there are way more factors than just displacement. Velocity, compression ratio...

 

[quote=n2oiroc;8677427]07 sti.
ar fab built shortblock with 9.5:1 arias pistons, manley rods and blueprinted bottom end.
stock heads and cams.
modified u.r. gt3582r kit with .82 a/r v-band discharge turbine.
tial 44 with 1.4 bar springs.
maddad v2 header and whisper catback.
perrin fmic.
deatschwerks 1,150cc top feeds.
boomba racing fuel rails, fuelab regulator and bosch 044.
4" filter on turbo inlet.
hydra 2.6.
tgv deletes.

93 octane pump tune is at 21 psi.

93 pump + 5 gallons Q16 race tune (roughly 40/60 mix) was at 28 psi.

corrected it was 419 whp on pump and 540 whp on the mix. it had more but the bottom end was built for 550 whp so i stopped there.


*** wow my car made 420whp on a mustangdyno with the 35r , so probably closer to 460 on a dyno jet, im suprised I made that much more on 93, but thanks for the info!

 

[QUOTE=italianevo88;8677883]i had stock cams and stock heads down to the springs. what do you expect?

 

Did the car hold together with that tune? Looks almost stoich up top!

 

that was with a single walbro. on the street i did a pull at 28 psi and logged an afr of 14.9:1 swapped a bosch 044 in and it dropped to 9.7:1. i retuned it myself and worked on the boost control and got it a bit better.

motor was great. overboosted a ton, slammed into the rev limiter many times, ran it low on gas at full boost and 28 psi at 7,500 rpm with an afr of 19:1 and all sorts of other stuff that should have hurt it. 20,000 miles on that block and it ran great until it was crashed and the radiator support was slammed into the timing cover and ate the timing belt. car was auctioned off to a guy in canada and he was getting it back on the road. he pulled the heads to replace the bent valves and thought the motor was new, it looked great inside.

 

Theres a guy around here with basically the same setup but made 550 as he has cams, it was funny watching a 410hp civic eat him from a dig. Even tho the hp carrys up top the sti just deosnt seem to pull as hard as a evo does up top even with the same power, its weird.

 

It's already been said but they don't boost the same as Evo they have lower PSI smaller turbo almost same size of that which is in the neon srt-4 stock so its choking up top and they are slightly heavier.

 

the trans is the problem. super close ratio and short gearing. at 123mph in the 1/4 i was grabbing 5th.

 

either way, the subie will spool an equal size turbo faster, even with unequal headers halfway around the engine compared to a 2.0 4g63, theres really no argument about that.

 

I bet my 2.4l 4g64 will spool the same as a sti.

 

i had stock cams and stock heads down to the springs. what do you expect?[/quote]


all i had was mild cams, so I still expected more

 

all i had was mild cams, so I still expected more[/QUOTE]

it was on par with any other 35r sti. sti's just wont make the same power as an evo with the same turbo. evo motor just makes more power and sti's generally make a bit more torque.

 

it was on par with any other 35r sti. sti's just wont make the same power as an evo with the same turbo. evo motor just makes more power and sti's generally make a bit more torque.[/quote]


ohh ok, good side note

 

My wrx spooled my t67 pretty quickly with a 8.7:1 compression ratio on a sti ej257 with very ported ej20 heads and 272's etc, i was surprised the first time i put it into boost it was that responsive.

 

the boxer engine is not as efficient as other motor designs but i couldent tell ya if that would make up for the half ltr of motor the sti has over the evo even if it spools faster they dont have any top end and fall of faster then mike tyson career.