DmcL

anyone maybe shed some light here..

own a standard (far as im aware and far as history shows) 2.5 WRX and had a bit of a play with a 2.0 STi and some sort of evo ix i think it was, both with mods and myself and the STi ended up walking the random evo. after that i had a crack at the STi and it was even-ish when we started (2nd roll up to 5th) but as we went up the gears i started pulling and eventually walked him.

had a chat and we both looked round each others cars and he says his STi is meant to be 360bhp (though he only got it a few days prior). he wouldnt believe me when i said my 2.5 was standard and wanted a look under the bonnet. as for his STi all i can confirm is that it had some sort of mapping as he had antilag, had a FMIC, intake, exhaust and atmo BOV and he was running atleast 1.5 bar though he reckons it was running about 2 bar but his boost gauge only goes up to 1.5 bar.

so what im wondering here is what give? i know the 2.5 with a small turbo gives great mid range torque but i thought the 2.5 WRX was only like 230bhp or so which to me would say either my WRX is up from standard figure or his STi is not running very well at all..

and lastly just to complicate things further.. after that i happened across an evo x FQ300 and given the BHP claimed by the STi driver i egged the evo on and had a bash. the evo walked me from mid 2nd to mid 4th and pulled maybe 2 - 3 car lengths on me in that time. so chatted to the evo driver and its only got 11k miles and has been mapped on the rollers to 380bhp on 98 octane fuel. by his admission though he was running 95 so i figure maybe in the 350bhp ballpark or there abouts? even at that id have expected to be left like i was in reverse..

so do the 2.5's generally exceed standard book figures out of the box or could it just be the torque from the 2.5 and relatively small TD04? id have thought torque would have went out the window as soon as we got moving though.. something not quite adding up and im very curious what it could be lol

ditchmyster

iTrader: (7)

:lol 1:

Proof of what I have been telling these STI fan boys for some time now mate.

Nothing wrong with any of the cars.

It's all about spool and longer gear ratios and weight although i'm unsure what the Evo weighs, I presume you didn't go much more than about 100 / 120mph and it was already GAME OVER by then anyway.

But to be fair by the sounds of it yours has had a cheeky remap and is probably running around 270 bhp and a few more torques, and is more than a match for these bigger turbo cars until the speeds get silly.

You really have made my day.

Stick around though because the STI fan boys will be along to try and discredit you without actually offering a plausible argument other than "it's an STI so it's got to be faster because its an STI, so its got to be faster because it's an STI"

I have managed to discover a couple of the reasons STI's must be faster and it seems to have something to do with the shift light, pink badges, blue seats and the ironing board on the back.

The 2.5L has it's weak points but it does make for a cracking road car when sorted.

DmcL

does the WRX have longer gears than the STi? they dont seem long to me compared to alot of previous cars. i know with a slightly taller diff ratio in my E30 325i i could be hitting very similar road speeds in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. id i had an STi i wouldnt want gearing any shorter than what the WRX has tbh..

about 2.5 vs 2.0 torque difference, id have thought torque would have been out the window after 1-2 gears then top end HP would have taken over.

there were 2 evos incase that wasnt made clear. first evo me and the STi both dusted. the second evo was the "380bhp" Evo X FQ300 which did pull away from me a little bit more in every gear till i lifted and threw in the towel lol

im wondering now how the hawkeye 2.5 STi compares to the previous generations 2.0 STi. must be knocking out more torque also but with a larger turbo id have thought.

ditchmyster

iTrader: (7)

Yes the STi gears are shorter, you have the same TD04 turbo in all WRX cars since around 2000, it's so good they never changed it where as on the previous generations there were around 3 different turbos used from the Vf series.

I understood what you were saying about there being two evo's, but it still goes to show you and others what a great package the WRX is, and I bet both you and the 380bhp mitsi driver were surprised at how little there was in it in the real world.

PrimeKos

iTrader: (1)

Interesting thread this, I got my GB270 Wagon remap with JGM yesterday on a VF35 and that ended up with 320BHP and 370FTLB. I had a play with my mates BMW 335i Stage 1 last night and 0-100mph I pulled about 3 nealry 4 car lengths out of him. The difference in torque was noticeable which was a major shock to me as the 335I runs a twin turbo. Major difference being the 335I was 230KGS heavier mind you.

We then did a return trip through some B roads that lead on to a couple roundabout and truth be told after the second roundabout I could not see him in the rear view mirror after that lol

Tidgy

with that much power it should have walked away with it, i suspect his 360 aint 360.

MattyB1983

iTrader: (51)

I can picture your face you bugger grinning from ear to ear I bet..
Bet you couldn't believe your eyes when you read the ops post....


But, even you know a standard WRX can't pull away from a STI with 360 bhp Ditch. Something sounds a little odd if you ask me.

jayallen

iTrader: (31)

It must be 360, the guy said so along with 2bar of boost ...Ditchmeister will try to hang on to anything to try and prove his deluded theory that the WRX is a better car than the STI..

I was at Castle Combe last Friday in my Clio Cup trackcar. I passed 2 EVO's, an Impreza, a Radical, Caterhams as well as a host of other cars and some.....I think I have now proved the Clio is a better trackcar than all of the above, I mean it must be....
The Top Gear team were there filming for the next series and watched me destroy these cars, Jezza approached me and asked if I would let The Stig take it for a lap around the Top Gear track.....He reckons it will fair well and should end up somewhere between the Enzo and Koenigseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeegg...

Emmaroids

iTrader: (2)

must be true he was running two bar boost............or he was full of ****

urban

iTrader: (1)

Bet it had a VTA crapper valve too

Steve's Sti

iTrader: (2)

If hes only had it a few days how does he know for sure its 360, time and time again people selling cars stating big figures who knows until its dyno'd, as a fellow 2.5 albeit an sti the torque is usually the difference

LuckyWelshchap

Thing is though, the OP wasn't that much slower than the second evo, which points to the possibility that the WRX isn't standard.
Either that or all the other drivers never went anywhere near their car's capability.

A Megane tried it on this morning on a lovely little country road as it happens.
When we came to the end (about a 2 mile run) he was still close to me.
373/389 and I can't lose one of them !

I was carrying too much weight.
I was taking the wife to work.

Science says that 360 v 230 (or perhaps as ditch says poss 270) and/or superior pwr gives only one winner - if the human factor isn't taken into account.
And similarly 380 v 230 or 270 would produce a much bigger difference between respective performances.

To give an idea of whether it has been modded, is the 0-60 for the WRX wildly different to quoted figures (taking into account how manufacturers attain them, and the fact we're not professional drivers) ?

Tidgy

yeah its a fair point, thinking about it, remapped the 2.5 may be pushing mrre torque than the sti and evo even tuned up a bit.

mantazini

iTrader: (25)

Power to weight ratio, and a well setup little bugger will match most of them... It was same at cadwell , almost 400 in mine but 1.400+kg doesnt help at all... I could even feel that extra weight tbh where most of saxos, pug, clios where better on the corners , although they were on slicks and stripped to death lol... There was 1 b20 1.8heads 98 civic type r stripped with agressive lsd which heald with me everywhere weighing about 900kg and 250bhp.... makes sense..

Steve's Sti

iTrader: (2)

You really need a big hp torque difference to see much between cars, human element is the usual suspect

Tidgy

yeah but in theory were talking 230 vs 360 so 130 ponies which is a pretty big difference.

tubbytommy

iTrader: (20)

So the op was racing cars on the road and just happened to race both an sti and an evo and after both races stopped to have a chat..... happens everyday



on jackanory

urban

iTrader: (1)

Tidgy

pretty sure it says on track lol

ditchmyster

iTrader: (7)

i told you they would be along to discredit you.

Matt you know me so well, I was indeed wetting my pants grinning from ear to ear.

With regards the renault lucky chap, i'll tell you all a little story which i'm sure you won't believe.

I'm on a twisty road with a few short straights that go into some decent sweeping left and right handers, this road is about 4 miles long and it goes to my local town down in one of the valleys, they even do a hill climb event once a year up the last section before the town.

So i'm coming up behind a wagon and timing my run to overtake on the next straight if there's an opening, so round the bend drop from 5th down to 4th doing around 50mph casually overtaking, see a flash in the rear view and it's the local estate agent in his black 460 ferrari, so I figure i'll drop a cog and get a move on so he can get in before the next bend, I floor it and there's a couple more bends before the next straight so I figure we can have a bit of fun and I don't want to hold the lad up.

This is the bit you won't believe my little Rover 25 1.4 (well it's the mrs actually) does just shy of a ton in 3rd gear and revs quite well too all the way to the limiter at around 7000 and a bit rpm, at this point I was expecting to get hammered by the ferrari 460, so here's me and rover on the ragged edge at around 70mph round these few bends and a couple of pokey small straights, now with the speed I was carrying and the way the other traffic paned out we both overtook a couple of other cars but the ferrari could not pass me as well, and in fact had a bit of a job staying with me, which was in part due to the road and the speed I was travelling at, and a bit of on coming traffic ( well one car actually) he did try a couple of times but he realised there was no way he would make the next bend if he did especially on the last bit that's used for the hill climb

Now i'm not at all deluded about mine or his machines capabilities and the fact if he was in front I probably wouldn't have seen him for dust, but the point i'm trying to make is it depends on the road and the driver, and this particular road doesn't favour huge power once your on the move and up to a certain speed.

At the end of the day more power can be a bit of a dis-advantage too and in this instance it was as I have since found out he thinks i'm a nutter and he was trying.

Edit to add; the Rover is 103bhp. and I fcuked the head gasket at the same time.

jayallen

iTrader: (31)

Yep power to weight is king Mantas...

OK I told a little porky pie about Top Gear being there............



























It was actually the Fifth Gear team....

jayallen

iTrader: (31)

Hardly surprising the Ferrari driver couldn't pass you in a 1.4 Rover, I mean, I've read a recent post of yours where you claim to lap the ring in the wet in your Type R quicker than the M5 ring taxi can lap in the dry.....It was then that I drew my conclusion that you really are full $hit....

mantazini

iTrader: (25)

lol .....

Cannon Fodder

iTrader: (100)

mantazini

iTrader: (25)

It remind me the thread on MLR when i was doing a research of Cadwell lap times... And there plenty og Vetel's and sorts of , making it 140's and some of them 130's in a standart or easily moded car... But when i actualy searched for evidence and watched all 23 or smtn you tube pages , none of them could do better then 150's only couple 400 bhp ones went into 1.46's -1.48's ... Oops .... made me feel quick in my good old bug

ditchmyster

iTrader: (7)

Obviously never driven a Rover 25, there's a good reason they put that engine in the lotus elise, add that to it having the widest track in it's class when first released and i'm sure you'd be very surprised if you drove one for a while.

Like many cars they have their faults, HG being the main one, but they weigh bugger all and have a very rev happy engine and like I said this particular road is not overly suited to lots of overtaking doing between 70 and 90 which is the sweet spot for 3rd on the rover and all but the most committed of drivers would have struggled to pass, I guess he just didn't have the bottle to go for it.

9.12 isn't a quick lap of the ring, in fact it's quite an average time, the locals that go round in old VW golfs would probably be ashamed if they got above 9mins, and the ring taxi was obviously taking it easy with a couple of passengers no doubt, he never got out of shape once and the fact a 320bhp newage could stay with an M5 that's set up for the ring with a pro driver that's doing it all day every day should tell any retard that.

I'd like to see what the lap record is for an M5 in fact i'll go take a look now and pop back with an edit, just for my clagg nut.

Ok 8.13 in an E60 M5 in 2004, so a minute quicker in a much older car, can't be arsed to try finding anymore recent ones, but i'm sure you get the picture.

The Pink Ninja

iTrader: (23)

yeh but the sti did it in 8.05

LuckyWelshchap

It does prove a point though.

I've read in a few places that Subarus (and EVOs) are the fastest cars between any two points (that aren't in a straight line).

It's not because they are the most powerful, it's because they don't have to slow down so much for bends etc. and that goes for their drivers as well.

PS the wife would have blown a gasket if I showed him what he could have had for his money, even with me driving.

LuckyWelshchap

So why don't they make drivers like jockeys then?

(Only want to keep this going so I can see the 500th post before I go over the pub )


Further edit:

AAAGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!! Wrong thread (re. Post 500).

ditchmyster

iTrader: (7)

yeah my point exactly, gayclaggnut thinks 9.12 is a major ground breaking time at the ring.