Just for fun, I pushed the mph limits of the car

dscoobydoo · Post by **dscoobydoo** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:22 pm

OK, this morning on my way to work, I decided to push the car and see how the top end feels. Mind you I commute to work 30 miles of open 2 lane highway with no one on it ( my only fear is deer at this time of the day).

At about 125, I decided to let off because I ran out of straight roads.

But DAMN it was smooth. And I still had another 1250+ rpms to go- and she was still pulling.

NOW, if I only had a 6 speed...........

Tleg93 · Post by **Tleg93** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:27 pm

It only goes around 129 or 130 tops, maybe more downhill but I don't think it can go much faster than that without changing things.

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 7:02 pm

What do you need a 6 speed for? Your last three gears are nearly indentical. You need more power, or better aerodynamics.

My baby used to be able to do 120-125 easily

dscoobydoo · Post by **dscoobydoo** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 8:17 pm

The six speed would allow me to add another lower overdrive gear.

I think she could do 130, but am curious if I could actually get the speedo to see the 140.

aerodynamics/drag vs power

LaureltheQueen · Post by **LaureltheQueen** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 8:29 pm

lol, one of my coworkers(who drives a 2g integra) believes that his car could beat mine because it has 5 speeds instead of 4. lol

Kelly · Post by **Kelly** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 9:16 pm

HA HA. My buddies rabbit did much better quarter times with a 4 speed. There are a bunch of Porshe guys that pull the 5 speeds out of 993's, and run the old 4's instead, ofcorse they gotta lot more power than us.

legacy92ej22t · Post by **legacy92ej22t** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 9:17 pm

I've had my SS up to 133-134 mph down on I-270 north of DC. She was still going strong when I shut her down too. I could have pushed her further.

Tleg93 · Post by **Tleg93** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 9:41 pm

I don't know, Matt, these cars don't go much over 130.

Kelly · Post by **Kelly** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 9:51 pm

Mines been to 130, on the back side of the costal range on 26.
With the car dropped, and the wheel gaps filled, its a pretty aerodynamic car really.

HA HA, I just realized I have oversized tires, so maybe it wasnt 130.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:22 pm

I've seen 133. My old GL used to go faster in 4th than 5th.

Steve

legacy92ej22t · Post by **legacy92ej22t** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:37 pm

Scott- Is that a challange, mang?

I was still accelerating (although slowly) when I shut it down at 133-134 mph. I'm positive I could have pushed it further, probably not much further but maybe the 136-137 range.

This was also on a stretch of freeway that is dead flat for about 8 miles.

My tires were OEM at the time too.

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:43 am

So you'd build a custom 6 speed just to make 140 mph?

The usdm 6th gear ratio is .756, the final drive ratio is 3.900
Your 5th gear ratio is .738, your final drive ratio is 3.900

You wouldn't be adding a lower final gear you'd be adding a higher final gear. I say again, you dont need a 6mt

G-reg · Post by **G-reg** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 1:29 am

My Leg's speedo was quite a bit off at legal highway speeds. I can only imagine it got pretty optimistic at less than legal speeds. I got it up to 120 indicated and chickened out because I didn't trust the cheap tires that were on it when I bought it

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:44 am

I can push through 3rd and to the top of 4th.

I'm confident that I can reach the physical limitations of the gearing of the vehicle.

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:10 am

I dunno if I'd make that claim. You've got less horse than an sti and they top out at like 150 right? (powerwise, not gearwise) They're also better aerodynamically.

douglas vincent · Post by **douglas vincent** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:40 am

My wagon was off a full 10% with the stock tires. So the one time I hit 127 I was actually about 115. Big difference.

Now with the WRX tires and rims I am about dead on and have hit 120 once, only once because that was damn fast and I was having fueling issues.

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:05 am

I'm basing it on the haste that I clear 120mph. It gets there pretty fast.

I'm sure I'll find out one day.

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:12 am

I don't doubt you get to 120 quicklike, hell maybe even 130, but 163? You need a lot of power to move that fast. Doesn't wind resistance increase exponentially?

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:23 am

163?

I can probably clear 140 or maybe get up to 150, but I doubt 163.

Yukonart · Post by **Yukonart** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:26 am

Either way. . . (since I KNOW I can't even top-out my top gear) . . . our cars are shaped like bricks when it comes to coefficient of drag. You'll top THAT out before even getting close to topping out the top gear.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:27 am

Drag increases at the square of speed.

I don't think an STI is better aerodynamically to a Legacy sedan. That wing, especially, creates a lot of drag. Still, I'm not sure about 163 either. Maybe with the mirrors pulled, seams taped, and some openings blocked. Some undertray and possibly rear skirts would be helpful, also.

Steve

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:28 am

well that's where you'd redline in 5th.

Yukonart · Post by **Yukonart** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:30 am

Well, Steve. . . I was going to say my car is shaped more like a shoebox. . . but I was generalizing most sedans together.

There are reasons we STis get pulled-on when at freeway speeds . . and excessive drag is one of them.

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:35 am

I dunno about the new impreza's but our drag coefficient is actually pretty low, especially for when our cars were produced. It's like .32 isnt it? Our drag coef is good but the frontal area is fairly large.

The top part of the wing creates drag, the bottom part creates downforce. The top part is for stability.

I do believe the svx is still the fastest subaru in america. Topping out at 154mph in 92 and 93 versions. Reason being is the .29 drag coef. And apparently with the non-usdm uncar cover the drag coef is .285

Kelly · Post by **Kelly** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:06 am

evolutionmovement wrote:Drag increases at the square of speed.

I don't think an STI is better aerodynamically to a Legacy sedan.

I agree. The round fenders n such just make more surface area.

In reguards to the 5 vs. 6 speed arguement. The 6 speed is much more durable, in every aspect. Downside, it weighs a helluva lot more.

legacycentral bbs

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

Just for fun, I pushed the mph limits of the car

Just for fun, I pushed the mph limits of the car