Which WRX STI- Hawkeye VS Hatch VS 2010 Saloon?
Discussion
Afternoon all,
I have been eye up various Subaru's for a while, but since lock down I haven't been inspired (or able) to test drive any to compare variants. Also most seem to be 100+ miles from where I am in kent!
I like the idea of 4 wheels pushing, with a bias of rear wheel. So far the only options are this or an Xdrive BMW, and I'm a bit bored of BMW now. Also the newer BMWs with xdrive are too bland for my liking.
From guessing, I imagine the hawkeye will be more raw / light, and newer ones will be slightly more refined / less connected. This could be age related or generally the way cars go over the decades. I might be totally wrong?
Before my E46 M3 I had an M135i. Whilst this was great, the sound was very muted and I somewhat missed the rawness of an older car. The M135i has electronic steering, very clever adaptable suspension, almost silky smooth over bumps and likes of which is great, but almost too luxurious and not sporty enough!? That being said, I loved the twin scroll turbo, so would be very interested in another twin scroll, which variants they cover is a bit beyond me at the moment as I'm finding it quite hard to find a clear different between the variants / years. I guess I could always swap a single turbo out for a twinscroll.
Shifting from the M135i to the E46 (and convertible factor) was really nice. That being said, now I'm feeling a bit fatigued with the rattling and general noise of the E46, so thinking of something slightly more refined and hard top. That being said, anything hardtop will naturally be more refined due to less clanking etc from the rag top.
Sounds crazy, but when you look at my needs (manual, AWD with rear bias) then the options become pretty limited within my price bracket (£10-15k). So it maybe that I own different variants of WRX STI over time to match my need for lightness / rawness / refinement.
I have a wife and a 2 year old kid to 'ship around' so this is a factor I will always need to keep happy. That being said they love the E46 and the little boy thinks my wifes hatch is ok too, but much prefers the E46. It might be to pillarless design and lower doors which gives him better visibility from the back.
My wife's car (2010 Mazda 3) sits in a much more upright seating position, and higher off the ground which I'm liking a lot at the moment. Especially given that I'm mostly doing A/B roads.... Is the seating position / ground clearance roughly the same throughout all the years I'm interested in?
Thoughts welcome, as I'm still really in two minds about things, but really want to own one before they start disappearing from the roads.
Am I also right in saying that most of the variants <2014 will roughly hold their price?
Best,
T
I have been eye up various Subaru's for a while, but since lock down I haven't been inspired (or able) to test drive any to compare variants. Also most seem to be 100+ miles from where I am in kent!
I like the idea of 4 wheels pushing, with a bias of rear wheel. So far the only options are this or an Xdrive BMW, and I'm a bit bored of BMW now. Also the newer BMWs with xdrive are too bland for my liking.
From guessing, I imagine the hawkeye will be more raw / light, and newer ones will be slightly more refined / less connected. This could be age related or generally the way cars go over the decades. I might be totally wrong?
Before my E46 M3 I had an M135i. Whilst this was great, the sound was very muted and I somewhat missed the rawness of an older car. The M135i has electronic steering, very clever adaptable suspension, almost silky smooth over bumps and likes of which is great, but almost too luxurious and not sporty enough!? That being said, I loved the twin scroll turbo, so would be very interested in another twin scroll, which variants they cover is a bit beyond me at the moment as I'm finding it quite hard to find a clear different between the variants / years. I guess I could always swap a single turbo out for a twinscroll.
Shifting from the M135i to the E46 (and convertible factor) was really nice. That being said, now I'm feeling a bit fatigued with the rattling and general noise of the E46, so thinking of something slightly more refined and hard top. That being said, anything hardtop will naturally be more refined due to less clanking etc from the rag top.
Sounds crazy, but when you look at my needs (manual, AWD with rear bias) then the options become pretty limited within my price bracket (£10-15k). So it maybe that I own different variants of WRX STI over time to match my need for lightness / rawness / refinement.
I have a wife and a 2 year old kid to 'ship around' so this is a factor I will always need to keep happy. That being said they love the E46 and the little boy thinks my wifes hatch is ok too, but much prefers the E46. It might be to pillarless design and lower doors which gives him better visibility from the back.
My wife's car (2010 Mazda 3) sits in a much more upright seating position, and higher off the ground which I'm liking a lot at the moment. Especially given that I'm mostly doing A/B roads.... Is the seating position / ground clearance roughly the same throughout all the years I'm interested in?
Thoughts welcome, as I'm still really in two minds about things, but really want to own one before they start disappearing from the roads.
Am I also right in saying that most of the variants <2014 will roughly hold their price?
Best,
T
modern cars can be very competent and fast but also can be boring as they do every thing for you , and require little input , older school cars ie scooby also in my case the monaro require more from the driver and are much more involving , i would rather have a slower more involving car than a quicker one , my preference of four wheel drive and quick is a forester sti but it’s horses for courses , quite a few imprezas out there , jdm is a good route twin scroll sti 2 litre so you get less lag , brining in cars can be pricy at the mo as exchange rates are not good , so look for a fresh import
vxr2010 said:
modern cars can be very competent and fast but also can be boring as they do every thing for you , and require little input , older school cars ie scooby also in my case the monaro require more from the driver and are much more involving , i would rather have a slower more involving car than a quicker one , my preference of four wheel drive and quick is a forester sti but it’s horses for courses , quite a few imprezas out there , jdm is a good route twin scroll sti 2 litre so you get less lag , brining in cars can be pricy at the mo as exchange rates are not good , so look for a fresh import
Importing a car sounds like fun! Could anyone recommend the best sites for this? I like the idea of being able to change the power from front to back. How far can you go back in time to get this tech?
Torque gt , harlow jap autos , both often have stock in , they are two good ones there are many others , currently it’s expensive importing due to exchange rate , i would see what’s in the uk now , if you are talking about dccd then it started with the classic subaru’s around 96 , the dccd is more based on driving conditions ie snow gravel rather than a wish to be more rwd as you need the correct setting for a condition if not risk of damage
vxr2010 said:
Torque gt , harlow jap autos , both often have stock in , they are two good ones there are many others , currently it’s expensive importing due to exchange rate , i would see what’s in the uk now , if you are talking about dccd then it started with the classic subaru’s around 96 , the dccd is more based on driving conditions ie snow gravel rather than a wish to be more rwd as you need the correct setting for a condition if not risk of damage
Ok nice thanks. I think the youtuber Engineering Explained has done something on the system so will have a poke.Good to hear they stared in 96 as this is something which really interest me. ATM I'm seeing the engines and general tech (bar mod cons) havnt really chagned since 2000, so it seems more of a case of choosing my style and the whole old vs new experience.
TBH I have been driving older cars more recently so might go for a ~2011 saloon as it will be a nice change.
Might start looking up specific specs and the likes of.
MDMA . said:
A lot of the specific Subaru forums are now dead, unless you browse the US sites. If looking for the newer saloon, I'd get a JDM one. Spec C would be my choice. But you'll be looking at 20k for a nice one now.
How comes JDM if you dont mind me asking? The 2L twin scroll?I'm tempted on asking my local indy scuby to see if he can add a twin scroll to the uk 2.5L
theog87 said:
How comes JDM if you dont mind me asking? The 2L twin scroll?
I'm tempted on asking my local indy scuby to see if he can add a twin scroll to the uk 2.5L
Few things. "Generally" a better car/condition. Not spent the last 10 years over here. More collectable, better resale, better all round car really. I'd always try and buy JDM if a Subaru. I'm tempted on asking my local indy scuby to see if he can add a twin scroll to the uk 2.5L
MDMA . said:
Few things. "Generally" a better car/condition. Not spent the last 10 years over here. More collectable, better resale, better all round car really. I'd always try and buy JDM if a Subaru.
Ok good to know! I first have to sell my E46 M3, so that could take a while, but pretty sure this is my next car as ticks so many boxes so far.Pre covid, are there many meets? Japfest or something rings a bell?
Converting a single-scroll car to twin-scroll is a lot of work and money which you’ll never get back when you sell - much more sensible to go JDM.
As rear bias is a priority, go for a blobeye not a hawkeye as the blob DCCD offers 66% rear bias compared with 59% on the hawk DCCD and later DCCD cars.
If you are used to an M135i and equivalent modern machinery, the fuel consumption of an Impreza may come as a shock. A twin-scroll JDM car is especially thirsty as the turbo is always spooling.
Later cars are heavier and not as sharp as the GD models and are unlikely to ever appreciate, which good GD STi examples are already doing.
I also find the US forums such as NASIOC and IWSTI really useful even though they too get little traffic these days. It doesn’t actually matter that these forums are dying as the answer to almost question you may have is available via search. The historical knowledge base on these cars is astounding.
If you prefer to gather your info through live interaction then Type-RA.com is still going strong and “Subaru Impreza Owners UK” is not quite as terrible as your average Facebook group.
vxr2010 said:
the dccd is more based on driving conditions ie snow gravel rather than a wish to be more rwd as you need the correct setting for a condition if not risk of damage
Not sure I read that correctly? The main reason to opt for DCCD is the rear bias it gives on full open or Auto. Even if you never bother changing the settings, that alone makes DCCD worth having and makes a huge difference to the feel of the car.As rear bias is a priority, go for a blobeye not a hawkeye as the blob DCCD offers 66% rear bias compared with 59% on the hawk DCCD and later DCCD cars.
If you are used to an M135i and equivalent modern machinery, the fuel consumption of an Impreza may come as a shock. A twin-scroll JDM car is especially thirsty as the turbo is always spooling.
Later cars are heavier and not as sharp as the GD models and are unlikely to ever appreciate, which good GD STi examples are already doing.
theog87 said:
Anyone recommend which will be good for scuby uk? I often join a forum thinking its going to be great, but seems to be dead!?
Scoobynet is almost dead today but is a treasure trove of info from its glory days from 2008-2018.I also find the US forums such as NASIOC and IWSTI really useful even though they too get little traffic these days. It doesn’t actually matter that these forums are dying as the answer to almost question you may have is available via search. The historical knowledge base on these cars is astounding.
If you prefer to gather your info through live interaction then Type-RA.com is still going strong and “Subaru Impreza Owners UK” is not quite as terrible as your average Facebook group.
Edited by plenty on Saturday 16th January 22:38
vxr2010 said:
Torque gt , harlow jap autos , both often have stock in , they are two good ones there are many others , currently it’s expensive importing due to exchange rate , i would see what’s in the uk now , if you are talking about dccd then it started with the classic subaru’s around 96 , the dccd is more based on driving conditions ie snow gravel rather than a wish to be more rwd as you need the correct setting for a condition if not risk of damage
One of the old myths i hoped to have killed in the very early 00's.You wont do any damage to the DCCD system no matter where you set it.
The Classics all had a manual DCCD if fitted, the DCCD-A came in with the Newage, with various versions over the years.
The only way to go more RWD is to remove the front drive and fit a centre diff that only drives the rear. It's pointless unless you want to build a drift car Impreza.
The torque split is derived from the centre diff design, it's basically two types of diff in one unit, firstly an open diff with a mechanical ratio of 33:66 and then a clutch pack that applies a resistive force between the front/rear outputs, with no clutch preload you get the 33:66 output, with clutch clamping applied the output varies up to a max of 50:50 when the clutch pack is fully clamped.
You increase the clutch pack load by increasing current in an electromagnet that pulls the plates tighter. On the later diff units from the hawkeye onwards, they increased the static preload on the clutch pack and also made some changes to the torque sensing and clutch plate design, which is why they have a higher base front torque rate.
If you manage to get enough torque going to the rear wheels, you can break rear tyre traction and have the car driving like a RWD car with the centre diff open, but that takes some skill to drive like that under control. It's not the fast way to drive but it's fun. The way to really get these cars to feel alive is to use weight transfer and throttle application to induce a slightly rear biased all wheel drift.
The torque split is derived from the centre diff design, it's basically two types of diff in one unit, firstly an open diff with a mechanical ratio of 33:66 and then a clutch pack that applies a resistive force between the front/rear outputs, with no clutch preload you get the 33:66 output, with clutch clamping applied the output varies up to a max of 50:50 when the clutch pack is fully clamped.
You increase the clutch pack load by increasing current in an electromagnet that pulls the plates tighter. On the later diff units from the hawkeye onwards, they increased the static preload on the clutch pack and also made some changes to the torque sensing and clutch plate design, which is why they have a higher base front torque rate.
If you manage to get enough torque going to the rear wheels, you can break rear tyre traction and have the car driving like a RWD car with the centre diff open, but that takes some skill to drive like that under control. It's not the fast way to drive but it's fun. The way to really get these cars to feel alive is to use weight transfer and throttle application to induce a slightly rear biased all wheel drift.
jsf said:
The only way to go more RWD is to remove the front drive and fit a centre diff that only drives the rear. It's pointless unless you want to build a drift car Impreza.
The torque split is derived from the centre diff design, it's basically two types of diff in one unit, firstly an open diff with a mechanical ratio of 33:66 and then a clutch pack that applies a resistive force between the front/rear outputs, with no clutch preload you get the 33:66 output, with clutch clamping applied the output varies up to a max of 50:50 when the clutch pack is fully clamped.
You increase the clutch pack load by increasing current in an electromagnet that pulls the plates tighter. On the later diff units from the hawkeye onwards, they increased the static preload on the clutch pack and also made some changes to the torque sensing and clutch plate design, which is why they have a higher base front torque rate.
If you manage to get enough torque going to the rear wheels, you can break rear tyre traction and have the car driving like a RWD car with the centre diff open, but that takes some skill to drive like that under control. It's not the fast way to drive but it's fun. The way to really get these cars to feel alive is to use weight transfer and throttle application to induce a slightly rear biased all wheel drift.
OK very interesting. The torque split is derived from the centre diff design, it's basically two types of diff in one unit, firstly an open diff with a mechanical ratio of 33:66 and then a clutch pack that applies a resistive force between the front/rear outputs, with no clutch preload you get the 33:66 output, with clutch clamping applied the output varies up to a max of 50:50 when the clutch pack is fully clamped.
You increase the clutch pack load by increasing current in an electromagnet that pulls the plates tighter. On the later diff units from the hawkeye onwards, they increased the static preload on the clutch pack and also made some changes to the torque sensing and clutch plate design, which is why they have a higher base front torque rate.
If you manage to get enough torque going to the rear wheels, you can break rear tyre traction and have the car driving like a RWD car with the centre diff open, but that takes some skill to drive like that under control. It's not the fast way to drive but it's fun. The way to really get these cars to feel alive is to use weight transfer and throttle application to induce a slightly rear biased all wheel drift.
I would like to think I can tell where traction is on the limit before loosing. Sometimes I play with that line but tbh I have only ever done very minor drifts in sensible(ish) situations e. G. Going uphill corners where slowing down isn't an issue(ish).
I have never done all out donuts etc as always Road driving and never really near a car park or likes of that is appropriate.
For what it's worth I do unhealthy amounts of racing sims (via pc wheel etc) and the setup I always go for is 70-90% power to the back. This greatly depends on tyre width, weight distribution and power. But I have found in games and real life that the above factors play such a massive part of the feel of the car. Also I find its just as much about how a car reacts to track loss as it does to keeping it perfectly in shape.
My lsd on the m3 is much more predictedable in comparison to other cars.
That being said I love the characteristics of the front end pulling the car back on track (AWD) whilst the back maintains a steady slide. I have never experienced this being the wheel on an AWD with rear bias.
That being said the xdrive on a 3 series still felt very fwd in comparison. But then again 50/50 weight distribution would I guess naturally provide more traction to the back!? Probably chuck tyres on the back also.
Does the scuby have lsd each end? How does it manage this traction loss?
Also I'm assuming you need more than stock 300bhp to light up the back end as I think stock wheels are a square 240mm which is quite big! 960mm of traction!
That being said a lot of weight is on the front so xyz calculation could make you say it feels as if 80% power to the back based on weight distribution of the car in comparison to bmw!?
Tyres play a major role in how much power you need to break traction, the original P1 Pirelli's were pretty lethal on an STi Type R/RA with DCCD, you could break traction at will, and often when not willing with those death traps on the car. With decent tyres you need to use weight transfer more to get the correct momentum at the rear to then use the power. It's an incredibly powerful platform, but to use it to it's potential timing of input is critical. A lot of people cant get their head round a good AWD platform and complain of understeer, thats usually because they hit the throttle too soon and dont wait long enough for the weight to have shifted.
The DCCD-A cars are much better for the average joe to get some sense of the dynamics, but again unless you learn to drive them properly you will think it's an understeer biased platform.
Diff's wise, they vary over the years as to what is fitted where. They all have a rear LSD, some plated, some torque biasing gear based, some viscous. Front some are open diff, some helical, some suretrack.
The best combo IMHO is an STi helical front, 33:66 DCCD-A and STi plated rear.
Map DCCD can be fitted to any DCCD equipped car, it's a fairly basic system with limited inputs. I wouldn't fit that to a car equipped with a DCCD-A system. I use a plug and play DCCD controller in mine when doing competitive events, which allows me to map it to suit the event and conditions, that uses base maps with active control from wheel speed inputs from the ABS system via CAN bus. This allows me to set a base lock rate over a full 3D map and then set a slip target for front/rear average wheel speed. If i want more oversteer i just allow a bigger % of wheel speed difference between front/rear before the active system starts to increase the centre diff lock to control that difference. It's useful to use if you want to max out the brakes at high speed also. On the road i just pop the stock road system back in.
Brake system on these cars is very good, it has active brake bias adjust using a G sensor, so in the wet you can get much more rear brake utilisation which reduces front wheel lock.
This is quite a nice shot of what you can do with a stock JDM STi in the wet, hard braking into a left hand corner with the weight transfer being used to rotate the car and get ready for a slight oversteer power on exit.
And a relatively high speed 4 wheel drift full power corner exit in the dry.
In both you can see a fair amount of body roll and wheel movement with the stock suspension. The mistake most aftermarket setups make is they reduce the droop too much, especially at the rear, so you get snap changes in grip which limits how hard you can push at the limit. Both pictures are with the stock DCCD-A set to auto mode.
This one is being a hooligan in an STi5 Type RA with the centre diff set to fully open, to get it to that attitude it takes a fair bit of initial weight transfer, once you have done that you can drive it out of the hairpin like a RWD car. It's not the fastest way to set a lap time.
The DCCD-A cars are much better for the average joe to get some sense of the dynamics, but again unless you learn to drive them properly you will think it's an understeer biased platform.
Diff's wise, they vary over the years as to what is fitted where. They all have a rear LSD, some plated, some torque biasing gear based, some viscous. Front some are open diff, some helical, some suretrack.
The best combo IMHO is an STi helical front, 33:66 DCCD-A and STi plated rear.
Map DCCD can be fitted to any DCCD equipped car, it's a fairly basic system with limited inputs. I wouldn't fit that to a car equipped with a DCCD-A system. I use a plug and play DCCD controller in mine when doing competitive events, which allows me to map it to suit the event and conditions, that uses base maps with active control from wheel speed inputs from the ABS system via CAN bus. This allows me to set a base lock rate over a full 3D map and then set a slip target for front/rear average wheel speed. If i want more oversteer i just allow a bigger % of wheel speed difference between front/rear before the active system starts to increase the centre diff lock to control that difference. It's useful to use if you want to max out the brakes at high speed also. On the road i just pop the stock road system back in.
Brake system on these cars is very good, it has active brake bias adjust using a G sensor, so in the wet you can get much more rear brake utilisation which reduces front wheel lock.
This is quite a nice shot of what you can do with a stock JDM STi in the wet, hard braking into a left hand corner with the weight transfer being used to rotate the car and get ready for a slight oversteer power on exit.
And a relatively high speed 4 wheel drift full power corner exit in the dry.
In both you can see a fair amount of body roll and wheel movement with the stock suspension. The mistake most aftermarket setups make is they reduce the droop too much, especially at the rear, so you get snap changes in grip which limits how hard you can push at the limit. Both pictures are with the stock DCCD-A set to auto mode.
This one is being a hooligan in an STi5 Type RA with the centre diff set to fully open, to get it to that attitude it takes a fair bit of initial weight transfer, once you have done that you can drive it out of the hairpin like a RWD car. It's not the fastest way to set a lap time.
John - what might I expect in terms of handling differences going from primarily DCCD-A to manual full open?
I had two GDs that I mostly drove in Auto and never spent much time really experimenting with manual settings. I have just acquired a GC with manual-only DCCD. I realise it will be a bit more lairy in the wet on full open compared with Auto mode on a GDB, but what about in dry high-grip conditions?
Also - interested in your comment about rear droop. The GC I’ve bought was set up for track by Chevron for sprinting. Rear ride height is lower than front. I set up my previous Imprezas with a little positive rake (rear higher than front) as I like soft suspension and as this helps with understeer on a compliant setup. I drive on bumpy country roads, no track.
I am planning to rip out the fat roll bars and the stiff PSS9s and fit OEM bars, struts and P1 springs which worked really well on my previous GCs without DCCD. Just wondering if this setup, which has positive take built in, might make my DCCD car trickier on the limit than my current setup.
I had two GDs that I mostly drove in Auto and never spent much time really experimenting with manual settings. I have just acquired a GC with manual-only DCCD. I realise it will be a bit more lairy in the wet on full open compared with Auto mode on a GDB, but what about in dry high-grip conditions?
Also - interested in your comment about rear droop. The GC I’ve bought was set up for track by Chevron for sprinting. Rear ride height is lower than front. I set up my previous Imprezas with a little positive rake (rear higher than front) as I like soft suspension and as this helps with understeer on a compliant setup. I drive on bumpy country roads, no track.
I am planning to rip out the fat roll bars and the stiff PSS9s and fit OEM bars, struts and P1 springs which worked really well on my previous GCs without DCCD. Just wondering if this setup, which has positive take built in, might make my DCCD car trickier on the limit than my current setup.
plenty said:
John - what might I expect in terms of handling differences going from primarily DCCD-A to manual full open?
I had two GDs that I mostly drove in Auto and never spent much time really experimenting with manual settings. I have just acquired a GC with manual only DCCD. I realise it will be a bit more lairy in the wet on full open compared with Auto mode on a GDB, but what about in dry high-grip conditions?
It depends on the tyres, how much power you have and how much work the plates in the centre diff have already done. Each car is different.I had two GDs that I mostly drove in Auto and never spent much time really experimenting with manual settings. I have just acquired a GC with manual only DCCD. I realise it will be a bit more lairy in the wet on full open compared with Auto mode on a GDB, but what about in dry high-grip conditions?
Edited by plenty on Tuesday 19th January 20:57
The basic idea behind the Auto control system is to provide a more balanced corner exit under power, depending on generation of car the feedback loop used a G sensor, a yaw sensor, a steering angle sensor and so on. The cars with the yaw sensor fitted are better than just a G sensor, but it's only marginal in feel. The DCCD-A cars all use wheel speed input to tighten the lock if you get wheel spin, so even though you aren't aware of it, it is using some amount of diff lock all the time you are under any decent power. On the DCCD-A cars under braking the diff lock is reduced to just 5%, even when you have it set in manual mode and fully locked, this is to protect the centre diff unit from overload when the ABS system activates and starts pulsing the wheel that needs it. All 4 wheels are individually controlled and pulsed by the ABS system. One of the mods you do when you build a GroupN car is to cut the brake input signal to the control unit, so you don't lose the lock rate under braking if you retain the OEM control unit (most fit an aftermarket system).
This can catch people out who think they have a locked centre diff in snow, you don't when the brakes are applied, it's basically open and you are relying on the systems a normal 2WD car has with ABS and all the problems that gives. It's not the same as the manual DCCD cars which do keep the diffs locked and you have fully manual wheel rotation control.
When you go to a manual only DCCD system, you don't have any ABS, so you don't have the problem of shocking the centre diff. This means whatever lock you manually set, stays set. That means there is some gains to be made under braking by sharing the brake load around the 4 tyres, what you dont have is the active brake bias of the later system, so it's swings and roundabouts.
With the manual system under power, you just need to experiment a bit with the settings for the various conditions, with the adjuster set to fully open, then there is no clamp load on the plates, so you have a fully open centre diff unit, which means you can get wheelspin quite easily, and if you break traction, the only thing to return it is your right foot or an increase in grip. If you move the adjuster a little and the indicator goes up one position, that switches on the electromagnet and provides a small amount of lock, from that point on upto full lock its an analogue adjustment, it's not a switch up by each light level as can be interpreted if you read the owner manual, so this is where you need to just experiment and find the sweet spot for your particular car.
A small change can make a huge difference, it's all based around the mechanics of your car and especially the tyres. I usually left it in fully open in the dry when running stock 280BHP and then would set it so i could still just break rear traction before front in the wet, maybe 1/3 locked. The only time i went full lock was in snow or mud. I remember one car (V3 STi) i setup for a sprint competitor, well before any aftermarket controllers were about, that i had a small steel pin resting on the manual adjuster and i got the driver to count how many knurls of the adjuster the pin jumped, after doing some runs i had the sweet spot found and he kept to that, made a huge difference to his times as it was nicely balanced and needed a lot of provoking to break traction, when it did it was easy to manage. Too much lock you get corner entry understeer, too little and you lose acceleration.
A well mapped auto system on a TA car with 750BHP or even something like my 480BHP car is a great tool to use, i would always have a bit of lock no matter what, because it's always traction limited, the trick is to not have too much on high speed corner entry as you need the centre diff more open at that phase, if you do it right it allows far more directional control with the throttle than a conventional car as you can ramp up the lock rate on throttle position at various speed range points to change balance. On sprints i'd often modify the diff map every run i did as you can often pick up a better grip/direction balance based on the grip levels that day. I did one event in the wet where i changed the diff map 4 times on a single 60s run, as the controller can carry 4 individual maps and just pressing one button made it jump to the next map set. It could fry your head if you didn't understand it properly.
Gassing Station | Subaru | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff