318_tC

boosted with fully built bottom end......call b/s all day he ran a 13.6 at the track btw...

seattledave

both the sti and evo are 293/300 hp, no? and the new eclispe 4banger turbos are 260

318_tC

The new ones are v6 not turbo.

mattvs

Naw, he was pretty accurate in his post. All of the baseline 2006 STI dynosheets I've seen were around 230awhp. The VIII's are about the same, maybe a smidge higher.

The IX's are beasts though and can hit 240-250awhp. I haven't seen much of what the 07 STIs are doing. I've heard they're fairly close to the IXs and are reacting almost as good to BPU's.

seattledave

so the 300 hp that both the sti and evo claim are bogus?

they're not even at the 276 japanese rule?

mattvs

The 06-07 STI and 06 Evo IX are rated at 298 and 286 crank horsepower, respectively.

AWD has to move 4 wheels instead of 2, which is why you see more power lost in the drivetrain. The difference in the drivetrain technology between the STI and the Evo is what accounts for the difference in awhp output.

blackcherrytc813

as engifineer stated a rwd car is the way to go, why not buy a ls1 car and turbo it, spend less then 16000 on the car and slap a turbo on and make the evo and the sti look like a toy car. it would be cheaper and faster. my firebird formula before i blew the motor intentionally would run mid to high 11s all day long depending on the temp outside and how hot the tires where.

freestyle789

cuase every1 knows those cars are fast, and every1 knows tc's r slow, so its nice to see sum1's face when u beat them in a turbo tc sleepers r the way to go, would it be nice if the tc was RWD....yeah but its not so wut ya guna do, if your looking to make big hp in an RWD car for relativly cheap i would go with a 240sx and so a sr20 swap or get ur hands on a 93 mr2 turbo mwhahahha but all in all the tc is a sweet lookin car and if ur turbo u got a sweet looking car that can beat up on some mustangs and other fast cars

engifineer

Oh I wasnt saying not to mod a tC, hell I will probably eventually build a motor for mine for fun. But with me, 220 WHP is fine. Still reliable and that is all the power I will want or need if I auto-x it. But in any case, a FWD is not a true sports car, since it was not built around performance first, my point was to those many people who seem to think they are driving a "Sports" car. Sure, you can make an eclipse hella fast.. .and it will live a short life, like every even moderately built eclipse I have ever seen. Even those that I have seen built very well by people knowing what they are doing end up having issues very soon in thier life. They are not built well enough to start with, since they are not sports cars at heart. They were built to handle the boost they came with, and usually do a poor job at that.

But as far as making a track rwd car, you are better off with a v8. Go to a track and see who is running the big numbers in each class and you will see what I mean. You can easilly turn 12's in an NA v8 if you build it right. They have the torque to create a wider powerband, making them a better performer than a similarly powered boosted cars in many applications. When I was a kid, my father, his friend and I built a 600HP v8 ford without ever thinking about boost. And I am not even a ford fan

But all of that doesnt mean you can enjoy building what you have. That is what it is really all about.

djct_watt

As always, you are pretty much 100% correct. A couple points I would bring up:

1. Optimal engine configuration depends on the type of track/racing.
2. RWD > FWD, granted. But V8's don't always win.

A) Case and point; Lotus Elise/Exige.
B) Porsche Boxer/Flat 6 Engine. You're an engineer, I am not. Maybe you understand the true mechanics of it. . . or maybe it's just that Porsche boosts the snot out of those motors. Either way, it is a great motor and performs admirably.

But I generally agree with everything you're saying. Sure, it's cool to make a decently quick FWD 4 banger. But there's nothing sports about it. Make the same car RWD, and it will be a night and day difference. Better yet, up the displacement, and you'll see an even bigger difference.

1) There's no replacement for quality engineering
2) There's no replacement for displacement
3) Combine both, and the sky is limitless. An over-engineered I-4 is great. But an over-engineered V8/V10/V12 is much much better

I can't believe how many *I beat a corvette* with my NA tC with an intake posts we have.

jlaznlover

+1 i agree

Who beats whom(did i use that correctly?) is hard to say. too many variables. how much boost is each car running, what size turbo in each car, what is the condition of the motor, driver experience, what kind of tires. etc. in the end, the tc should have the advantage simply because everything will pretty much be brand new. i.e. motor, turbo. you get the point. i wouldn't mind seeing a vid either just curious how it would turn out :D

matt, i notice we did the same thing. i had an 2005 IIP tc and traded to a 06 evo, but mines a GSR though

engifineer

No kidding... a vette that was probably not even aware someone was "racing" them :D

Oh, there are plenty of fast 4bangers out there like the ones you mentioned. The elise and exige though weigh in at 2000 lbs or less, so that is part of where they get thier performance. They dont need the power to go fast that a heavier car does. They are also not really built for 1/4 mile outright as opposed to handling and tight track driving, in which you dont need a monster motor.

The porches are fast cars with high amounts of power in a V6. There are cars out there with high performing 4 cylinders and of course 6 cylinders. My point was that if you are looking to start with a cheap motor and build a fast car in the straight line, then a v8 is a great way to go. You can buy a used 350 chevy for dirt cheap and produce tons of power with it. If you want to get more serious, then you can by a 572 crate motor for around $7000 - $8000 and get 600 NA hp already built for the race track. Or spend around $12,000 and get 700 NA HP built for the track. Slap a big blower on it and you are running WELL over 1000HP with no fear of pushing the motor too far.

But now I am just drooling :D

If the car is built around performance to start with (porsche, lotus, etc) then sure, it can run, but look a the cost of the car.

mattvs

30-35psi is a bloody good alternative though.

^_^

turbo27

If you want a 1/4 mile car then you could get a VR4 for around $5-7,000 spend only $2,000 on mods and eat a vette alive. AWD owns any V8s RWD and its powerband is amazing.

Back on topic. Has anyone who has their TC turbo ever drive another turbo vehicle they can compare it to so I could get some kind of idea how fast a basic turbo TC is? Anyone have a EVO III 16g on there car?

engifineer

No awd doesnt "own", it makes it easier to drive, but an experiened driver in a rwd will still do just as well, especially considiering the higher parasitic loss of an awd system, so you need more power to get the same end result. AWD has its places, but so does RWD. For example, on pavement a well setup rwd with a good driver will match or beat the same awd.

turbo27

Though when RWD spins AWD wouldve gripped up the pavement and be half way there. Having all that hp doesnt matter if you cant put it down to the tires. With LSDs and what not your still going to lose more traction in a 2WD car then you would in a AWD car. AWD cars aventage are in their launch, thats what they specialize. Sure a RWD would take a AWD from a roll but from a dig, like drag racing the 1/4, match a AWD with a RWD and AWD would own.

engifineer

Sorry... but I will never agree with that. If you setup and drive a rwd properly, you are still in a better platform for straight line racing. As you go up in power, you are removing MOST of the weight on the front wheels on a good launch, so the awd will either spin the fronts or if it is a good AWD system it will shift to mostly rwd anyway. Again, the AWD system is just robbing more power at that point.

turbo27

Well, I guess we should put it as it is all about the car, the setup of the vehicle, and the driver. One day RWD could own AWD and another the opposite.

OuterHeaven

I have an AWD turbo DSM. I drive both that and my turbo'ed tC all the time and I say my tC with only 6 psi is much faster overall but it the AWD launches much better (obviously). For the street tires I would say that an AWD will be a much better platform then RWD in the end.

capscion

wow.... saying that a front wheel drive 4-cyl is not a sports car is probably one of the most rediculous things I have ever heard. I guess you have never been to a 1/4 mile track and watcha 4-cyl knock out a 7 sec 1/4 mile. Maybe you like the feel of the rear wheel drive better (as do I), but I have seen many a RWD V8 get its doors blown off by a little ricer 4-cyl. I think you confuse your preferance for reality. Obviously insurance company's would disagree with you as well. Since there are many 4-cyl FWD cars that are classified as sports cars. Its all abou the mods and the driver. HAVE NONE OF YOU HEARD OF A 4-CYL PUSHING OVER 1000 HP?? If thats not a sports car I don'tknow what is............................... And neither do the rest of ya