Posts: 18
Joined: 12/5/2003 From: United States Status: offline
Hey you guys, I'm new to this forum and I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything, I just want your opinions. I'm curious of whats happening to ford. I own a ford ranger and also a subaru impreza STi. Hot Rod mag tested an STi against a Cobra side by side and the 2.5L was faster, got more mpg, has much better handling, and not to mention is 2 grand less. Whats happening to ford, a 5L blown engine not keeping up with a 2.5L?
you know that's a good question...let's see 2.5L 300hp with 300 pd of tq @3200 pounds for 30k. and 4 wheeled drive..let's consider this that this engine conf. is close to a porchse and a good package..yes ford does need to wake up
Posts: 751
Joined: 9/8/2003 From: United States Status: offline
[QUOTE=chowder31]Hey you guys, I'm new to this forum and I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything, I just want your opinions. I'm curious of whats happening to ford. I own a ford ranger and also a subaru impreza STi. Hot Rod mag tested an STi against a Cobra side by side and the 2.5L was faster, got more mpg, has much better handling, and not to mention is 2 grand less. Whats happening to ford, a 5L blown engine not keeping up with a 2.5L? [/QUOTE]
Posts: 22
Joined: 6/12/2003 From: United States Status: offline
[QUOTE=vfast]you know that's a good question...let's see 2.5L 300hp with 300 pd of tq @3200 pounds for 30k. and 4 wheeled drive..let's consider this that this engine conf. is close to a porchse and a good package..yes ford does need to wake up[/QUOTE]
Those magazine drivers must be retarded. When my 03 Cobra was stock it had 390hp(actually closer to 425) and now it has 500hp. The Cobra is more mod friendly than the sti and I have no trouble eating those little suckers for breakfast and lunch.
Posts: 18
Joined: 12/5/2003 From: United States Status: offline
ohh sorry....4.6 L....its still 2.1 L bigger than the STi....thats almost another engine. The only reason the cobra engine is more mod friendly is because the STi engine is brand new, the mods that are out now can easily push it over 500 hp and trq, an insane amount of power for a 4 cylinder engine. Just give it more time until more research is done and more mods come out for the STi. BTW, I doubt Hot Rod magazine drivers are retarded, the STi is just that good of a car. An AWD car will out launch a RWD car anyday too. OK03 I don't doubt you could kill alot of those "suckers", you must have almost a grand or more in mods. You need this to compete/beat a bone stock car, so give them a little respect eh As for trucks, Ford rules pretty well in that department, my 4L ranger def hauls ass and theyre tanks
Posts: 1077
Joined: 9/16/2003 From: United States Status: offline
No, the reason the Ford engine mods more easily is because there's space to do it! not to mention the cost of parts is less. The brand new 4.6 engines are not any newer than the 2.5s, but are way easier to work on. I put a Turbo XS ECU as well as a boost controller into my buddies WRX and there is no room whatsoever.
Team MF Member #420 Posts: 14535
Joined: 7/24/2003 Status: online
I have that issue of Hot Rod and your story is wrong.
The cars posted IDENTICAL 1/4 mile times, BUT the issue for the Cobra was traction. The Cobra was putting out higher trap speeds and it was even said that the Cobra is faster and would put up a better time if they could put different tires on it.
Posts: 18
Joined: 12/5/2003 From: United States Status: offline
meh yea your right about the room thing, it is damn hard to get any hardcore modding done on the boxer engine. Alright, then the Mach V wrx forum is posting the wrong info about the artical, sorry about the tire thing. I didn't ever say the cobra wasnt a hell of a car, for it also has a ton of potential. Like I said, I just wanted opinions from you guys. Jugador, I looked through the threads and couldn't find anything without going indepth, thats why I started this one
Posts: 18
Joined: 12/5/2003 From: United States Status: offline
25 horses isnt much when the STi is also 400 or so pounds lighter, mated with a close ratio 6 spd. I'm not sure of the mustang tranny so don't go all flamer on me if the mustang has a 6spd too
claimed hp doesnt mean crap. i have seen many as in 5 or 6 sti's dyno no higher then 225 or so hp, subaru is notorious for extreme parasitic loss through the drive train, also it is 4wd and the interior is crap the seats suck and many of the engines have been grenading because of knock... how does subaru fix this problem. you bring in your car and they retard timing on your factory ecu costing you power. and in turn making you slower than say, a stock evo with 30 less horsies. all in all good car but they should have stayed with the 2.0 instead of the 2.5... too many problems. the mustang is in a much higher class then the sti... no comparison.
Posts: 279
Joined: 11/21/2003 From: United States Status: offline
I saw PHR show today and all I have to say is the guys that did the drag testing are pathetic. They were getting 14's and had to ice the intakes to get them to run low 13's. Pretty sad.
Posts: 18
Joined: 12/5/2003 From: United States Status: offline
biker your dyno numbers are true that I wont argue but saying the interior is crap is just your opinion...everyone whos seen my interior loves it, as do i. The knocking your complaining about, is a rareity and is caused by s**t gas, namely californias, where many of the STis were sold. Hmmm that correlates pretty well.
About the only good thing I can say about the post '95 Mustangs is that Ford still uses the 8.8 rear. The engine is junk. Sorry, it's a fact. The modular motor has never worked right from the beginning. The SOHC one is a dog, and the DOHC makes good top end, but has no low torque. They had to force feed it in the Cobra to get respectable numbers. The new IRS in the Cobra explodes on a regular basis, and barely works in stock form. Serious racers swap back to a solid rear axel to gain durability. The car is basically the same design produced since '79. It worked well until '95, but the death of the 5.0 basically ended its reign as a performance car. The new modular cars are slow, heavy, and very dated. The interiors aren't any nicer than the ones in the Subaru. The seats wear well, but all of the other components will chalk up and look like crap in about five years (I know because a friend of mine has a '95 Cobra, and most of the plastic has been replaced to make the car look decent). Who cares about wheel horsepower? Stock STis are running 12.9s and are considerbly cheaper than the Cobra, which can't match these times stock. The STi runs fine when you can get 93 octane. The timing is a bit much for areas where 91 is all that is available. At least Subaru didn't have to change heads and intakes to get the power claimed in their literature like Ford did with the first modular Cobras. AWD is way better than RWD, and that's a fact. Have fun with your Mustang in 8" of snow when they don't plow the streets. Hell, have fun in the rain.
The Mustang started as a great car. I know because I own two of them. The new ones stick to the basic Ford mentality though, which is sell cars first and make them perform well second. Obviously this works for Ford, as it killed the Camaro and Firebird when both would dust any Mustang, even the Cobra. They are worried now though because Subaru is stealing market share from them. Times are changing, and you can either change with them or turn a blind eye to it. Fast is fast, and that's all that matters to me. The WRX is the 5.0 of the new millenium.
Posts: 2963
Joined: 6/8/2003 From: United States Status: offline
you are the moron of the new millenium. AWD sucks, especially in texas where all it does is make for more driveline loss and it helps pussies launch better. im not even gonna get started about anything else cause i dont want to argue and you absolutely cannot argue against the driveline loss.
Printable Version
STi v Cobra - 
As for trucks, Ford rules pretty well in that department, my 4L ranger def hauls ass and theyre tanks
