FR faster than Cupra

[Ben CTR]

Driven both, Cupra quicker end of.. 0-60, 0-100, 30-70, through the gears, in gear, upstairs, downstairs, inside out, upside down, deosn't matter! There may be a certain gear where between 33mph and 37mph in sixth that the FR's turbo may spool up a little quicker and get a headlight in front, but that'll soon change..
As for overtaking. If you're being lazy, then yeah you might leave it in a high gear. But if you need to get past something quickly and safely, you'll drop it a gear or two. So why bother comparing times.
At the end of the day, the Cupra is the faster car, as it is the flagship model. DSG or no DSG..

 

[jdearden]

Ok we'v tried a number of runs on a (closed road of course) with both a FR and Cupra (BOTH NON DSG).-racig against each other...

Here's how it went-
The FR pulled away faster initially due more traction (cause of having less power), the cupra scrambled a lot at first but then pulled it back pretty much straight away, passing the point 200yards away before the FR. (Proving the Cupra is quicker)
Then when driving at a constant speed of 60 the cupra pulled away quicker again..

All that i can conclude is the Cupra is quicker (however you want to define it ie 0-62, max speed, overtaking)

STOCK CUPRA BEATS STOCK FR!! END OF! PLEEEEEASE!

 

[Bigfoot]

It's a bit like mines bigger than yours

 

[cupra yk1]

.

 

[leviathan18]

i have an fr and a cupra is quicker is a no brainer 40 hp is a lot k04 is bigger but not a lot bigger to make a difference in turbo lag maybe the fr can start a little bit ahead but unless the driver of the cupra isnt blind and with only 1 arm, the cupra will be faster

 

[Al]

Hey guys,

I have a stock Leon FR DSG Petrol and I did 2 drag races with stock Cupra, both cars were new and there was no way that the Cupra could win..
I think that to win in a drag in a Cupra you need to really have top gear changing skills.. however, on high speeds the Cupra is always better..

 

[jdearden]

Well if they were brand new, its never a good idea to give it a full blown race for starters...well for a quarter mile sprints sake i reckon the cupra would cross the line a good second or 2 before the FR.

When i first saw this forum thread i thought it was a no brainer, and now its been tried and tested it still is! Cupra is more expensive for a reason! Cupra has it's own race series for a reason!

The BWA engine in the FR produces:

2.0 TSI FR Straight-4 DOHC 16V 2 L (1984 cc) 200 PS (197 hp/147 kW) 280 N·m (207 ft·lbf)


The BWJ in the Cupra
2.0 TSI Cupra Straight-4 DOHC 16V 2 L (1984 cc) 241 PS (238 hp/177 kW) 300 N·m (221 ft·lbf)

oh and the cupra is lighter!!!

END OF THE DAY THEY ARE BOTH HOT HATCHES BOTH SEAT LEONS AND BOTH GREAT CARS!!

***JUST GO OUT THERE AND DRIVE***​

 

[phil3012]

Hey,

This is my second post and I have some new info. Went to a dealership this afternoon and the salesman is going to email me some figures regarding the in gear speeds of the FR and the Cupra, I'll post them as they come in. He - the salesman - said that because of the differences in powerband and the way the power is delivered at different RPM's the Cupra could be out performed by the FR TFSI (DSG or 6-manual). He even said than an FR TDI is slower a 2.0 TDI

A dealer will always try and sell you an FR over a Cupra. I found this when I bought mine, both dealers I tried at first said "Can't get you a Cupra, do you want an FR instead?"

Only when they knew I was serious did both of them say, well as it happens I have a Black one with iPod coming in x weeks. Got mine in 6 but had to compromise on getting the Convenience Pack that I wasn't bothered about.

At the time, they both eventually admitted that they an get can FR really easily (think they build quite a few for stock), any colour in most specs within a week or so. Most Cupras at the time were build to order.

Dealers prefer to sell a car they can source (or have out the back) rather than do a build to order. Wouldn't surprise me if the margin on an FR was greater than the Cupra.

 

[Rampage]

The BWA engine in the FR produces:

2.0 TSI FR Straight-4 DOHC 16V 2 L (1984 cc) 200 PS (197 hp/147 kW) 280 N·m (207 ft·lbf)


The BWJ in the Cupra
2.0 TSI Cupra Straight-4 DOHC 16V 2 L (1984 cc) 241 PS (238 hp/177 kW) 300 N·m (221 ft·lbf)

oh and the cupra is lighter!!!

END OF THE DAY THEY ARE BOTH HOT HATCHES BOTH SEAT LEONS AND BOTH GREAT CARS!!

***JUST GO OUT THERE AND DRIVE***​

Cupra is 42kg HEAVIER!

 

[MUFFIN]

FR Faster

You wish! LOL

 

[on_the_verge]

Why would Seat sell the Cupra as the top of the range car if it was not faster than the lower models, that aside common sense says that 240bhp will be quicker than 200bhp.

All this talk of in gear acceleration, in reality (on a closed road) head to head it would be gear down and see you later.................anyone who thinks otherwise is just kidding themselves.

I love in gear aceleration, I would I have the FR TDI, but I would rather have a Cupra if circumstances were diffierent - I would forgo my in gear acceleration for 240bhp any day of the week.

Just my thoughts on the subject!

 

[DSG-boy]

From a dig 0-60 i will have no problem smoking a stock Cupra with my FR dsg stg1.
You couldnt keep up with the stick.
In higher speeds i will probably not keep up, that´s when the K04 kicks K03 butt.

 

[Ben CTR]

I think at the end of the day 0-60 means fook all these days. If you were going to have a traffic light GP with soimeone, it'll be more down to the driver/launch than the car. For instance, a 106 GTI with a good driver in it would be quicker than a Cupra with a crap driver in it from 0-60, as it's over much to short a distance/time. I'd much rather compare my car with another one off say a RA on to a DC (side by side) (up to sensible speeds of course), but even then soooooo much depends on the driver..

 

[DSG-boy]

I think at the end of the day 0-60 means fook all these days. If you were going to have a traffic light GP with soimeone, it'll be more down to the driver/launch than the car. For instance, a 106 GTI with a good driver in it would be quicker than a Cupra with a crap driver in it from 0-60, as it's over much to short a distance/time. I'd much rather compare my car with another one off say a RA on to a DC (side by side) (up to sensible speeds of course), but even then soooooo much depends on the driver..

A crappy driver in my car would smoke that Pega 106 GTI

 

[chrisboyle999]

.

 

[DandB]

 

[Ruddmeister]

In 4th gear:
From 60 to 90 km/h: FR = 4.3 FR DSG = 3.6 Cupra = 4.7
From 90 to 120 km/h: FR = 4.7 FR DSG = 4.2 Cupra = 4.7

100 km/h = 60 MPH

The big question is why anyone would be doing 35mph to 55mph (60 to 90 km/h: FR = 4.3 FR DSG = 3.6 Cupra = 4.7) In 4th Gear any slower in 4th and you'd stall the car

4th gear at 35mph not exactly real world driving.........2nd gear at 35mph is more realistic

 

[phil3012]

The big question is why anyone would be doing 35mph to 55mph (60 to 90 km/h: FR = 4.3 FR DSG = 3.6 Cupra = 4.7) In 4th Gear any slower in 4th and you'd stall the car

4th gear at 35mph not exactly real world driving.........2nd gear at 35mph is more realistic

Good spot.

I'm by no means an expert but doing that sort of speed in fourth, wouldn't you expect the Cupra to be slower?

Don't bigger Turbos take longer to spool and at that sort of speed/revs the engine is pratically labouring anyway?

(or am I talking complete rubbish?)

 

[Ruddmeister]

Good spot.

I'm by no means an expert but doing that sort of speed in fourth, wouldn't you expect the Cupra to be slower?

Don't bigger Turbos take longer to spool and at that sort of speed/revs the engine is pratically labouring anyway?

(or am I talking complete rubbish?)

No spot on the K04 equipped car would spool later

Diesel FR's would tave more torque too.

Why anyone would buy a cupra a drive like Miss daisy I have no idea.......if you drive like that you may as well save the cash and buy a smart car

 

[vern987]

Still diesel is the fuel of the devil and truck drivers.