why do evo's produce so much torque for 2.0
22 June 2010, 08:55 AM
#31
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Manchester ish
Posts: 18,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is also on the standard turbo with a small hotside (I can change the hotside very cheaply and quickly which will loose me some spool maybe 200rpm further up, however it will hold power better even though I have a relatively flat boost curve)
22 June 2010, 09:00 AM
#32
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Manchester ish
Posts: 18,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first time I heard chocolate pistons was on here 
22 June 2010, 09:16 AM
#34
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
New age cars as Banny say's, have different rods, which were the weak spot on the classics (well lots of weak spots on the classics, rods being one, main end bearings being the other), the later twin scroll JDM cars have better cranks (drilled/nitrided for better oil distribution to the bearings), stronger rods, stronger engines in total, easily run 400+bhp with no issues, but you cannot compare classic JDM cars with newage JDM cars, Subaru really did their home work when they re engineered the engines due to the issues they had with the classics, now they are much stronger 
and the engines are far better 
oh the joys of twin scroll cars
Tony
and the engines are far better oh the joys of twin scroll cars Tony
22 June 2010, 11:27 AM
#37
Comparing STi and EVO. I have an 03 STi (UK) with a fair few mods inc. an MD321H, 3" Milltek etc. My son has an EVO IX also with a 3" Milltek and K&N cone but otherwise standard.
He recently had it re-mapped after fitting the exhaust and the power curve compared to mine, makes interesting reading! His standard turbo spools nearly 1000rpm quicker giving great torque at much lower revs than mine. Both torque and power curves climb so much earlier and peak just over what mine gives. All this on the same rollers and by the same mapper. Even considering the EVO is lower geared, on the motorway it will pull from below 70 in 6th with a real shove in the back that the STi could only dream of!
Before the EVO he had an STi PPP and even when the EVO was standard (FQ320) he reckoned it was like chalk and cheese!
At least it doesn't sound as good as mine!
JohnD
He recently had it re-mapped after fitting the exhaust and the power curve compared to mine, makes interesting reading! His standard turbo spools nearly 1000rpm quicker giving great torque at much lower revs than mine. Both torque and power curves climb so much earlier and peak just over what mine gives. All this on the same rollers and by the same mapper. Even considering the EVO is lower geared, on the motorway it will pull from below 70 in 6th with a real shove in the back that the STi could only dream of!
Before the EVO he had an STi PPP and even when the EVO was standard (FQ320) he reckoned it was like chalk and cheese!
At least it doesn't sound as good as mine!
JohnD
22 June 2010, 11:41 AM
#38
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
John, his car is twin scroll, you have no chance of keeping up with it as he provides the power lower down (same with the JDM STI scoobs from 2003 onwards), but that is the joy of twin scroll STI's pull from 16-1800 rpm, its great
Tony
STI's pull from 16-1800 rpm, its great Tony
22 June 2010, 11:48 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: W-s-M
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it all comes down to preference at the end of the day, I like the sound of my scooby over an Evo and as people have said set up right they are as good as each other, the Evo appears to be easier to make more power but my opinion on the whole is that the scooby's will make better torque because of the flat four engine, the unequal manifold also aids in torque over the equal length.
Reliability wise LMS have an import STI version 7 that is running meths and over 420bhp / 350lbs used as a demo track car and daily which is still on standard internals adn going strong. .
Reliability wise LMS have an import STI version 7 that is running meths and over 420bhp / 350lbs used as a demo track car and daily which is still on standard internals adn going strong. .
22 June 2010, 11:53 AM
#42
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Incorrect, the equal length headers improve torque over uneven length, hence why twin scroll cars can make 360/400lbs on the standard turbo yet a uk car would be pushed to make 350/350.
Tony
22 June 2010, 12:33 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 2,604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my 8 is running standard bottom end, just under 400bhp (399.5bhp) that was at 1.65 bar peak and 1.5 held. It now runs 1.7 peak and holds 1.6 but I will be upping this soon.
This is also on the standard turbo with a small hotside (I can change the hotside very cheaply and quickly which will loose me some spool maybe 200rpm further up, however it will hold power better even though I have a relatively flat boost curve)
This is also on the standard turbo with a small hotside (I can change the hotside very cheaply and quickly which will loose me some spool maybe 200rpm further up, however it will hold power better even though I have a relatively flat boost curve)
maybe less i havent really had the time to look down at the avcr
wouldnt mind running 2 bar but would defo have to uprate something
has anyone run 2bar on standard internals
22 June 2010, 12:35 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 2,604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dont you lose the burble though (i dont hink i could lose the noise)
steve
22 June 2010, 01:52 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: sunderland
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
22 June 2010, 02:34 PM
#48
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Tony
22 June 2010, 02:35 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Barnsley
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The thing is though, an evo has great spool same as a twin scroll unit and much better legs at the end, Rob North told me how his ran out of power at the top.
The latter is open to debate, a stock evo engine is better built IMO, the boxtersetup just does not compute with me, on a track and under oil surge conditions, the boxter setup is flawed IMO.
22 June 2010, 02:37 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Barnsley
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New age cars as Banny say's, have different rods, which were the weak spot on the classics (well lots of weak spots on the classics, rods being one, main end bearings being the other), the later twin scroll JDM cars have better cranks (drilled/nitrided for better oil distribution to the bearings), stronger rods, stronger engines in total, easily run 400+bhp with no issues, but you cannot compare classic JDM cars with newage JDM cars, Subaru really did their home work when they re engineered the engines due to the issues they had with the classics, now they are much stronger and the engines are far better oh the joys of twin scroll cars
Tony
and the engines are far better oh the joys of twin scroll cars Tony
Ok then as an example of the newer lumps.....Evo X........525bhp aft achieved on the standard bottom end...argument over.
22 June 2010, 02:45 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Barnsley
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oh and Tony, not sure if your aware of the RS variants of Evo's but they every bit as good as your fabled Spec C's....they are 1250kg out of the box, mechanical diffs, ti turbo wheels for ultra fast spool and were made for the sole intent of selling to the rally guys who basically turned them into what they wanted from the great base they already are.
I hear so much about Spec C this, Spec C that, everyone thinks an Evo is a tommy Mak or a fq300......not the case.
With just remap, exhaust, fuel pump, mine made 385/390 and was on full boost at around 3k rpm on the road and had the legs that the twin scroll units could only dream of.
22 June 2010, 02:48 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Go to you tube and see you "fabled" rs get its a(RS) handed to it several times on the track by just standard subaru's (not even Spec C's )
Someone on here is running 550bhp on a standard Spec C bottom end, more than the evo x
Tony
)Someone on here is running 550bhp on a standard Spec C bottom end, more than the evo x
Tony
22 June 2010, 02:51 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
I think gearing in the WRX is why STIs don't get a look in on longish straights.
22 June 2010, 02:59 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Its probably the bigger turbo, more time for it to gain momentum, this is why twin scroll units are good, give you the pickup of a small turbo but with bigger turbo power
Tony
Tony
22 June 2010, 03:05 PM
#56
JohnD
Last edited by JohnD; 22 June 2010 at 05:45 PM.
22 June 2010, 03:17 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 1600cc's of twin scroll fun :)
Posts: 25,565
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Yup the ratio's are close, 6speed 5th is higher than a wrx's 4th, same with a wrx's 5th, the 6 speed's 6th is higher again but not by too much, biggest difference is that a wrx has more of a cruising box, the 6 speed is closer so you dont have any gaps in the power band that you can get with the wrx.
Tony
Tony
22 June 2010, 03:33 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: BEDFORDSHIRE
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i find the 6 speed too much work, constantly changing gear, i prefer being able to make the most of the long 5 speed gears, which co-insides with prodrives test figures with not having to change gear as much, i reckon a wrx with the same power as a mild tuned sti would be quicker- i'll find out soon when i get the vf35 and pinks done on mine lol- i'll compare to my dads sti running about 320 so will be about the same power.
22 June 2010, 04:27 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 2,604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i find the 6 speed too much work, constantly changing gear, i prefer being able to make the most of the long 5 speed gears, which co-insides with prodrives test figures with not having to change gear as much, i reckon a wrx with the same power as a mild tuned sti would be quicker- i'll find out soon when i get the vf35 and pinks done on mine lol- i'll compare to my dads sti running about 320 so will be about the same power.
)that poxy 5 speed box will go bang and you will go for either a dog box or the cheaper option THE 6 SPEED
which is overall a great boxalso what you have to remember is that the sti can be tuned higher (using standard internals etc) thus needing a stronger box
imagine an newage sti with a 5 speed box
