*** 2011 Evo X GSR Baseline Dyno ***
Aug 24, 2011, 07:10 PM
#47
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pacific North West
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aug 24, 2011, 08:21 PM
#48
honestly, i have no idea what changed... but i looked at a million dyno's at cars with comparable mods to mine before i got it tuned, and i expected to come out with 320-340 based on what everyone else was getting, then i get there and it puts down 318 before the tune... Even Lucas (English) was surprised...
Aug 25, 2011, 09:54 AM
#49
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pacific North West
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
honestly, i have no idea what changed... but i looked at a million dyno's at cars with comparable mods to mine before i got it tuned, and i expected to come out with 320-340 based on what everyone else was getting, then i get there and it puts down 318 before the tune... Even Lucas (English) was surprised...
Aug 25, 2011, 10:14 AM
#50
Newbie
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Himm so if the tuners are surprised as well, why do they not say anything about this? This car has been out for almost 12 months now, and still we don't know if they make more with same mods or not? This is all very weird, and I'm utterly confused 
honestly, i have no idea what changed... but i looked at a million dyno's at cars with comparable mods to mine before i got it tuned, and i expected to come out with 320-340 based on what everyone else was getting, then i get there and it puts down 318 before the tune... Even Lucas (English) was surprised...
Aug 25, 2011, 11:09 AM
#52
Yeah, but I already had an aftermarket exhaust at that time, I got rid of the stocker before I hit 2k miles... One thing I'm pretty sure that changed is the bov, cause didn't the previous years start leaking at 24psi? I'm still on the stock untouched (not crushed or anything) and I'm making 27 psi without issue... So if they changed that and didnt publish it anywhere, it's possible they made other minor changes without publishing...
I should also mention that my tune is a bit on the rich side. I track my car so he gave me a bit more of a safety cushion than a normal street tune... so technically I have another 5-10 whp in it...
I should also mention that my tune is a bit on the rich side. I track my car so he gave me a bit more of a safety cushion than a normal street tune... so technically I have another 5-10 whp in it...
Last edited by WarmMilk; Aug 25, 2011 at 11:23 AM.
Aug 25, 2011, 12:41 PM
#53
Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read somewhere too that the exhaust on the 2011 is more free flowing and even sounds slightly different. Did Mitsu dial up the boost by even 0.5psi or something? Maybe leaned it out a little more from the factory? My wife loves our 2010 MR on the Stg 1 tune with a HKS Drop in and catback. I'm pretty damned satisfied as well.
I'm lucky to own both 2011 STi and 2010 MR, and yes the EVO X is hands down the better overall performance car out of the box. The stock tune on the STi sucks (it's well accepted at NASIOC) and my car is Cobb Stg 1 as well and that bumpy STi dyno graph is more in line with the EVO X now. Both platforms are very capable tuning platforms, but obviously the EVO X is much easier to extract HP out of.
I'm lucky to own both 2011 STi and 2010 MR, and yes the EVO X is hands down the better overall performance car out of the box. The stock tune on the STi sucks (it's well accepted at NASIOC) and my car is Cobb Stg 1 as well and that bumpy STi dyno graph is more in line with the EVO X now. Both platforms are very capable tuning platforms, but obviously the EVO X is much easier to extract HP out of.
Aug 25, 2011, 08:45 PM
#54
Evolving Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read somewhere too that the exhaust on the 2011 is more free flowing and even sounds slightly different. Did Mitsu dial up the boost by even 0.5psi or something? Maybe leaned it out a little more from the factory? My wife loves our 2010 MR on the Stg 1 tune with a HKS Drop in and catback. I'm pretty damned satisfied as well.
I'm lucky to own both 2011 STi and 2010 MR, and yes the EVO X is hands down the better overall performance car out of the box. The stock tune on the STi sucks (it's well accepted at NASIOC) and my car is Cobb Stg 1 as well and that bumpy STi dyno graph is more in line with the EVO X now. Both platforms are very capable tuning platforms, but obviously the EVO X is much easier to extract HP out of.
I'm lucky to own both 2011 STi and 2010 MR, and yes the EVO X is hands down the better overall performance car out of the box. The stock tune on the STi sucks (it's well accepted at NASIOC) and my car is Cobb Stg 1 as well and that bumpy STi dyno graph is more in line with the EVO X now. Both platforms are very capable tuning platforms, but obviously the EVO X is much easier to extract HP out of.
Aug 28, 2011, 06:07 PM
#56
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm lucky to own both 2011 STi and 2010 MR, and yes the EVO X is hands down the better overall performance car out of the box. The stock tune on the STi sucks (it's well accepted at NASIOC) and my car is Cobb Stg 1 as well and that bumpy STi dyno graph is more in line with the EVO X now. Both platforms are very capable tuning platforms, but obviously the EVO X is much easier to extract HP out of.
Aug 28, 2011, 07:24 PM
#57
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pacific North West
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The STi is a great car but it's a pain in the *** to work on. After I helped a friend out with a 20g turbo and injector install, I knew I was done modifying my STi. There is no room to work on anything in that engine bay, and everything seems to be in the way of you accomplishing an install. A turbo inlet install is worse than some forms of torture. I loved my STi, but working in that engine bay was hell. The Evo by comparison is a pleasure to work on.
will never go back
Aug 29, 2011, 06:53 AM
#58
Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My main reasons:
1. STI is slower in 1/4 mile and track
2. In my case, the STI would have cost $5000 more than the EVO
3. The pamphlet at Subaru offering a $2000 upgrade for "performance suspension," WTF??? Should have had the stiffer bushings in there from the get go.
4. They were reluctant to let me test drive the STI because they only had one and it was on the showroom.
Aug 29, 2011, 07:37 PM
#59
I looked at the 11 STI too since it's such a similar platform. After some heavy reading and a test drive of the Evo, the choice was easy.
My main reasons:
1. STI is slower in 1/4 mile and track
2. In my case, the STI would have cost $5000 more than the EVO
3. The pamphlet at Subaru offering a $2000 upgrade for "performance suspension," WTF??? Should have had the stiffer bushings in there from the get go.
4. They were reluctant to let me test drive the STI because they only had one and it was on the showroom.
My main reasons:
1. STI is slower in 1/4 mile and track
2. In my case, the STI would have cost $5000 more than the EVO
3. The pamphlet at Subaru offering a $2000 upgrade for "performance suspension," WTF??? Should have had the stiffer bushings in there from the get go.
4. They were reluctant to let me test drive the STI because they only had one and it was on the showroom.
Aug 30, 2011, 09:12 AM
#60
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this part is pretty sweet actually... subaru accepts the fact that people will modify their cars... and just for the record, the 2k subaru performance suspension is better than most aftermarket suspension setup's of equal cost... prolly even more cost... I think it'd be cool if mitsu did the same for the Evo...