I wasn't criticizing your post, I was criticizing the way people have used the information you posted. So far no one has addressed the minor problem of a 237 HP Ralliart dynoing 20 less than a 291 HP Evo.

 

ok ok...whats the WRX pushing boost at factory?
I Know the EVO X is at like 25 PSI,
and the RA is at 13 PSI,
So if the WRX is pushing more boost, then maybe if we crank the RA psi up to like 20. then its numbers will be more impressing on papers.

 

I highly doubt the Evo is at 25psi. And just because you up the boost does not mean the power will be upped to equal levels because they are different turbos (WRX and RA). The Evo's turbo at 20psi will be much more powerful then the RA's turbo at 20psi.

 

sorry the evo X is runnung 22.4 psi compared to RA's 13.3
straight from the new TURBO magazine Jan 09.

also i wasnt expecting it to run the same as the evo lol, but if def. might increase its numbers on paper, ya feel me?

 

Zchip with MBC and they say keep X boost no more than 24.

 

You are right, all the cars in that test are essentially even. You can basically chalk up the differences to drivers. No reason to get ****. I am just going to say that the RA is a good car. I look forward the the Zchip (if anyone actually will go there). That is about as much modding as I would perform on the RA. Just like AP on the WRX. My guess is that the RA with Zchip will require the MBC to get the power that some on here are hoping for (50whp).

 

I highly doubt the Evo X is pushing that much boost stock and under all conditions (ie. at altitudes other than sea level). You cannot simply turn up the boost, if you push the turbo outside of its operating range, you'll make it less efficient leading to problems.

 

i corrected my self.. evo x is at 22.4psi

 

that is mainly because the pump gas.
I wouldn't run over 25 psi in any circumstances with pump gas.
But for the RA i dont think the pump gas is a limit.

 

Here is the article i was talking about, sorry it took so long to get.


http://i369.photobucket.com/albums/o...doc001/RA2.jpg

http://i369.photobucket.com/albums/o...doc001/RA3.jpg

http://i369.photobucket.com/albums/o...doc001/RA4.jpg

 

Thanks for posting. For the cash they spent, the Zchip will be a much better buy for WAY more power.

 

Ur welcome. the Zchip can also be used in conjunction with these mods to make even more powere . It seems though that from this recent post about the FQ-400 the TC-SST can't handle more than 331 LB-FT TQ. Thats good in a way so it can remain a good DD but bad because u can't make it a beast. https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=384854

 

I just got the C&D magazine and have to say this comparo is a joke. I mean the gotta have it and fun to drive are totally subjective and what is powertrain flexibility anyway? What about reliability, safety and/or fun to drive in bad weather? (which is one of the main reasons I'm looking at the RA and WRX anyway). What about taking away points for torque steer? One thing I did notice at looking at the performance numbers is they are all very close. Even though the wrx is supposed to be the most powerful engine, its the redline launch that gets it out ahead and the 5-60 its tied for 2nd with the RA. btw, one thing that really caught my attention is the top gear acceleration from 30-50 and 50-70. The RA was by far the slowest and the wrx was in fifth. I wonder how the other cars do good in this category in 6th gear compared to the rex's 5th? What about the numbers of the GTI: 3.2 and 4.2 respectively! Those are some pretty quick numbers and it has the 2nd lowest hp of the group. I wonder if it has something to due to its auto-man. trans...

 

I'll bet wieght, two less wheels to drive and less turbo lag has something to do with it.

 

After driving a MkV GTI, I still wonder why there aren't tons of them on the road. If you can live with 3 or 5 doors and no all-wheel drive, it's a sweet little car. If I wasn't dead-set on AWD, I'd probably get one.