TTP-Engineering Tunes the 2009 Ralliart 4b11
Nobody is comparing the car to anything right now since it seems to lose every published comparison. That still doesn't address the issue, I find it odd that the car is pushing 19 PSI yet it has low power numbers. If the published turbo specs are accurate, it's larger than the turbo in the WRX. If the engine is indeed the same as the Evo, the head should flow just fine. This leaves the intake system as a potential source.
Thread Starter
Account Disabled
iTrader: (465)
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 8,824
Likes: 2
From: Central FL
How can that be my opinion when there are clear facts? So if I say 2+2=4, that's just my opinion? If I say the sky is blue, that's just my opinion? Clearly the Ralliart is not underrated based on these results. You can argue that all you want but the facts suggest otherwise.
This is exactly why I absolutely hate dyno numbers, 99% of people can't read them worth a damn. I don't care about the number, I care about how it compares to other cars (ie. reference points). The Ralliart could dyno 140 WHP but if an Evo dynos 170 WHP, the Ralliart is pretty close to the stated value of 237 crank HP.
What does 330 WTQ mean in that context? You need a reference point. I don't see why this is a difficult concept.
This is exactly why I absolutely hate dyno numbers, 99% of people can't read them worth a damn. I don't care about the number, I care about how it compares to other cars (ie. reference points). The Ralliart could dyno 140 WHP but if an Evo dynos 170 WHP, the Ralliart is pretty close to the stated value of 237 crank HP.
What does 330 WTQ mean in that context? You need a reference point. I don't see why this is a difficult concept.
Moderators have no business critiquing Internet Brands sponsor vendor facilities, nor equipment. If you feel the need to critique our facility in a negative way, I think it would be fair to ask that you relinquish your moderator status. Moderators should be free from bias, which clearly it appears you are not.
You have already proven to be one of these people.
Moderators have no business critiquing Internet Brands sponsor vendor facilities, nor equipment. If you feel the need to critique our facility in a negative way, I think it would be fair to ask that you relinquish your moderator status. Moderators should be free from bias, which clearly it appears you are not.
Moderators have no business critiquing Internet Brands sponsor vendor facilities, nor equipment. If you feel the need to critique our facility in a negative way, I think it would be fair to ask that you relinquish your moderator status. Moderators should be free from bias, which clearly it appears you are not.
I'm not criticizing you nor am I criticizing the equipment, I'm simply suggesting that people actually find a reference number before they go declaring the Ralliart underrated or whatever they want to do.
And that addresses the issue how? Moreover, how can the Ralliart be better when it makes virtually the same amount of power and produces virtually the same performance numbers (maybe even a little lower)? Respond to the actual issue, ad hominems have no place in a discussion.
And that addresses the issue how? Moreover, how can the Ralliart be better when it makes virtually the same amount of power and produces virtually the same performance numbers (maybe even a little lower)? Respond to the actual issue, ad hominems have no place in a discussion.
Another shot.
You have already proven to be one of these people.
Moderators have no business critiquing Internet Brands sponsor vendor facilities, nor equipment. If you feel the need to critique our facility in a negative way, I think it would be fair to ask that you relinquish your moderator status. Moderators should be free from bias, which clearly it appears you are not.
Moderators have no business critiquing Internet Brands sponsor vendor facilities, nor equipment. If you feel the need to critique our facility in a negative way, I think it would be fair to ask that you relinquish your moderator status. Moderators should be free from bias, which clearly it appears you are not.
I also don't think it's fair for you or anybody else to ask a Staff member to relinquish their status so that they may speak as freely as everybody else does. We can have an opinion AND be fair in Moderating....I do it every day.
Keep this on-topic, please.
SASD209
Last edited by SASD209; Dec 10, 2008 at 10:05 AM.
You clearly have no understanding of dynos. Again, how can the Ralliart be underrated when on this same dyno, an Evo produces 252 WHP? Does that mean the Evo is underrated too? Now then, I know this is going to be hard but let's use some logic. Yes, logic has no place on a car forum but let's try.
Ralliart
Crank HP 237
TTP WHP 220
TTP WHP/ Crank HP ratio- 0.928
Evo
Crank HP- 291
TTP WHP- 252
TTP WHP/Crank HP ratio- 0.865
If we make the false assumption that two cars will have identical powertrain loses despite having different powertrains, we can increase the Ralliart to 250 crank HP. However, this doesn't line up with the performance numbers. Moreover, that is bad logic.
Edit: Look at the WTQ numbers as well. Are we to believe that the Ralliart only has 14 less WTQ than the Evo (which is rated at 300 ft-lbs vs. 253 ft-lbs for the Ralliart)?
Ralliart
Crank HP 237
TTP WHP 220
TTP WHP/ Crank HP ratio- 0.928
Evo
Crank HP- 291
TTP WHP- 252
TTP WHP/Crank HP ratio- 0.865
If we make the false assumption that two cars will have identical powertrain loses despite having different powertrains, we can increase the Ralliart to 250 crank HP. However, this doesn't line up with the performance numbers. Moreover, that is bad logic.
Edit: Look at the WTQ numbers as well. Are we to believe that the Ralliart only has 14 less WTQ than the Evo (which is rated at 300 ft-lbs vs. 253 ft-lbs for the Ralliart)?
Haha it doesn't take a rocket scientist to read a dyno chart. I actually learned how to read a dyno in 3rd grade when i learned line graphs. And the RA is losing 17 horsepower, the Evo is losing 39 horsepower. I'd say that's a much bigger gap on claimed numbers. So would it be safer to say the Evo is overrated then? Would that make you feel better?
Thread Starter
Account Disabled
iTrader: (465)
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 8,824
Likes: 2
From: Central FL
So now we cannot have an opinion as Staff? Now that's not really fair, is it? I don't see any Vendors complaining when a Mod has "Tuned by ABC", or "XYZ built Evo" in their sig. You guys can't have it both ways.
I also don't think it's fair for you or anybody else to ask a Staff member to relinquish their status so that they may speak as freely as everybody else does. We can have an opinion AND be fair in Moderating....I do it every day.
Keep this on-topic, please.
SASD209
I also don't think it's fair for you or anybody else to ask a Staff member to relinquish their status so that they may speak as freely as everybody else does. We can have an opinion AND be fair in Moderating....I do it every day.
Keep this on-topic, please.
SASD209
Its no secret also that vendors are held to a higher posting standard than regular members.
Back on topic... Personally we do not see how a WRX to Ralliart comparison has any place within this thread.
Yeah TTP pulls some real unbelievable numbers out, with only Z-chip from the X
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=381433
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=381433
? How was that another shot? Have you seen a review yet where the Ralliart produces the same performance numbers as the 2009 WRX? If you compare the Ralliart numbers to the 07 WRX, they're virtually identical thus making the barbs that started this whole fiasco illogical.