I just checked the specifications of the 4B11 vs the 4B11T. The 4B11 (NA) has the same bore and stroke, the only apparent difference is the compression ratio. As I said, they're very similar motors.

 

we dont . but the 4B11T is a very very close engine /little brother, handicapped by smaller turbo and so/ to the X.

So it is a legit point after the X runs high hp a long time now, with some cases very high boost, and holds extremely well.
To bring up as a good point in the RA . And should. Since the Ra has a same block etc interior wise a same engine as a X.


Now the WRX engine can not hold that much boost and hp without opening up.
So there fore the the RA 4B11T engine is better more durable engine as a WRX in stock form.
It is proven in racing many times can and does, hold up against extreme abuse without opening them up.
Which is can not be said about the WRX engine. That is why.

 

And the 4B11 is a very similar motor to the 4B11T, it's just handicapped by no turbo and a different compression ratio. If Ralliart owners can suddenly invoke the Evo argument, Lancer owners will suddenly want to invoke it too.
Sure the 4B11T in the Ralliart is capable of good power but the rest of the car isn't. It's great to talk about 400 WHP without any internal engine modifications but the TC-SST can't take that power. TTP had issues with 300 WHP. Until people start modding the TC-SST or swapping transmissions, it's a moot point. If that happens, all bets are off. If we allow for TC-SST modifications or tranny swaps, why wouldn't it be logical to consider engine upgrades for the WRX? The WRX engine can handle pretty decent amounts of power without changes, I've heard the number is around 400 WHP before the pistons become an issue.
For 99% of people, either car is. Invoking race cars or ignoring the limitations of the rest of the car is just silly.

 

IIRC, they even replaced modded motors with no questions, assuming they were one of the defective ones.

And +1000. That and the hatchback are why I chose the STi over the Evo this time.

Haha, that quote proves you are right, they are not the same motor!! Thanks RobEvo Jaykay

 

Well I shot myself in the foot with that one by showing how similar the 4B11 is to the 4B11T.

 

Say wut? what am I side-stepping exactly... that the WRX is better performing out of the box (stock for stock)? We all know that already. What we were beating on recently was about the motor, correct? Specifically the 4B11T, yes? You were the one who first pointed out about the recalls, I had nothing bad to say about about the WRX on this thread till you started digging that up. I said, well those recalls were minor and had nothing to do with the engine/drivetrain/powertrain itself. So I countered with "at least the 4B11T has not been known to blow up" argument.

 

Rob, I actually like you, but you are probably the most biased fanboy on this site. We all love Evo's and RA's.. or at least most of us, but being unbiased is something else. SOME of the 09 WRX's had engine issues which Subaru fixed, SOME of the RA's had tranny issues and some get fixed depending on who your dealer is... but the fact of the matter is that stock for stock the WRX wins in EVERY category... and that's all their is to it.

 

cool

 

I wouldn't say EVERY category, a lot of that is based on preference anyway.

 

Hopefully Amby isn't going to accuse me of being Rob's crony like he did last with GPtourer (remember?) He may be baised, but he does talk sense and mostly true facts (even with broken english). Sure the WRX wins most of the performance categories stock-for-stock, but some people do see past numbers and publication reviews. I am one of those people. I tend to look at the whole package: technology, reliability, styling, appeal, potential, VALUE, current deals/incentives/financing, etc. I don't dismiss a car just because it showed inferior stock performance just due to bad tires from the factory or that it has less advertised horsepower. I won't deny that I like Mitsu, but I also like other brands (latest one we purchased is a VW). Heck, I even liked the new Subaru Outback (if only the deals were good, we would have gotten it instead)

Some people just like to get the most out of our money when choosing a car, not just by face value (in this case, stock performance).

 

Have to add that some people also hate the TC-SST, and even without test-driving it, they will dismiss the idea no matter what and won't be shy on disuading other people who might be interested with this new technology.

Just like those stupid MAC vs. PC commercials, some people will never like Windows 7 and won't even give it a try because it is for the PC (therefore it is inferior) and Macs are cooler. Sure, you can spend $1,500 on a new Macbook, while I spend $500 on a new Windows7 laptop w/ dual-core CPU, 3GB of memory, 250GB HDD, DVD-burner, HDMI, and a 15.6" LCD!

 

Can't argue that, that's why a test drive is needed before making a real decision. Just like how I heard the WRX265 was faster than the STi and drove both back to back and found that wasn't nearly true at all.

Agreed, I even admit that I need to get a chance to drive one again just because I'm still pretty sure the MR I drove had some issues.

Let's not even get started on that. I love my Mac, and love the multitouch trackpad... But the whole "less errors than a PC" BS is... well... BS. It may not bluescreen, but I have all sorts of problems with my Mac. The only thing it does better than any PC laptop I've owned is restore my active session after a crash. The biggest problem I have with it is sometimes it doesn't start up again after I've shut the lid and it goes into sleep and I have to cold boot it. I've had all sorts of errors to though Still... I like it (and it works) way more than my 2200 dollar Dell gaming laptop that I had before (fully loaded 9300)... But that was a Dell, and we all know they suck.

 

You're side-stepping my point that using the Evo X in a Ralliart comparison is ridiculous. The Evo X engine performs very differently because of all the bits you're appear to not be concerned about, like the larger, twin-scroll turbo and the different intake system.
Originally, this came about when someone used this argument
"The 4B11T is a new engine, therefore the Ralliart is better"
which is wrong for a number of reasons. First, the reason why I cited the recalls, a newer engine/car invariably has growing pains. Second, what I was alluding to here, the Ralliart is composed of more than just the motor.

 

For some people though, performance is getting the most out of their money. I don't care about how advanced the TC-SST is, it's not attractive to me. I could care less about Bluetooth or how many gigs the hard drive has because I wouldn't use them anyways. For me, the performance of the car is important. I wouldn't buy a Ralliart over a WRX because I'd have to spend more money on the Ralliart just to get it to perform as well as the WRX does from the factory. Much of the things you've said cannot be quantified, you cannot quantify styling, you cannot quantify technology (or rather how it will rate for each customer), you cannot realistically quantify potential, etc., they're all personal opinion.

 

the 4B11T is a good engine, because it can take abuse, what in the RA probably never will . Because the same internals as a X but less stress , smaller turbo SST tranny etc.
The new vs old engine is was your point , when you said the new probably not as good as the old one...remember?

Now funny thing is, in this comparison the RA engine which is new , better then a older WRX engine.