What would you do with...

Matt Monson · Post by **Matt Monson** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 8:28 pm

An AWD BF wagon weighs 3040 lbs
An AWD BC sedan weighs 2980 lbs
A BC Sport Sedan weighs 3140 lbs

So, to answer your question, yes...

dzx · Post by **dzx** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 12:47 pm

That's interesting since my sport sedan was just over 2900 lbs when it was weighed with the automatic transmission and a fourth of a tank of gas, but without me in it. The scrap yard in denver is useful for finding out weight of your car and the scale should be very accurate since that is how they know what to pay people. Did you find those weights on the internet? I've seen those particular numbers before but i've also seen diff numbers. I would be interested in finding out how they got those weights and how the numbers for weight on the title came into being also. http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68414

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 4:49 pm

My SS was 3230lbs with a full tank of gas and all kinds of crap in the trunk and back seat. Matt came in UNDER the list weight.

LaureltheQueen · Post by **LaureltheQueen** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 4:50 pm

This is pulled off edmunds.com

1993 Subaru Legacy AWD Sport Sedan -
Curb Weight: 3180 lbs.

1993 Subaru Legacy AWD Turbo Touring Wagon
Curb Weight: 3300 lbs.

Now what's that? 120 lbs? What 120 pounds does is even out your weight balance, and not drastically affect the acceleration of the vehicle. I see no point in having a sedan, wasted utility space, there's things that you can do comfortably in a wagon that you cant do in a sedan, and keep the sleeper factor. It's not like the sedan is much sportier. I would venture to say the only thing sportier about the sedan is it's shape. The wagon even has a better weight distribution.

can you do this in a sedan?

Matt Monson · Post by **Matt Monson** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 6:06 pm

Just for clarity, my wagon number was for a non-turbo 5 spd. I am pretty sure the EAT weighs a bit more than the 5 spd does. What Jon's car would weigh after the engine swap would likely fall between the 3040 I listed and the 3300 that Laurel listed...

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 6:11 pm

The sedan is inherently stiffer. Playing devil's advocate, here, as my wagon has few squeaks.

Steve

Matt Monson · Post by **Matt Monson** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 8:39 pm

That's what strut tower bars and sub-frame braces are for...

dzx · Post by **dzx** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 9:51 pm

But your right, even if the wagon is heavier, its not really enough to make a diff, and no lol i cant fit that much stuff in my sedan, although my car is packed with shit from school as im too lazy to clean it.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 9:57 pm

Front and rear bars work for me. Subframes 'll come when I have more power and seam welding if I ever get a place with a garage.

Steve

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:01 pm

Matt Monson wrote:That's what strut tower bars and sub-frame braces are for...

That only covers PART of the stiffness issue. The strut towers and sub-frame braces will have more of an effect on the Sedan than they will the wagon. The sedan has less BODY flex (even less if we didn't have a sunroof), and that's just as important for traction.

The sedan is also available in a 5MT (for the Turbo version) which offers significantly more control than a 4EAT. Might be less consistent in the 1/4 mile, but when it comes to turning the 5MT simply offers better control of the cars attitude. If you don't drive to the level that you notice the control (or fail to realize that the control advantage exists) then this point, and the previous one, are insignificant, and the Wagon would be a better choice, as it's got a much larger cargo capacity.

Plus it's easier to have sex in the back of a wagon, which would pretty much make it worth it.

I really wish I had the money and time to have a Touring Wagon. Use it as my Daily Driver and use the SS as my "weekend" car. When I break things on the SS, I can rape most of the important parts off of the wagon.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:01 am

In reality, the chassis flexibility has not prevented me from more than holding my own in the corners, so I'd consider it more academic, like such and such is a faster car because it goes to 60 .1 seconds quicker.

Steve

blueslsti2004 · Post by **blueslsti2004** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:36 pm

Damn, so many respones that I didn't even know existed...

I now have a secret that only Matt knows... It's what I'm going to do...

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:43 pm

But Steve, if you drove a GD right after you drove your wagon, you'd notice the significant difference. Chassis rigidity is pretty important.

Blueslsti2004 - Your buying his 90 GT, right?

blueslsti2004 · Post by **blueslsti2004** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 6:55 pm

BAC5.2 wrote:
Blueslsti2004 - Your buying his 90 GT, right?

I dunno... Maybe... maybe not...

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:49 am

I prefer weight shift and don't mind flexibility. In reality, my tires and suspension aren't good enough to exploit any appreciable increase in rigidity. That's the way I like it as I like to slide a little. I guess I'm old school, plus I have to put other assholes' low profiles on now and they SUCK to mount. When I have real power I may change my mind.

The only flexing that bothers me is from the suspension on medium speed transitions where the load isn't enough to shift the weight and keep it there so there's a sort of diagonal juggling that doesn't happen at low or high speeds.

Steve

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 6:25 am

Lol, I'm one of those assholes I guess. No one wants to mount a 45 series tire

.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 6:50 am

Bastard!

Yeah, we get morons with chrome 18-20's in there. The idiots are actually surprised when these huge monstrosities on rubber bands get destroyed on Afghanistan-reproduction New England roads. Oops! Sorry, guys, guess there goes another welfare check, huh? That's okay, from the looks of it, your kids can afford to miss a few meals. Me on the other hand, I'm getting sick of PB & J.

Steve

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:31 pm

Get some Ramen! That shit is great!

Is a 45 series tire considered a low profile? It's on a 225 width tire, so it can't be THAT bad.

I was at a shop the other day and saw a 205/35/18. THAT was ridiculous.

Matt Monson · Post by **Matt Monson** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:45 pm

BAC5.2 wrote:
Matt Monson wrote:That's what strut tower bars and sub-frame braces are for...
That only covers PART of the stiffness issue. The strut towers and sub-frame braces will have more of an effect on the Sedan than they will the wagon. The sedan has less BODY flex (even less if we didn't have a sunroof), and that's just as important for traction.
.

I beg to differ with this point. Because the wagon is not as stiff to start with it has more to gain from such changes in stiffness. I noticed a slight difference when I put a strut tower bar on my GC. I definitely noticed more of a difference when my buddy put one on his GG WRX wagon. And another freind, who's opinion I exlicitly trust, says that the strut tower bars did more for his handling on his '98 GT wagon than the sway bars did...

LaureltheQueen · Post by **LaureltheQueen** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:46 pm

I had 40 series tires on my 15" civic Si wheels when i had the crx. Nothing else would fit without rubbing.

i miss that car

blueslsti2004 · Post by **blueslsti2004** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 6:52 pm

I have 17 in tires on my Legacy... And they definitely rock...

Post by **DLC** » Tue Sep 21, 2004 7:16 pm

I'll attest to the stiffness of these modern Subaru chassis, e.g. the BE/BH, BL/BP and GDx. With nothing but a front strut tower brace, my GT is much stiffer and unexplainably solid than the wagon with pretty much everything thrown in.

On my BF, i got wheels and tires, then GR2s. Next was a Cusco rear bar from Cobb. I received it the day i drove to Pocatello, ID for my first ever auto-x event. I drove up, installed it there and raced the car, doing pretty well, but not having any reference point for the effect of the bar.

Driving home was pretty much the same, no big difference going in a straight line or around long curves at 85MPH.

But as soon as i got back onto streets that i'd been driving on for months, in corners i was familiar with, i was shocked at how much better the car felt.

The front top bar helped even more, and the lower Cusco bar just pulled everything super tight. I really wouldn't want to drive that car without those enhancements. I'm sure i'd be very disappointed.

Matt Monson · Post by **Matt Monson** » Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:51 pm

Jon,
You have an urgent PM...

legacycentral bbs

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

What would you do with...