RE: braking specs

[Eaton Dave <dave.eaton@minedu.govt.nz>]

actually its got very little to do with group a.  brakes are "free" under
the regulations in group "a" (as anyone who has seen a rally car tarmac-spec
braking setup will attest), so subaru can do what they like.  ditto tyres.
no such thing as control tyres as regards the "for sale" models.  the "group
"n" spec wrx which you can purchase in nz has quite a different wheel/tyre
and brake combination again....

as to the weight, certainly this is a factor, with the m3 100kgs heavier
than the wrx.  however that doesn't explain the difference between the 911
and the m3 does it?  nor does it explain that the new s4 has better braking
performance than the (lighter) m3.  ditto the c43 m-b (ref for both: autocar
comparison test).

dave
'95 rs2
'90 ur-q
> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:33:06 -0500
> From: "Dave Aukerman" <mhauk@ccsdana.net>
> Subject: Re: Flag Debate (I want other specs)
> 
> - ----------
> > From: Eaton Dave <dave.eaton@minedu.govt.nz>
> > 
> > 16's (all round).  the wrx was much better under brakes than the m3, and
> > only marginally worse than the 911 (911 rating a 9, the wrx a 8, and the
> m3
> > only a 4), despite poorer wheel/tyre specification than either car....
> > 
> > perhaps the m3 (despite it 50:50 weight distribution) is suffering in
the
> > chassis dynamics department?  hold on a minute, how could the wrx with
> it's
> > awful front-biased weight distribution and lack of a locked centre diff
> > brake better than the m3???  
> > 
> 
> 	Same reason the rally editions put you on the dash under braking. No
big
> mystery here.  Lots to do with the fact that the wrx has a very good brake
> design in a car weighing less than both the m3 and 911.    As for
> tire/wheel. . . I seem to recall the control tire width for the tarmac
> rally (group a) is something like 215.
> 
> Dave
>