yeah but 139lbs of tq is incredibly low no matter what kind of suspension

and intakes on Sis have worse numbers on intakes than we get on lancers...check out some civic forums and dynos

 

What does engine torque have to do with suspension? There's a reason why miatas can take on corvettes in autocross and road racing and it sure as hell isn't torque. The Si has a superior suspension system so that's another thing you'll have to upgrade before you can take on an Si.
Where are these numbers coming from? For one, it's next to impossible to compare two different dyno numbers unless you take careful measures to ensure accuracy. Second, you're probably trying to compare the numbers given to you by a vendor with the numbers from a real dyno run. I'm sorry but that is incredibly naive. According to those kinds of numbers, my old lancer should have made close to 150 hp. Instead it probably made 125 hp.

 

alright mr know it all, heres a lesson for you, si's arent gods gift first of all, second i think our suspension is better, even my friend who owns an 08 si says he thinks my car handles better, next his car shakes if you brake too hard over 120, i havent ever had that problem, 6speeds doesnt make much of a difference, 6th is an od, to the average driver si's arent that much faster stock for stock than a lancer

 

well i hope things work out for our CVT's i really wanna turbo it and not be forced to get another car just to have sum extra get up lol over all glad things are lookin a little better.

 

? And this is coming from where, me saying that a car designed by Mitsubishi to be an economy car isn't going to perform as well as a car designed by Honda to be a performance car? Really? I really don't care what your friend says because frankly, I don't put much faith in what people say because people can be full of BS. Do I think the SI is the best car out there? No, otherwise I would damn well own one but do I think that stock it performs better than a mildly upgraded economy car? Of course because it was designed to. Your friend's brake problems are irrelevant, he probably has either warped rotors caused by poor driving or he buggered up something else like the pads. There are evos with blown transmissions and fubared motors but I would never agree that that makes them inferior to a Hyundai Accent. A 6-speed transmission is a huge asset on the track and it'll allow the driver to stay in the powerband (very important for a NA 4-banger like the SI) in almost all conditions. The SI is way faster stock for stock than a lancer, you must be blind if you can't see that.
Edit: Lets add some numbers to this. According to Road & Track, the SI has a 0-60 of 6.8 seconds, the GTS 8.5. The SI has a 0-100 of 17.0 seconds, the GTS 24.1. The SI pulls a 0.87g on the skidpad and goes through the slalom at 67.6 mph. The GTS pulls a 0.82 and does the slalom at 64.7 mph. So where is this handling advantage and similar performance?

 

Torque has a lot to do with beating another car. From a dead stop the car with more torque is able to get the HP that it has to the ground more efficiently thus BEATING the car with lower torque numbers off the line. Torque comes into play when exiting a corner on a road course. A car with too much torque accelerating too much on the exit of the turn is more likely to spin their tires. Yes horsepower comes into play in that instance but torque is also involved.

The term "horsepower" was coined by the engineer James Watt (1736 to 1819) in 1782 while working in the performance of steam engines. This occurred while using a mine pony to lift coal out of a coal mine. He conceived the idea of defining the power exerted by these animals to accomplish this work. He found that, on the average, a mine horse could pull (lift by means of a pulley) 22,000 foot-pounds per minute. Rather than call this "pony" power, he increased these test results by 50 percent, and called it horsepower i.e. 33,000 foot-pounds of work per minute. (stole this from wiki) thank you wiki

Horsepower is the output of the work being done. Torque in the case of a car is how effective that horsepower can be utilized. So Torque has a TON to do with it.

And from everything I have seen from the last few gen SI is that they are just flashy version of the top end civic with a few upgrades on the suspension and a radically screwed up engine. It is soo detuned from what it should be putting out due to emission laws that they have robbed people of what the true SI's were 5 or more years ago.

As far as the suspension goes the GTS has one of the most solid chassis and suspensions of any car on the road these days. Just the frame is 60% more rigid than the previous evo. Which is a ton more rigid than the civics frame. Secondly the GTS has a sport tuned suspension just like the SI does. So I would almost bet that they are very similar in rigidity in that regard. But the chassis and suspension are what makes a car handle well. Not just a suspension, The suspension is what keeps you planted on the ground so it has to be tuned just right to accommodate the chassis properly.

Thank you and this has been a trip into what I remember of the 1 year of automotive schooling that i have. Not 100% accurate but its the gist of things

 

I'd say that would also depend on the driver's skill. I mean, even among professional drivers, their skill levels vary greatly. Now if we're just looking at numbers, I do agree with you. But then again, there are way too many crappy drivers on both sides. Not saying I'm the best either...I mean hell, if I wanna go fast, I'll hop in the Mustang I have sitting in my driveway.

 

lol civic SI's aren't that great. If they were as good as everyone makes them out to be, i bet alot of us would be in one of those instead. When I test drove one, i didn't like the handling too much, and it took forever to get it going. But this is getting way off topic

Best of luck to RRM and their CVT turbo. I've already talked to a few dealerships about a possible trade in for the RA, so if it turns out it really is impossible for a reliable turbo kit to come out for the CVT, i'll be in a nice new RA for only $27 more a month than what im paying.

 

Lets not talk about the Civic SI in here. It is starting to look like the EVO X VS. RA VS. LANCER TURBO forum again. Mods a little clean up? Or move some posts? Lets keep it relitive to the turbo project at hand so we dont have to read through a lot of stuff not pertaining to the topic.

 

Torque has nothing to do with suspension though. Yes it helps in corner exits and yes it comes into play in terms of drivability but a skilled driver can make up for these shortcomings and manipulate the car effectively. This is why cars like the Integra, the civic, the miata, etc. are such potent track cars in the hands of experienced people. Sure they don't put down impressive numbers but they make up for it in balance.
The new SI is the best SI that's ever been made (or at least made it to our bastardized continent). The K-series motor is crazy and there's no arguing with 100 hp per liter.
It's nice saying that the GTS is X stiff and all that, but the numbers don't show it. Is the GTS a great car for it's class? Hell yes, if I was looking for a sporty yet economical car I would get a new lancer but it's not a performance car and it wasn't designed to be. Honda is renowned for their chassis designs, people still consider the older Integra Type-R to be the best FWD car ever made.

 

awwww don't delete my post its actual facts...well sorta. But I do have to say since i posted something off topic i will post something on topic.

I am sure this is just a matter of cracking the ECU a little more. Which is not as hard as you would think in these newer cars. They are getting closer and closer to being like a home computer as far as the coding. The issue is after cracking it and being able to read the files. What does each section of the ecu control, how many variables are there, how much does each instruction module(more than one component). I do not know much about car ECUs im just going off my PC knowledge. Once they narrow everything down to what controls the CVT it should be rather simple to figure out how to modify it so that you are able to up the power.

And in this day and age do not be surprised if RRM has relationships with other shops that they consult on things they need help with. Not every shop has all the knowledge and they do work together to help broaden the knowledge base. I know RRM will get this issue resolved.

 

Yes this is OT but considering this is page 87, there'd have to be a hell of a lot of cleaning to get this thread back to where it ideally should be. I guess this stuff is sort of applicable in the broadest sense of the term.
Arcanas, I agree with you that the driver plays a huge role but that can apply to any comparison (ie. evo vs ZO6, civic vs Ferrari).
If people want to upgrade their car, more power to them. Having naive and very optimistic goals or assumptions however is ridiculous. So far no one has provided concrete proof that bolt-ons give the kind of gains being talked about on a lancer. This sounds very similar to what was being said back when I still had my lancer. People talked about gaining 10 hp from an intake mani or having 150 whp NA cars or beating STIs with a stage 1 turbo and things like that but very few people had any proof whatsoever and even fewer had accurate data. This led to people like me spending thousands on a car to only end up pissed off and disillusioned by both the results and how people treated those results. If you're happy going down that same road, great, but I'd rather address now than wait for the facts to start trickling in and people to start freaking out when they're not what they wanted because people just fed them BS.

 

Anyway back to the turbo.
Can somebody explain to me what is this "safety feature" actually doing and how is it preventing the turboed engine to unleash its power .
Not that it really concern's me but I'm just curious.

 

guess you like to find the facts that you like to find, heres some facts for you, the lancer does 0-60 in 7.6 to 7.7 seconds, which i can confirm and have a few sources, also ive seen anywhere from 6.8 to 7.2 for the si which isnt that big of a difference, the lancer does the 60-0 in 117ft while the si does it in 125ft, also the lancer chassis definitely more rigid then the si's, unless your going to try and tell me the si's chassis better than the evo ix's, which the new lancer is in fact more rigid than the ix,i will challenge any stock si on a road course

 

ty plz back on the turbo. make another thread for the honduh specs