BC-BF handling versus new/GDA Impreza

IggDawg · Post by **IggDawg** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 7:23 pm

I looked at the skidpad and they were pretty close stock. I thin kthe Legacy SS got around 0.82G and the new WRXs get 0.85 stock. how about with mods? with GR-2s or AGXs all around and a nice set of springs, how well do our cars contend?

Post by **Legacy777** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 7:27 pm

Honestly.....it all depends on the setup. I've ridden in one mean WRX. It might has well been on rails.

But he had more in his suspension then I do, or any other BC/BF I've ridden in.

Overall the new WRX chassis is super stiff compared to ours.

I think with common springs/struts/sway bar sizes/& tires the WRX would probably pull a better number on the skid pad......but that's not to say the legacy will feel more stable under turns and such......or vice versa.

vrg3 · Post by **vrg3** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 7:29 pm

This is not necessarily directly related, but I think our cars have better weight balance than the Imprezas... We're maybe a little better than 55/45 while the Imprezas are closer to 65/35 I think.

boostjunkie · Post by **boostjunkie** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 9:16 pm

This is not necessarily directly related

Actually, this is related to the performance of a car . . . I would have to say in a more real world sense, than skidpad numbers, IMHO.

Weight distribution will determine how the car will maneuver in transitions (multiple turns in sequence). Typically in a slalom type course, a car with a better F/R weight distribution (closer to equal) will be able to negotiate the course better than a car with unequal distributions, all else being equal.

For me, I autocross fairly frequently, and in those courses there are both long sweepers (better suited for cars with high skidpad g's) and s-turns (better suited for cars with better weight distributions). These are generalizations, mind you.

That being said, it's really hard to say which car will handle better with given mods, as both skidpad g's and weight distribution both have their merits WRT handling. Like Legacy777 stated, the wrx also has a stiffer chassis, which likewise has it's positive effects on handling.

IggDawg · Post by **IggDawg** » Tue Jan 14, 2003 2:46 pm

IC. That all makes sense. I have a GDA style Impreza TS, and it is noticably stiffer around twisties. It has the rex springs and that just helped even more. The Legacy just seems to point better tho, despite the blown front struts

. More roll for sure, but still it points wherever I want it. And it is certainly creakier. When I hear a creak or two under hard acceleration I pretend my engine is so powerful it's pulling the car apart

.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know the spring rates for the BC/BFs? I asked this on i-club and nobody could come up with them (not that Impreza folk are particularly motivated to do so.)

But yeah. I like my Legacy and I'm actually looking forward to rallycrossing her on the blown front struts. I think it'll be easier to get the weight forward for turning.

-IggDawg

Post by **Legacy777** » Tue Jan 14, 2003 4:08 pm

I posted some info on spring rates.....check out earlier in this forum.......however I can't say that the FSM's numbers looked all that correct for the turbo models. The n/a numbers look about right.

Replace your struts.....you will be astonished with how much better the car will handle. Trust me.....even if you just put GR2's on.

rallysam · Post by **rallysam** » Tue Jan 14, 2003 4:52 pm

But yeah. I like my Legacy and I'm actually looking forward to rallycrossing her on the blown front struts. I think it'll be easier to get the weight forward for turning.

Oh boy!

I BET you'll get that weight forward! I rallycrossed several times on shocks that had already seen 100k miles and the car was flopping like a fish. With the shocks basically out of comssion, the only way the car could jump out of ruts or potholes (at speed) was to bounce off the bump stops. Even worse, the exhaust manifold and heat shields ate dirt and rocks on harsher courses - leaving some scars and lots of rattling. You can be like me, but that's usually not a good idea.

Actually, that setup might be fun to try once. With a stiff rear and a soft front, I bet a little flick-move would be all it took to cause mad oversteer![/quote]

IggDawg · Post by **IggDawg** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 2:29 pm

I made a huge post with a table of spring rates and all that great stuff, but my stupid dial-up connection at home ate it :rolleyes: . anyways, our spring rates are comparable to WRX spring rates. sorta. WRX wagon springs are best for the sedan, and WRX springs don't ahve nearly enough support in the rear for the wagon.

vrg3 · Post by **vrg3** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 2:38 pm

I thought that our front spring rates were a bit less than the WRXs while our rear ones were quite a bit higher... I seem to remember something like my car ('93 Legacy Turbo 5-speed sedan) being 134/134 and the 2002 WRX 5-speed sedan being 163/119.

I have two sets of WRX springs... I was having silly thoughts of trying to maybe get four WRX front top hats and put WRX front springs on all four corners of my car. The rear top hats would have the rotatable bearings in them, so I guess my rear toe would be variable. Passive rear-wheel steering, anyone?

vrg3 · Post by **vrg3** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 2:57 pm

Hm, on rereading my post I see that I confused which springs had a bigger difference. But still...

Yes, the factory service manual lists no difference between spring rates for the turbo and naturally aspirated Legacies. Is it possible that the difference in ride height and damping between the two cars is accomplished entirely by using different struts?

Post by **Legacy777** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 3:30 pm

Couple things.......The impreza is a lighter car......regardless of what model/year.......putting impreza springs on may not be the best choice......unless you get some good aftermarket with higher spring rates.

The whitelines I have on my car are 190 front 180 rear I think.....they're somewhere around there.

As for the FSM saying the spring rates are the same.....it's probably wrong......I still can't believe how many errors is in that damn thing. It's horrible!!!

Only way to get correct info is to buy a set from a subie mechanic that updated the info once it was made available. Even then, things get overlooked.

IggDawg · Post by **IggDawg** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 4:14 pm

Pulling form memory, I'll try to post some spring rates. IIRC the Liberty springs were 18% stiffer in front and 3% stiffer in the rear. I'm going to assume this is consistant with USDM legacy spring rates, since the leg turbo gets .82 on the skidpad and the L & LS both get around .78. so,

Legacy L & LS Sedan- 134/134
Legacy Turbo Sedan- 158/138
Legacy L & LS Wagon- 134/190 (!)
Legacy Turbo Wagon- 158/196 (!!)

WRX Sedan - 163/119
WRX Wagon - 163/144 (IIRC)

So there it is as I recall. The Impreza 2.5 RS springs are a little softer than the legacy turbos and WRXs. Some of my numbers might be off. I was wrong once back in '82 so it could happen again.

boostjunkie · Post by **boostjunkie** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 4:42 pm

I'm going to assume this is consistant with USDM legacy spring rates, since the leg turbo gets .82 on the skidpad and the L & LS both get around .78.

Not to rain on your parade, but didn't the N/A models also come with 185/70/14s rather than 195/60/15s? . . . Not sure how much that would matter since both models got crappy tires!!

Hehe, useless post . . . I know

Post by **Legacy777** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 6:18 pm

Check out this thread http://www.bbs.legacycentral.org/viewtopic.php?t=45

And the info at least for my car is
F: 123 lb/in
R: 129 lb/in

entirelyturbo · Post by **entirelyturbo** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 7:18 pm

IggDawg wrote:...and the L & LS both get around .78.

Any difference between 2WD and 4WD?

Post by **Legacy777** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:28 pm

subyluvr2212 wrote:
IggDawg wrote:...and the L & LS both get around .78.
Any difference between 2WD and 4WD?

probably.....I would think the AWD would get a little better.....but ya never know....

IggDawg · Post by **IggDawg** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 10:02 pm

From what I understand, AWD with an open front diff tends more towards understeer. But I could be wrong on that.

Post by **Legacy777** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 12:42 am

Well you essentually have this with a FWD.....and no rear power to help with the understeer......so I think it would handle similarly....if not worse then an AWD.....but ya never know

legacycentral bbs

A forum for 89-94 BC-BF(BJ) Legacy Owners and Fans

BC-BF handling versus new/GDA Impreza

BC-BF handling versus new/GDA Impreza