Why does the EVO VII has more power??
05 February 2002, 02:52 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Surferk
Posts: 2,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I recall the EVO does not pass type approval. They are brought over and each car has to pass an SVA. The UK STi has passed type approval i.e. it passes emmissions and is therefore detuned.
Somebody will correct me if I'm wrong
MArk
Somebody will correct me if I'm wrong
MArk
05 February 2002, 03:10 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
err, actually that was just the evo 6, the evo 7 has type approval.
It is perfectly possible that the evo 7 can produce its power without needing modifcations in order to meet emissions regulations.
It is perfectly possible that the evo 7 can produce its power without needing modifcations in order to meet emissions regulations.
05 February 2002, 04:27 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite simply the base Evo engine has stronger internals and a better turbo design. It also has a more efficient transmission which loses less HP thru the gearbox/flywheel etc, making it feel even faster. And don't forget all that lovely Evo torque is produced 1000rpm lower the STI.
But the Evo still sounds like an hairdryer and has no character (in comparrison with a scoob).
But the Evo still sounds like an hairdryer and has no character (in comparrison with a scoob).
05 February 2002, 04:32 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
stronger internals would make no difference!
they allow you to run more boost, but the evo as standard runs less boost.
As for efficient drivetrain, I think that is nonsense as the evo needs to transmit power through 90 degrees since it is a transverse engine. Drivetrain losses on the rolling road seem to be about the same, I remember cems car losing 100hp, whereas mine lost 80 (type rs lose about 80 in general, 4 doors seem to lose 100 too)
The evo does not have more power, but it does have more torque, possibly due to a longer stroke, but the secret to the torque curve is purely that it has a compression ratio of 8.8:1 instead of 8:1 in the impreza. It also has a fmic as standard so they tend to make their quoted power on the rollers.
they allow you to run more boost, but the evo as standard runs less boost.
As for efficient drivetrain, I think that is nonsense as the evo needs to transmit power through 90 degrees since it is a transverse engine. Drivetrain losses on the rolling road seem to be about the same, I remember cems car losing 100hp, whereas mine lost 80 (type rs lose about 80 in general, 4 doors seem to lose 100 too)
The evo does not have more power, but it does have more torque, possibly due to a longer stroke, but the secret to the torque curve is purely that it has a compression ratio of 8.8:1 instead of 8:1 in the impreza. It also has a fmic as standard so they tend to make their quoted power on the rollers.
Trending Topics
05 February 2002, 09:36 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,998
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sam Elassar's EVO7 has more of everything than his highly modded gear box eating UK scoob MY99,except the fuel tank size 
and all his EVO has is a decat system and Dawes.
and all his EVO has is a decat system and Dawes.
05 February 2002, 10:43 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam i think you have a problem with the 7 m8 is it because your car could not live with one ( i think so ), i think sam`s car was 286bhp standard at 1000 miles.
The vii uk300 is standard apart from a sports exhaust ( still with cat ) and a filter, they only say 276bhp as it is a japanese regulation which is never regulated ( a golden handshake more like ).
Once run-in ie. above 8000 mile, a true figure is touching 300bhp as my old pulsar was that figure and the 7 feels and is quicker that also goes for my old p1 but more so as the pulsar was quicker than the p1, my mate who know ownes it is in banzai this month posting 4.5 0-60/ 12.71 i think to 100, so there you have it guys.
Hope this helps but for some nobody can help them!
J
The vii uk300 is standard apart from a sports exhaust ( still with cat ) and a filter, they only say 276bhp as it is a japanese regulation which is never regulated ( a golden handshake more like ).
Once run-in ie. above 8000 mile, a true figure is touching 300bhp as my old pulsar was that figure and the 7 feels and is quicker that also goes for my old p1 but more so as the pulsar was quicker than the p1, my mate who know ownes it is in banzai this month posting 4.5 0-60/ 12.71 i think to 100, so there you have it guys.
Hope this helps but for some nobody can help them!
J
05 February 2002, 11:17 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi there
few things to clear about the evo 7, really apart from the fuel tank it is by far the best car i have ever had.
it runs 1.2bar as standard, peaks to 1.4 bar.
my car with just a decat exhaust gave 320bhp!!!!!!! at 1.2 bar and gave around 350 with hyper muffler, and boost raised to 1.4 bar and 1.5 peak.
now show me a scoob that will beat that for 600£ worth of mods?
also i would like to add that i have had the con rod bolts done from new.
T-UK has been in it and he can tell you how fast it is compared to scoobs!!!!! needless to say i think he is converted
few things to clear about the evo 7, really apart from the fuel tank it is by far the best car i have ever had.
it runs 1.2bar as standard, peaks to 1.4 bar.
my car with just a decat exhaust gave 320bhp!!!!!!! at 1.2 bar and gave around 350 with hyper muffler, and boost raised to 1.4 bar and 1.5 peak.
now show me a scoob that will beat that for 600£ worth of mods?
also i would like to add that i have had the con rod bolts done from new.
T-UK has been in it and he can tell you how fast it is compared to scoobs!!!!! needless to say i think he is converted
06 February 2002, 12:10 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam M
It is the Evo's stronger internals that allow for a higher compression ratio. They also allow to safley break the 300bhp barrier (anything more than that in a scoob requires stronger rods/pistons...). The Evo's turbo may run similar boost presure, but it's light weight titanium blade design allows it to spool up much quicker.
It is the Evo's stronger internals that allow for a higher compression ratio. They also allow to safley break the 300bhp barrier (anything more than that in a scoob requires stronger rods/pistons...). The Evo's turbo may run similar boost presure, but it's light weight titanium blade design allows it to spool up much quicker.
06 February 2002, 12:16 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 10,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think elondan meant his question with regard to why not how the power is different.
ie. For the last few years the STi in Japan was 276bhp as was the EVO but when it was launched for the UK it had a lesser powered engine, whereas the EVO remained similarly powered to its Jap predecessors. Why did Subaru choose a lower spec engine wise?
ie. For the last few years the STi in Japan was 276bhp as was the EVO but when it was launched for the UK it had a lesser powered engine, whereas the EVO remained similarly powered to its Jap predecessors. Why did Subaru choose a lower spec engine wise?
06 February 2002, 12:34 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jason B I think you are misguided.
The evo 7 is an awesome car. I absolutely love it. I would go so far as to say I prefer it in everyway to the impreza, and if I wasnt obsessed with my 22B I would have one over everything else (barring skyline maybe). The only thing I dont like are the looks. It would be a six for me, which although is not as capable on the road, still has that great engine.
It was the best car I have ever driven, barring none, because I was not afraid of it like I am of mine.
Orwella,
It makes sense that stronger internals do allow for higher compression I suppose it equates to greater engine stress at teh same boost pressure yet despite this the evo is more resiliant on standard internals to increased boost.
I think there is little question that the evo engine is better than the impreza, but there is no question that the capacity for improvemet is better on the impreza and the ultimate goals attainable are higher (2.5 litre availability - rare I know, but possible).
The evo doesnt however, allow for the centre of gravity to be as low as it is, and doesnt aloow for a longitudinal engine with equal length driveshafts which is a design brief requirement for subaru.
Sam, you are right, for £600 you wont see any impreza getting near that kind of output, but then dont forget the rolling road does favour a front mount intercooler, and evos have those as standard whereas you are talking the best part of £1000 to do that to an impreza. It doesnt explain the imprezas shortfall though.
I think it is wrong though to say that the impreza cant take over 300 on standard internals, I can name well over 20 cars I know of personally running over this for significant periods with no strength related problems at all, sams included.
[Edited by Adam M - 2/6/2002 12:51:48 PM]
The evo 7 is an awesome car. I absolutely love it. I would go so far as to say I prefer it in everyway to the impreza, and if I wasnt obsessed with my 22B I would have one over everything else (barring skyline maybe). The only thing I dont like are the looks. It would be a six for me, which although is not as capable on the road, still has that great engine.
It was the best car I have ever driven, barring none, because I was not afraid of it like I am of mine.
Orwella,
It makes sense that stronger internals do allow for higher compression I suppose it equates to greater engine stress at teh same boost pressure yet despite this the evo is more resiliant on standard internals to increased boost.
I think there is little question that the evo engine is better than the impreza, but there is no question that the capacity for improvemet is better on the impreza and the ultimate goals attainable are higher (2.5 litre availability - rare I know, but possible).
The evo doesnt however, allow for the centre of gravity to be as low as it is, and doesnt aloow for a longitudinal engine with equal length driveshafts which is a design brief requirement for subaru.
Sam, you are right, for £600 you wont see any impreza getting near that kind of output, but then dont forget the rolling road does favour a front mount intercooler, and evos have those as standard whereas you are talking the best part of £1000 to do that to an impreza. It doesnt explain the imprezas shortfall though.
I think it is wrong though to say that the impreza cant take over 300 on standard internals, I can name well over 20 cars I know of personally running over this for significant periods with no strength related problems at all, sams included.
[Edited by Adam M - 2/6/2002 12:51:48 PM]
06 February 2002, 12:51 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Orwella said "It is the Evo's stronger internals that allow for a higher compression ratio. "
This is very misleading. The compelling reason for not having a high compression ratio is that the higher you get, the more knock you'll get.
This is why normally aspirated cars have higher compression ratios. My mini had 11.5 to one. Are you telling me that my standard crack, rods and pistons in the mini constituted "stronger internals" than my scoob? i don't think so.
True, you'd need "stonger internals" to stand a better chance of not sustaining damage from knock, but the main reason for having "stronger internals" is that they need to be "strong" enough to take the torque.
The EVO (including the 7) is imported and Single Vehicle Approved. The emmissions regs for SVA are much more leniant than type approval, and as such more work can be done to the car and still have it meet regulations.
Things that could be making the EVO more powerful are: more efficient intercooler, higher boost, higher compression, better flowing (but probably noisier) exhaust.
SVAing each EVO adds to it's cost, which is one of the reasons why it is more expensive even that the STI.
Sam Elassar said "now show me a scoob that will beat [320 bhp] for 600£ worth of mods?"
But your evo 7 is £30,000. The STI7 is £25,000. I don't think it would be impossible to tune an STI7 to 320bhp with £5,600 to spend!
Orwella said "It also has a more efficient transmission which loses less HP thru the gearbox/flywheel etc"
So what? we're talking power at the flywheel here, so the transmission loss is particulary irrelevant.
Don't get me wrong, I love the EVO 6 & 7. I'd buy one if i could afford the insurance. No car can beat the "cool factor" of a car that has a button for gravel, tarmac and snow. 8-)
This is very misleading. The compelling reason for not having a high compression ratio is that the higher you get, the more knock you'll get.
This is why normally aspirated cars have higher compression ratios. My mini had 11.5 to one. Are you telling me that my standard crack, rods and pistons in the mini constituted "stronger internals" than my scoob? i don't think so.
True, you'd need "stonger internals" to stand a better chance of not sustaining damage from knock, but the main reason for having "stronger internals" is that they need to be "strong" enough to take the torque.
The EVO (including the 7) is imported and Single Vehicle Approved. The emmissions regs for SVA are much more leniant than type approval, and as such more work can be done to the car and still have it meet regulations.
Things that could be making the EVO more powerful are: more efficient intercooler, higher boost, higher compression, better flowing (but probably noisier) exhaust.
SVAing each EVO adds to it's cost, which is one of the reasons why it is more expensive even that the STI.
Sam Elassar said "now show me a scoob that will beat [320 bhp] for 600£ worth of mods?"
But your evo 7 is £30,000. The STI7 is £25,000. I don't think it would be impossible to tune an STI7 to 320bhp with £5,600 to spend!
Orwella said "It also has a more efficient transmission which loses less HP thru the gearbox/flywheel etc"
So what? we're talking power at the flywheel here, so the transmission loss is particulary irrelevant.
Don't get me wrong, I love the EVO 6 & 7. I'd buy one if i could afford the insurance. No car can beat the "cool factor" of a car that has a button for gravel, tarmac and snow. 8-)
06 February 2002, 01:43 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi adam
i know my scoob had 320 bhp and was probably slightly faster on a straight line than my evo. but the evo's handling is on a different league as you have mentioned. the only thing is getting 320bhp out of a scoob stretchs things a bit and that is why i went through 3 gearboxes!!!!!!!! that is the only reason i sold my scoob as i did not want to get another car at that point. you guys could have guessed that i was modding the car to keep it. but it had to go for the kind of use and perfomance i was expecting from it.
slippry
i have spent 600£ and got 350bhp, the car is not as stressed as a scoob, and i still have my full warranty. spending 5000£ on a scoob, and you will loose the warranty, end up having to figure out who is going to build you an engine, who is going to map it?, what ecu to go for, well it last, well the gear box survive?, do i need to go for a paddle clutch ? , the big turbo i have gives me too much lag,?? etc...... while i won't need to worry about that until o go over 400£
i am not attacking the scoob, i am still a very active member of the scoob community, and i think i should buy one for the wife as a next car
but believe me the evo has got a lot more tunning potential, apart form the fact you can drop a 2.5l block in a scoob and you can only do a 2.2l for the evo
sam
i know my scoob had 320 bhp and was probably slightly faster on a straight line than my evo. but the evo's handling is on a different league as you have mentioned. the only thing is getting 320bhp out of a scoob stretchs things a bit and that is why i went through 3 gearboxes!!!!!!!! that is the only reason i sold my scoob as i did not want to get another car at that point. you guys could have guessed that i was modding the car to keep it. but it had to go for the kind of use and perfomance i was expecting from it.
slippry
i have spent 600£ and got 350bhp, the car is not as stressed as a scoob, and i still have my full warranty. spending 5000£ on a scoob, and you will loose the warranty, end up having to figure out who is going to build you an engine, who is going to map it?, what ecu to go for, well it last, well the gear box survive?, do i need to go for a paddle clutch ? , the big turbo i have gives me too much lag,?? etc...... while i won't need to worry about that until o go over 400£
i am not attacking the scoob, i am still a very active member of the scoob community, and i think i should buy one for the wife as a next car
but believe me the evo has got a lot more tunning potential, apart form the fact you can drop a 2.5l block in a scoob and you can only do a 2.2l for the evo sam
06 February 2002, 02:11 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am certain the evo 7 has full type approval and is not being imported via SVA.
getting back to the original point of this thread. The jap gentlemans agreement does indeed have no strict limtations, ask cem.
His skyline would ahve been putting out 320 as standard even though it was officially 276. WIth an exhaust and filter he got to 366!
There is no reason to suggest that a standard evo should be putting out only 276, having driven several, it certainly feels like more. Irnoically the evo 7 I drove felt seriously underpowered having just driven my impreza, but round bends they were chalk and cheese.
Ultimately I am sure the 22B could have out handled it no the roads I was drivin, but not in my hands. Cornering grip of the 22B with its wider track is phenominal.
I digress..... if the standard evo is actually more than 276 as standard which I have no doubt it is, then for the UK market it is less likely to dip below its quoted output in order to meet emissions because it had a buffer in the first place.
All this is on the premise that it is going for type approval but then there seems to be some uncertainty on this.
I know the first lot through ralliart last year were done via sva coming in from rotterdam in the same way as the evo7 but I was assured at castle coombe by ralliart that the next batch would be fully type approved. Have to ask Iain Litchfield I suppose.
getting back to the original point of this thread. The jap gentlemans agreement does indeed have no strict limtations, ask cem.
His skyline would ahve been putting out 320 as standard even though it was officially 276. WIth an exhaust and filter he got to 366!
There is no reason to suggest that a standard evo should be putting out only 276, having driven several, it certainly feels like more. Irnoically the evo 7 I drove felt seriously underpowered having just driven my impreza, but round bends they were chalk and cheese.
Ultimately I am sure the 22B could have out handled it no the roads I was drivin, but not in my hands. Cornering grip of the 22B with its wider track is phenominal.
I digress..... if the standard evo is actually more than 276 as standard which I have no doubt it is, then for the UK market it is less likely to dip below its quoted output in order to meet emissions because it had a buffer in the first place.
All this is on the premise that it is going for type approval but then there seems to be some uncertainty on this.
I know the first lot through ralliart last year were done via sva coming in from rotterdam in the same way as the evo7 but I was assured at castle coombe by ralliart that the next batch would be fully type approved. Have to ask Iain Litchfield I suppose.
06 February 2002, 03:59 PM
#17
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 3,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My sti 3 with exhaust, air filter and phase one conversion (not recommended) made 346bhp on the same rollers that sam made his ~350bhp. That's 346bhp on standard internals.
In fact, those internals were, at that point, sub-standard because Power Engineering decided to rebuild the engine (they had blown up) using uk spec cast pistons rather than the lighter forged sti items that were standard in the 8000rpm revving engine. So that would be 346bhp on sub-standard internals.
Moray
bbs.22b.com
In fact, those internals were, at that point, sub-standard because Power Engineering decided to rebuild the engine (they had blown up) using uk spec cast pistons rather than the lighter forged sti items that were standard in the 8000rpm revving engine. So that would be 346bhp on sub-standard internals.
Moray
bbs.22b.com
06 February 2002, 04:04 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam i do not believe for one second that a 22b could out handle a 7 on any road or surface as technology moves forward not back! how could it???, but thanks for your revised explanation.
j
j
06 February 2002, 04:13 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
simply a case of much wider track, stiffer suspension, more lateral grip therefore greater cornering speeds.
plus if you read what I wrote, I said the roads that I was driving, and during my test drive these were bloody smooth sweeping bends akin to a race track so I stand by what I said.
Why must it always be a competition?
I am comparing one car I love to another car I love, no offense intended but I dont recall asking you your opinion on what I thought of the test drive I took.
plus if you read what I wrote, I said the roads that I was driving, and during my test drive these were bloody smooth sweeping bends akin to a race track so I stand by what I said.
Why must it always be a competition?
I am comparing one car I love to another car I love, no offense intended but I dont recall asking you your opinion on what I thought of the test drive I took.
06 February 2002, 05:18 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the fastest rentals in town......0-100mph in 10 seconds
Posts: 1,401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm interested to see what a new Sti puts out when equipped with catless exhaust and filter.
I haven't driven either so I can't talk from experience and I don't want to get into this mines better than yours crap but I remember Tiff N testing the Sti and Evo and prefering the Sti's handling on the limit.
I haven't driven either so I can't talk from experience and I don't want to get into this mines better than yours crap but I remember Tiff N testing the Sti and Evo and prefering the Sti's handling on the limit.
06 February 2002, 05:29 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
moray who said that i only got 350bhp, i reduced figure by 21bhp to make it more believable but at the end of the day i have got a piece of paper saying that i have got 371bhp!!!!!!!!!!! which is obviously a RR error. but this is a different thread all together
adam
i think you will find any of these cars in the right hands and the difference in handling will be very small, either way. i think the evo is more suited to individuals like myself who can't actually drive. anyway i reckon 400bhp by the end of this year won't be too difficult. and if your intial plans still stand you will be well on your way for even more!
sam
which is obviously a RR error. but this is a different thread all together adam
i think you will find any of these cars in the right hands and the difference in handling will be very small, either way. i think the evo is more suited to individuals like myself who can't actually drive
. anyway i reckon 400bhp by the end of this year won't be too difficult. and if your intial plans still stand you will be well on your way for even more! sam
06 February 2002, 06:31 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Sam can you explain why you produced 230+ PAW which gave a power of 370bhp and on my 22B i have also seen 230+ PAW but am only able to produce around 310 BHP?
I dont understand
Darren
I dont understand
Darren
06 February 2002, 06:50 PM
#24
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 3,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sam,
Actually, YOU are the one who wrote that you had 350bhp, earlier in this very thread.
dc911,
That would be the EVO's super efficient drivetrain managing to convert much more engine power into heat than a mere 22b's ancient antique drive system can.
Moray
Actually, YOU are the one who wrote that you had 350bhp, earlier in this very thread.
dc911,
That would be the EVO's super efficient drivetrain managing to convert much more engine power into heat than a mere 22b's ancient antique drive system can.
Moray
06 February 2002, 06:56 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi moray
i know you were going to say that i am sorry i just got carried away there. what i was pointing at basically that rolling road figures mean **** all . if you got 346, i got 371 does that mean either of us is correct or incorrect. all this proves that the evo will always got more power at the rollers than a scoob, and this is due to a mixture of larger tyres, bigger FMIC, short gearing ( final ratio 4.5) which is similar to the TYPR R, and the import 22B. LOADS of electronic diffs causing large transmission loses on the rollers etc...
whagt matters is how fast it can go.
i know you were going to say that
i am sorry i just got carried away there. what i was pointing at basically that rolling road figures mean **** all . if you got 346, i got 371 does that mean either of us is correct or incorrect. all this proves that the evo will always got more power at the rollers than a scoob, and this is due to a mixture of larger tyres, bigger FMIC, short gearing ( final ratio 4.5) which is similar to the TYPR R, and the import 22B. LOADS of electronic diffs causing large transmission loses on the rollers etc...whagt matters is how fast it can go.
06 February 2002, 07:21 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam you really do talk sh*t m8, and from our previous discussions i would take your skill level in any car with a pinch of salt, one question, do you know what the time is for the 22b around the nurbergring??????
J
J
06 February 2002, 08:04 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam just to prove you wrong AGAIN using figures from the 22b site, 22b 0.96 lateral G / Evo 7 0.99 lateral G this equates to a very very big margin indeed!!!!!!!!
J
You should know your facts m8!!!!!!
J
J
You should know your facts m8!!!!!!
J
07 February 2002, 01:30 AM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jason,
no offence mate, but you seem to have a problem reading. I consistently referred to my car, not the one that was tested in your lateral G test, and even then they are inaccuarte tests based on driving as fast as possible in circles, not on the road.
My car has an extra 2.6 cm of track both front and rear.
You seem to be the type of person who needs to feel they have the absolute best and be better than everyone else.
I am sorry but your car is not the best in world at anything. There are cars that can beat it in every one of its strong points. Perhaps a wrc is an example or a mclaren f1 or a formula one car or a mercedes s class. whichever way, I hope you can cope with the dissapointment, but I would rather you did this sooner than later as your constant rebuttals are very tiresome.
Your car is the best in the world. enjoy it.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
no offence mate, but you seem to have a problem reading. I consistently referred to my car, not the one that was tested in your lateral G test, and even then they are inaccuarte tests based on driving as fast as possible in circles, not on the road.
My car has an extra 2.6 cm of track both front and rear.
You seem to be the type of person who needs to feel they have the absolute best and be better than everyone else.
I am sorry but your car is not the best in world at anything. There are cars that can beat it in every one of its strong points. Perhaps a wrc is an example or a mclaren f1 or a formula one car or a mercedes s class. whichever way, I hope you can cope with the dissapointment, but I would rather you did this sooner than later as your constant rebuttals are very tiresome.
Your car is the best in the world. enjoy it.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
07 February 2002, 12:05 PM
#30
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 3,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jason,
I have pulled more than 0.99G lateral whilst cornering in a scooby, so what? Your car is also heavier than a 22b and does more of the driving for you.
I do agree with adam though, your car is quite obviously the best in the world.
Moray
bbs.22b.com
I have pulled more than 0.99G lateral whilst cornering in a scooby, so what? Your car is also heavier than a 22b and does more of the driving for you.
I do agree with adam though, your car is quite obviously the best in the world.
Moray
bbs.22b.com