Originally posted by wattspxr:
Kerrychin then obviously you know nothing about cars. Seems to me untrained people constantly love to take numbers and toss them around as there basis for every argument. 
If you don't already know, WRX is AWD which in English simply means FourWheelDrive!!! A AWD vehicle will always need to make up for power for it's Parasitic Loss through the complete drive train.......My wifes Eagle Talon TSI FWD will eat a similarly built Talon TSI AWD on the go any day, it's just simply MATH!
Since I do alot of Solo 1 & 2 Racing a have alot of Subaru Buddies, I've raced a couple of them a few times on and off the track, even against a friends slighlty modded WRX he still couldn't beat me up top..........
I don't know everything about cars, but you mentioned math, so let's play.
SVT: 200 hp @ 15% loss = 170 hp to the ground
WRX: 227 hp @ 28% loss = 163 hp to the ground
I assumed 28% because it's a lot higher, but not double.
Now, in a real world situation, there are other factors like:
- aerodynamics (advantage, SVT)
- power curve
My argument is that even with more losses and a slightly worse drag coefficient, an SVT will not be "a mile" ahead of a WRX or even beat a WRX above 100 mph.
Remember we are comparing peak hp numbers. Whoever stays in the part of the curve with more area under it for longer will do better. The WRX has the added advantage of an intercooler, whereas the SVT has heat soak issues in hotter weather (there is no air movement underhood, even at speed).
My additional argument was that I suspect the Subie allows overboost conditions, which would give it more than 227 hp for some period of time as long as all sensors check out OK. (Saabs do)
So it may be close, but it's not entirely obvious by looking at the numbers. First you said I shouldn't toss numbers around, then you said it all comes down to MATH, so what do you want?
Kerry
