[QUOTE=Master D;802924]Second hand GTR is 100k.
Don't fuck around :-)[/QUOTE]

Trust me...a second hand GTR was my very first choice!!

But went onto a couple of useful forums and everyone reckons that the 2009 and 2010 GTR's are very likely to have Trans/drivetrain problems.

Think the issue was fixed in 2011 onwards but that is getting out of my price range now hence I'm staying away from second hand cars which may cost me an arm and a leg in repairs..not worth the risk.

Contact willall racing in adelaide. They advertised a 09 GTR with MY13 upgrades and running gear for a shade over 100k.

[QUOTE=spider;802916]Just a quick question though..if the new FA engine is so good, then how come the new wrx is 0.7secs slower than the previous 2.5 litre engine?

Had another look at the sti last night but I just can't get pass how ugly the interior looks compared to the A45 amg and HSV. Really like the A45 amg but the waiting times is apparently nearly 10 months now. The HSV just looks like a ordinary commodore so I don't want to fork out $100k for something I don't really love inside out!!

So since the wait for the car I really want is 10 months, I have decided to hold out for now (no point putting down a $5k deposit and committing to a car that I won't get for nearly a year as there may be other cars that will come out sooner and also be better for example, VW looks as though they will go ahead with the new Golf r400 which has 294kw/450nm and will do 0 to 100 in 3.9 secs!!!!)

[url=http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/volkswagen-reveals-new-280kmh-golf-r400-20140421-36zgr.html]Volkswagen reveals new 280km/h Golf R400[/url]

[url=http://www.themotorreport.com.au/58737/volkswagen-golf-r400-bound-for-production-report]Volkswagen Golf R 400 On The Way To Production: Report | Reviews | Prices | Australian specifications[/url][/QUOTE]

There is also a big weight difference between the FA engined MY15 WRX and the previous model WRX. . .sorry can't remember the figure off the top of my head.

That VW sounds great tho u will be waiting at least 3 years before u would get one here . . . and thats if they even decide to do a production run for it.

Manufacturer's acceleration times are always conservative to what the car's run under professional testing. Some reviewers have hit 100 in second gear. A better indication is 5-60 mph. There's about an extra 28 kg from body stiffening.

2015


C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.1 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 25.3 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.3 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 12.1 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 7.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.6 sec @ 102 mph
Top speed (gov ltd, mfr's claim): 144 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 160 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.95 g

FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway (mfr's est): 21/28 mpg
C/D observed: 25 mpg


2011


C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.7 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 29.2 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 6.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.7 sec @ 100 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 144 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 162 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.89 g

Nice first person view of the 2015 STI Isle of Man TT Course with commentary.
[YT]nxaGtNGPYPo[/YT]

For those that are interested...

The brochure shows Maximum power output: 221kW@6000rpm
> Maximum torque: 407Nm@4000rpm (which is the same as the previous model) but I thought I've read somewhere that kw has gone up but torque has gone down for the 2015 sti?

The power figure's in the brochure are the correct figure's to go by, what you have read is wrong.
As the figure's stated are the same everywhere, that I've seen.
This car is just as fast (if not faster) than the superseded version due to factory tuning, even though it's heavier!
Also the power figure's are recorded using 95ron on a ECU tuned to 98ron!

P.S. I got one on order cunts :D

[QUOTE=Culprit02;803133]The power figure's in the brochure are the correct figure's to go by, what you have read is wrong.
As the figure's stated are the same everywhere, that I've seen.
This car is just as fast (if not faster) than the superseded version due to factory tuning, even though it's heavier!
Also the power figure's are recorded using 95ron on a ECU tuned to 98ron!

P.S. I got one on order cunts :D[/QUOTE]

I've read quite a few that have stated this -

"Compared to the outgoing WRX STI, the new model's figures mark a 6kW increase in power, but a 14Nm slip in torque"

[url=http://www.themotorreport.com.au/58029/new-wrx-sti-revealed-details-and-specifications-for-227kw-performer]2015 Subaru WRX STI: Specs And Details Revealed, 227kW Boxer On Board | Reviews | Prices | Australian specifications[/url]

Anyway, no big dramas..was just something I noticed when I looked at the brochure.

Congrats on your order mate.

[QUOTE=Culprit02;803133]The power figure's in the brochure are the correct figure's to go by, what you have read is wrong.
As the figure's stated are the same everywhere, that I've seen.
This car is just as fast (if not faster) than the superseded version due to factory tuning, even though it's heavier!
Also the power figure's are recorded using 95ron on a ECU tuned to 98ron!

P.S. I got one on order cunts :D[/QUOTE]

Give us a mini review when you get it !