# 30-130mph in 6 seconds. In an Evo? No way.....



## Stu-Oxfordshire (May 7, 2002)

Well "yes way" actually!

The MLR held their annual 30-130 challenge at Bruntingthorpe on Monday.

The day was won (unsurprisingly) by the Norris car pictured here: 









It managed 30-130 sprint in no less than 6.01 seconds. To give you an idea how fast this is, a "standard" Evo IX FQ340 takes 16-17 seconds to cover the same ground......

If you want to see/hear for yourself, download this vid:
Right click, save target as
http://323gtr.net/323gtr/Videos/ND1.mpg


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

Is it regular driver - ie did they drive it to and from the track?


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

garyc said:


> Is it regular driver - ie did they drive it to and from the track?


Its road-legal - the thing is, are they brave enough to look that stupid?


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Fookin hell, that is quick.

My RS6 managed 50-168MPH in 13 seconds according to AmD & that was at her maximum tune of 550+BHP.


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

jampott said:


> Its road-legal - the thing is, are they brave enough to look that stupid?


It is what it is, it looks how it should. It's not pretty but that's hardly the point. Anyone buying an estate car has pretty much abandoned aesthetics, so I don't understand why you can't see past the form and recognise the quality of the function.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Carlos said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > Its road-legal - the thing is, are they brave enough to look that stupid?
> ...


----------



## Gaz225 (Feb 11, 2006)

WOW that is awsome........but it doesn't look like it's going that fast


----------



## BAMTT (Feb 22, 2004)

Considering an F1 car goes to 125 in about 4 sec's that is bonkers


----------



## clived (May 6, 2002)

W7 PMC said:


> Fookin hell, that is quick.
> 
> My RS6 managed 50-168MPH in 13 seconds according to AmD & that was at her maximum tune of 550+BHP.


...and of course that isn't quite a fair comparison as I think you'll find the Evo had the small matter of drag to deal with as it wasn't sat still on a rolling road at the time.... ;-)


----------



## omen666 (Oct 10, 2004)

Carlos said:


> Anyone buying an estate car has pretty much abandoned aesthetics, so I don't understand why you can't see past the form and recognise the quality of the function.


Agree with your statement on quality of the function, but strongly disagree with the abandoned aesthetics fella

I feel I have both....










:wink:

The consensus amongst RS fan's/owners is the Avant is the nicer looking of the various options.

I think petrolheads respect the Evo and Impreza for their performance, but the looks do put some off. I reckon they would have sold more if that was addressed. I did try and persuade my wife to have an Evo so I could use it at the weekends and she use the RS6, but she just couldn't live with the looks of it.

Back on topic, that is some car. Can't imagine what's it like to drive


----------



## genocidalduck (May 19, 2005)

I'd agree with that Damon. Most of my mates have said i should get a Evo rather than the RS4. Cheaper with the same or better performance. But i said thats fine if all i wanted was a fast car. But i want the refinement aswell. The Japs IMO always fall short or that.


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

omen666 said:


> Agree with your statement on quality of the function, but strongly disagree with the abandoned aesthetics fella
> 
> I feel I have both....


I'm not saying estate cars can't be attractive - I've had 4 of them over the past few years, some better looking than others. But compared to cars like the TT or any other pretty coupe or sports car the aesthetics just aren't there. You can never say an estate is good looking compared to a beautiful sports car, only that it is good looking compared with other estates. To countenance buying an estate you must make compromises on aesthetics. Without exception.

BTW I far prefer the looks of the RS6 avant to the saloon!


----------



## Stu-Oxfordshire (May 7, 2002)

Tim, 
You are missing the point: The Norris car is their showroom: whilst it is road legal (and yes, they did drive it from Wiltshire to Bruntingthorpe and back again) it is designed to be an attention-getter. Personally, I would say they have succeeded.


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Monstrous!!

p.s. Jamie - Maybe you need to wait for the new GT-R. :wink:


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Stu-Oxfordshire said:


> Tim,
> You are missing the point: The Norris car is their showroom: whilst it is road legal (and yes, they did drive it from Wiltshire to Bruntingthorpe and back again) it is designed to be an attention-getter. Personally, I would say they have succeeded.


No, I'm not missing the point at all.


----------



## genocidalduck (May 19, 2005)

scoTTy said:


> Monstrous!!
> 
> p.s. Jamie - Maybe you need to wait for the new GT-R. :wink:


Nooooo its a ok cool car to look at type thing. Wouldnt own one.


----------



## sssgucci (Nov 20, 2004)

Awesom car!


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

clived said:


> W7 PMC said:
> 
> 
> > Fookin hell, that is quick.
> ...


Very true mate :wink: Only thing in my defence is i had the little matter of traction to deal with during that timed sudo-run. My car did not have the benefit of tarmac to aide traction, so it was a little slippy for the lower speeds. Agree though that it's only a slight comparison. The Norris EVO's are just plain bonkers.


----------



## Richard W (Nov 11, 2005)

It's been mentioned that it's the Norris 'shop window' car but has anyone actually given credit for the amount of work that's gone into it - ugly or not - I think it's the only Evo coupe in the world.......










Full spec - http://www.norris-designs.co.uk/demo-evo9.htm


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Richard W said:


> It's been mentioned that it's the Norris 'shop window' car but has anyone actually given credit for the amount of work that's gone into it - ugly or not - I think it's the only Evo coupe in the world.......
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It was discussed on here a while ago.


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

If you rolled my scoob out of a Hercules at 10,000 feet it would do 0-terminal velocity faster than that.

Which is the more comparable measurement? :roll:


----------



## Richard W (Nov 11, 2005)

jampott said:


> Richard W said:
> 
> 
> > It's been mentioned that it's the Norris 'shop window' car but has anyone actually given credit for the amount of work that's gone into it - ugly or not - I think it's the only Evo coupe in the world.......
> ...


  must stop going on holiday.......


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

Carlos said:


> If you rolled my scoob out of a Hercules at 10,000 feet it would do 0-terminal velocity faster than that.
> 
> Which is the more comparable measurement? :roll:


You're just being silly now


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

W7 PMC said:


> Carlos said:
> 
> 
> > If you rolled my scoob out of a Hercules at 10,000 feet it would do 0-terminal velocity faster than that.
> ...


I think if you rolled the Norris (crap name BTW), Paul's Beast, and a stock Polo 1.4 all out of a Hercules, that the Polo would not get left behind. :wink:


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

garyc said:


> W7 PMC said:
> 
> 
> > Carlos said:
> ...


But i think the spoilers & aerodynamics of Carlos's Scooby would allow for a smoother flight thus the Scooby would possibly come last. Me thinks the RS6 would however win that race due to it being the overweight relative :lol:


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

W7 PMC said:


> garyc said:
> 
> 
> > W7 PMC said:
> ...


Galileo suggested that all objects fall with the same acceleration.

But that might be just in a vacuum.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

jampott said:


> W7 PMC said:
> 
> 
> > garyc said:
> ...


And he never drove an Evo.. :wink:


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

garyc said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > W7 PMC said:
> ...


No, but he did have a MK1 TT...


----------

