Spec-C v. MR
.
Evolving Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
From: New York
well, that's gonna take a while becuase there's 9.6 second STis out there already beating FF drag cars and APU ++ supras
as of now, STi's can be considered the faster car b/w them and evo's.
what's the fastest evo? low 11s?
as of now, STi's can be considered the faster car b/w them and evo's.
what's the fastest evo? low 11s?
Evolving Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
and for the regular STi....
the place i sued to work for...Austin subaru...built a car....409whp..stock block...
and raced it in the big bend open road race challenge.....only problem they had was a blown IC hose(forgot the tbolt clamps:doh: )
the place i sued to work for...Austin subaru...built a car....409whp..stock block...
and raced it in the big bend open road race challenge.....only problem they had was a blown IC hose(forgot the tbolt clamps:doh: )
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: Ann Arbor, Michigan
STis don't have a forged block? But Spec-Cs do?
Regardless, the USDM STis do have an advantage of having 2.5L of displacement, so they should make more torque with mods and technically have an advantage from a standstill.
Although, the FQ-300 tested in EVO was putting out 300lb ft @ 4500rpm, while the Spec-C was only putting out 280lb ft @3750rpm (hp 301hp @ 6200rpm, 335bhp @ 7000rpm respectively)... So with equal displacements, the Evo has the advantage in torque, and easily match the bhp with minor tuning, mods.
The difference in track numbers for Evos and STis is more reflective of time to market and aftermarket development for the two cars. The STi crowd has the benefit of the WRX going through the aftermarket ringer and being prepped to race and has the advantage of using that knowledge in both having readily developed parts and developing aftermarket parts.
But, as can be seen by the efforts of RnR, AMS, Vishnu, Buschur, Boost Solutions, etc... Evo development is on an accelerated curve and their respective cars are making big, usable power and will give STis a run for their money on the drag strip soon enough... let alone anything else in their way to the podium.
Unfortunately for the STi crowd, they just can not compete on the track without major suspension mods...
.
Hell, the MR spanked the Spec-C on Tsukuba... and, as far as I know there is no Team prepped STi that can compete with the HKS Hippermax.
g
Regardless, the USDM STis do have an advantage of having 2.5L of displacement, so they should make more torque with mods and technically have an advantage from a standstill.
Although, the FQ-300 tested in EVO was putting out 300lb ft @ 4500rpm, while the Spec-C was only putting out 280lb ft @3750rpm (hp 301hp @ 6200rpm, 335bhp @ 7000rpm respectively)... So with equal displacements, the Evo has the advantage in torque, and easily match the bhp with minor tuning, mods.
The difference in track numbers for Evos and STis is more reflective of time to market and aftermarket development for the two cars. The STi crowd has the benefit of the WRX going through the aftermarket ringer and being prepped to race and has the advantage of using that knowledge in both having readily developed parts and developing aftermarket parts.
But, as can be seen by the efforts of RnR, AMS, Vishnu, Buschur, Boost Solutions, etc... Evo development is on an accelerated curve and their respective cars are making big, usable power and will give STis a run for their money on the drag strip soon enough... let alone anything else in their way to the podium.
Unfortunately for the STi crowd, they just can not compete on the track without major suspension mods...
. Hell, the MR spanked the Spec-C on Tsukuba... and, as far as I know there is no Team prepped STi that can compete with the HKS Hippermax.
g
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
From: Ann Arbor, Michigan
To be fair, their is some knowledge that has been gained from DSM tuning being applied to the Evo. So yeah, it's not a black box, but the STi does have an advantage still with having the WRX stateside several years before its arrival.
But, I think by the very nature of the two engines, the 4G63 is an easier motor to work with and by layout has more extractable power.
g
But, I think by the very nature of the two engines, the 4G63 is an easier motor to work with and by layout has more extractable power.
g