Anyone driven a Spec C ?
28 August 2003, 03:33 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes mate I have. Iain at Litchfields was kind enough to let me have a go at Rally Day.
It didnt sound like a scoob, equal length headers means there is no burble. It makes more of a big jap bike noise. It put the power down pretty smoothly throughout the rev range and went very well. Didnt like the interior, was very boring compared to STI8, although the dials were cool on the ltd edition version i drove. Im going to go see Iain and have another go in the next couple of weeks.
It didnt sound like a scoob, equal length headers means there is no burble. It makes more of a big jap bike noise. It put the power down pretty smoothly throughout the rev range and went very well. Didnt like the interior, was very boring compared to STI8, although the dials were cool on the ltd edition version i drove. Im going to go see Iain and have another go in the next couple of weeks.
"didnt sound like a scoob" 
28 August 2003, 04:21 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Colchester
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Following a brief drive, where I got nowhere near any of it's limits, I would say that dynamically, it is wonderful - it has fantastic performance, corners on rails and has superb brakes (all better than UK STI). As stated above, it is quieter than the UK STI PPP, with none of the deep 'burble' of that car. The interior is more 'toned down than the STI, which I prefer - none of the bright inserts on the seats in the Ltd Ed, but is apparently not as spartan as the 'basic' Spec C - it has air-con, passenger sun visor & electric windows, for example. It is still a little too minimalist for my tastes, though: there is absolutely no lining to the boot (except paint!) and you can hear small stones etc. tinkling away around the wheel arches, due, I assume to the reduced soundproofing.
What a ride, though!
What a ride, though!
28 August 2003, 04:36 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deep, are you still wondering to do it or not?
They are, as pointed out, sound proofing-less, under body coating-less, and the non-Ltd doesn't have any of that namby pamby creature comfort stuff
As a drive they are fab, but you must surely know that already. They are lighter than the JDM C type, so are certainly quicker in all ways, but perhaps by not as much as you'd think. Once moving the JDM STi with DCCD-A is not going to be that much slower much of the time, and the spec C was only half a sec quicker around Tsukuba (a tight 2km circuit) than the std car. That being said, over many laps (or one lap at the 'ring) that would add up to a fair bit.
But who can live without a boot liner? The dents from your golf clubs thumping around would cause a humour failure I bet (yes, I've seen a car in for repair coz of that here
).
Natch that is a simple fix if you pay up for a full liner & fitting...
They are, as pointed out, sound proofing-less, under body coating-less, and the non-Ltd doesn't have any of that namby pamby creature comfort stuff
As a drive they are fab, but you must surely know that already. They are lighter than the JDM C type, so are certainly quicker in all ways, but perhaps by not as much as you'd think. Once moving the JDM STi with DCCD-A is not going to be that much slower much of the time, and the spec C was only half a sec quicker around Tsukuba (a tight 2km circuit) than the std car. That being said, over many laps (or one lap at the 'ring) that would add up to a fair bit.
But who can live without a boot liner? The dents from your golf clubs thumping around would cause a humour failure I bet (yes, I've seen a car in for repair coz of that here
).Natch that is a simple fix if you pay up for a full liner & fitting...
Trending Topics
28 August 2003, 06:00 PM
#8
Ecu Specialist
Deep, I have an STi9 "GL" which is the "comfort" model compared to the basic C having all the creature comforts including decent back wing and soundproofing etc. ECU is same maps/code apart from boost control settings to accomodate the sleeve bearing version of the twin scroll. Apart from that its got all the good bits like LSD's front and rear and DCCD inc AUTO mode. If you want to come look then you are welcome
Bob
Bob
28 August 2003, 09:28 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 813
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Extremescoobies ... not quite correct to my knowledge
322bhp @6,500rpm & 325lb ft @ 3750rpm
28 August 2003, 10:51 PM
#15
Ecu Specialist
"as standard"
I've read that article ... as standard is the watchword and the Litchfield car had an exhaust and a remap IIRC. The car I have has the same ecu maps, twin scroll turbo (sleeve not ball but same compressor wheel, same engine internals, same cams etc etc etc. On the rollers the extra weight should be an advantage.
Its totally std still original no mods at all, nothing. (except a set of STi Defis.
It doesn't make anything like the figures quoted, yes its v quick, good torque etc. there is no difference to C spec except turbo bearings and that would not affect power only torque.
I'll be starting a thread in Projects on this car beginning with the first Power Run graph and working up from there. Completed stage 1/2 (half) tonight, it now runs 1.4/1.5 bar boost in mid range and 1.3 bar held to 8k as opposed to 1.35 mid and 0.95 bar to 8k.
So I just wondered where and in what gear Extremescoobies had rolling roaded their standard car.
cheers
bob
I've read that article ... as standard is the watchword and the Litchfield car had an exhaust and a remap IIRC. The car I have has the same ecu maps, twin scroll turbo (sleeve not ball but same compressor wheel, same engine internals, same cams etc etc etc. On the rollers the extra weight should be an advantage.
Its totally std still original no mods at all, nothing. (except a set of STi Defis.
It doesn't make anything like the figures quoted, yes its v quick, good torque etc. there is no difference to C spec except turbo bearings and that would not affect power only torque.
I'll be starting a thread in Projects on this car beginning with the first Power Run graph and working up from there. Completed stage 1/2 (half) tonight, it now runs 1.4/1.5 bar boost in mid range and 1.3 bar held to 8k as opposed to 1.35 mid and 0.95 bar to 8k.
So I just wondered where and in what gear Extremescoobies had rolling roaded their standard car.
cheers
bob
28 August 2003, 11:05 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob - spec c also has equal headers etc.
I'm sure Iain will correct me if I'm wrong but the car in autocar was standard, it had to be for the test, although Iain can supply (and generally does) with miltek and remap. With the exhaust and remap the car happily churns out 350bhp+
I'm sure Iain will correct me if I'm wrong but the car in autocar was standard, it had to be for the test, although Iain can supply (and generally does) with miltek and remap. With the exhaust and remap the car happily churns out 350bhp+
28 August 2003, 11:10 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
An extra third of a bar at the top sounds very useful... presumably the charge temperatures are still sane and the ignition is still nice (they must be knowing you 
) So you've done this just by remapping the ECU - no fuel pump, exhaust etc. Sounds quite tunable. You are putting me off my BMW plans for a nice daily driver
) So you've done this just by remapping the ECU - no fuel pump, exhaust etc. Sounds quite tunable. You are putting me off my BMW plans for a nice daily driver
28 August 2003, 11:40 PM
#18
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: www.Litchfieldimports.co.uk
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deep, pop over and take it for a Spin 
Bob, All of our JDM cars are remapped as part of the package. Our Spec C with the std exhaust produced 326bhp/325lbft at PE (having covered just 1,600 miles). However now the Milltek it is fitted (& remapped to suit) it is significantly quicker, although we have not had a chance to dyno it again.
Regards
Iain
www.litchfieldimports.co.uk
Bob, All of our JDM cars are remapped as part of the package. Our Spec C with the std exhaust produced 326bhp/325lbft at PE (having covered just 1,600 miles)
. However now the Milltek it is fitted (& remapped to suit) it is significantly quicker, although we have not had a chance to dyno it again.Regards
Iain
www.litchfieldimports.co.uk
29 August 2003, 01:59 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi guys.Sorry if this has been done loads but I've been trying to cut down on Scoobynet over the last few months!
Bob, I'm a little confused by your post, are you saying that the C does'nt have a twin scroll turbo? Also is'nt the geometry/suspension considerably different on the C vs GL or can this be sorted after market? Many thanks for the offer of an inspection.
Anthony,me indecisive? I'm not sure!
Iain,many thanks for the offer. I'm trying to give Scoobs up(I've had four!).Driving the Spec C Ltd might just pull me in again!
Be honest when you answer this. Which is the better DRIVERS CAR? A standard Evo8 or standard Spec C ltd?
Roll on the day when I can just drive a 'normal' fast car and be happy!!!!!!!!!
Bob, I'm a little confused by your post, are you saying that the C does'nt have a twin scroll turbo? Also is'nt the geometry/suspension considerably different on the C vs GL or can this be sorted after market? Many thanks for the offer of an inspection.
Anthony,me indecisive? I'm not sure!
Iain,many thanks for the offer. I'm trying to give Scoobs up(I've had four!).Driving the Spec C Ltd might just pull me in again!
Be honest when you answer this. Which is the better DRIVERS CAR? A standard Evo8 or standard Spec C ltd?
Roll on the day when I can just drive a 'normal' fast car and be happy!!!!!!!!!
29 August 2003, 02:50 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deep, spec c does, as you say, have the twin scroll, as well as substantial suspension mods including solid drop links, beefier ARBs not to mention a lengthened wheelbase due to longer front control arms. Its also over 100kg lighter, which makes a lot of difference.
29 August 2003, 04:03 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WADR, the std Evo 8 gets eaten by a spec C - and I like Evos (honest!). But the RS2 is another kettle of green tea Ya see, that's the one Mitsi don't like talking about much...lightweight everything spec C chaser (and for your own good, don't hit anything bigger than a moth in one ).
The competition between that and a spec C would be close (although the Evo that went **** first into the armco at the 'ring chasing an STi was rumoured to be an RS2).
IMHO both are frenetic cars that beg to go hard, and if you are after "that" sort of performance, either would serve you well. My gut tells me the spec C has it over the Evo for the moment (don't you just love competition ).
HTH
Ya see, that's the one Mitsi don't like talking about much...lightweight everything spec C chaser (and for your own good, don't hit anything bigger than a moth in one ). The competition between that and a spec C would be close (although the Evo that went **** first into the armco at the 'ring chasing an STi was rumoured to be an RS2).
IMHO both are frenetic cars that beg to go hard, and if you are after "that" sort of performance, either would serve you well. My gut tells me the spec C has it over the Evo for the moment (don't you just love competition
).HTH
29 August 2003, 04:07 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, Edcase, I think you'll find that Bob Rawle's std C rev GDB STi has the same rear links.
Weight, ball bearing turbo, massive water tank and that neat front end are the spec C points of interest IMHO.
<not scoring points, just trying to keep things straight>
Weight, ball bearing turbo, massive water tank and that neat front end are the spec C points of interest IMHO.
<not scoring points, just trying to keep things straight>
29 August 2003, 04:48 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL, rear links are hardly a selling point tho, I was pointing them out over deeps sti7 not Bobs car
BTW you are forgetting the Spec C's equal length tubular headers also.
BTW you are forgetting the Spec C's equal length tubular headers also.
29 August 2003, 05:42 PM
#25
Deep
I have driven Evo 8 only on a short test drive. Spec C Ltd has a lot more road noise, which is vastly reduced, after application of 3M textured anti chip, to wheelwells and underbody. Spec C is "more tight" steering more positive, allover more together.
Drove to Cornwall in it, staying off motorways as much as poss (385 miles), stopping only for optimax. Whilst not in the Benz class the ride was OK. I got out the other end resonably fresh.
Fuel economy is appalling, not helped by over rich setting, (but soon to be addressed). I am informed that Eibach (spelling) springs are available, which give a "better" low speed ride. However I will be sticking with the stock springs, which I am happy with.
Subjective I know, but the interior is nicer that the rather garish, blue/black jobby.
Cant comment too much on drivability, as far as engine is concerned, as it needs mapping, however at present has good torque from 3-5000. The Spec C I test drove was very tractable (pulled top from 1500 in 6th) and was a very quick car. I fully expect mine to be even better once Mr Rawle has finished with it.
I have driven Evo 8 only on a short test drive. Spec C Ltd has a lot more road noise, which is vastly reduced, after application of 3M textured anti chip, to wheelwells and underbody. Spec C is "more tight" steering more positive, allover more together.
Drove to Cornwall in it, staying off motorways as much as poss (385 miles), stopping only for optimax. Whilst not in the Benz class the ride was OK. I got out the other end resonably fresh.
Fuel economy is appalling, not helped by over rich setting, (but soon to be addressed). I am informed that Eibach (spelling) springs are available, which give a "better" low speed ride. However I will be sticking with the stock springs, which I am happy with.
Subjective I know, but the interior is nicer that the rather garish, blue/black jobby.
Cant comment too much on drivability, as far as engine is concerned, as it needs mapping, however at present has good torque from 3-5000. The Spec C I test drove was very tractable (pulled top from 1500 in 6th) and was a very quick car. I fully expect mine to be even better once Mr Rawle has finished with it.
29 August 2003, 06:54 PM
#26
Ecu Specialist
Guys I am fully aware of the complete spec ... the car on the drive has it all.
Deep all JDM STi MY03's have one of the twin scroll turbo's, the spec C has a ball bearing variety, the GL has the sleeve bearing version, VF36 and VF37.
The car will not produce those figs as std although it would depend where they were obtained, a Deltadash set of figs could give that I suppose. Be good if Ian could clarify the circumstances. For a start the cars seem to be so filthy rich above 6k it almost chokes.
John, its a very very happy bunny at that, advance multplier 16 and no knock retard on the knock learning matrix at all ... and no det to be heard.
Now where's that ignition map !!
cheers
bob
edited to add I have the rear water tank but its not supplied as std, I'm installing it to run in parallel with the front one (which is already a big tank). car also has the front splitter fitted which makes a huge difference to its looks at the front.
[Edited by Bob Rawle - 8/29/2003 6:58:03 PM]
Deep all JDM STi MY03's have one of the twin scroll turbo's, the spec C has a ball bearing variety, the GL has the sleeve bearing version, VF36 and VF37.
The car will not produce those figs as std although it would depend where they were obtained, a Deltadash set of figs could give that I suppose. Be good if Ian could clarify the circumstances. For a start the cars seem to be so filthy rich above 6k it almost chokes.
John, its a very very happy bunny at that, advance multplier 16 and no knock retard on the knock learning matrix at all ... and no det to be heard.
Now where's that ignition map !!
cheers
bob
edited to add I have the rear water tank but its not supplied as std, I'm installing it to run in parallel with the front one (which is already a big tank). car also has the front splitter fitted which makes a huge difference to its looks at the front.
[Edited by Bob Rawle - 8/29/2003 6:58:03 PM]
29 August 2003, 08:49 PM
#27
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: www.Litchfieldimports.co.uk
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car produced fiqures at Power Engineering
Bob YHM
regards
Iain
www.litchfieldimports.co.uk
[Edited by iainlit - 8/29/2003 8:53:50 PM]
Bob YHM
regards
Iain
www.litchfieldimports.co.uk
[Edited by iainlit - 8/29/2003 8:53:50 PM]
29 August 2003, 08:49 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Equal length headers on both spec C and Std STi, Edcase.
Sorry again...
And Bob, I most certainly was not intimating that u don't know the spec of your own car...
[Edited by AJbaseBloke - 8/29/2003 8:50:09 PM]
Sorry again...
And Bob, I most certainly was not intimating that u don't know the spec of your own car...
[Edited by AJbaseBloke - 8/29/2003 8:50:09 PM]
29 August 2003, 11:11 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been in Bobs new STi 9, and I can say is that it's seriously quick and torquey. With the boost it's running now it should be getting towards silly quick
Having pawed over the car for about an hour, when I buy a JDM i'll be going for the GL with the creature comforts, and spending the money saved on a few minor tweaks, courtesy of Bob.
As Bob says the main difference between the Spec C and GL is weight and the sleeve bearing turbo.
Nathan..
Having pawed over the car for about an hour, when I buy a JDM i'll be going for the GL with the creature comforts, and spending the money saved on a few
minor tweaks, courtesy of Bob. As Bob says the main difference between the Spec C and GL is weight and the sleeve bearing turbo.
Nathan..
29 August 2003, 11:48 PM
#30
Ecu Specialist
Well played some more, base timing is up in the areas that matter, fueling marginally leaner again (taking it steady here as the revised fuel system is a bit of an unknown)and its running just a touch more boost from 5k up. In gear boost compensation has been modified to improve low gear boost levels, not quite right yet though.
I'll run it like this for a few days and check it out, advance multiplier still max and only one non zero in the knock learning matrix.
Wastegate solenoid duty's are getting v high so a three port could be next.
Nathan will know which corner I'm talking about, it broke traction in third there after the last tweak which takes some doing on one of these with the auto DCCD on, v nicely sideways.
Wheel horsepower is now 281 according to Deltadash, salt pinch of etc etc
cheers
bob
edited to say cheers Ian YHM back, many thanks.
[Edited by Bob Rawle - 8/29/2003 11:49:11 PM]
I'll run it like this for a few days and check it out, advance multiplier still max and only one non zero in the knock learning matrix.
Wastegate solenoid duty's are getting v high so a three port could be next.
Nathan will know which corner I'm talking about, it broke traction in third there after the last tweak which takes some doing on one of these with the auto DCCD on, v nicely sideways.
Wheel horsepower is now 281 according to Deltadash, salt pinch of etc etc
cheers
bob
edited to say cheers Ian YHM back, many thanks.
[Edited by Bob Rawle - 8/29/2003 11:49:11 PM]