I think you are the one that needs to chill. If you can't take a little EVO vs STi rivalry you need to go home play by yourself in your own sandbox. Drew knows Smoggy...

 

Not to mention he's using a correction factor for naturally aspirated cars at 6k feet. Turbo cars have different rules and his numbers are about 20% overinflated.

 

Rancho Cucamonga posse unite!

I know Tom also. I'm just tired of Drew's antics as of late, including the last "Should've bought an STi" post in a different thread. It gets old, dude. We're here for tech and info, not to post ***** on irrelevant crap. Also, since his info about a 16G putting down as much or more on an STi was obviously wrong, I felt a need to point that fact out.

 

Where are you from Noize?

Our 16G on a STi should be close...it does have a significant (2.5 vs 2.0) size advantage. Not sure if anybody has done it with all of the matching (ie cams, cam gears, ect) mods.

 

Yeah an evo can make that much HP on stock turbo, but I haven't seen very many evos making 400+wtq on any turbo, muchless stock.

 

im truly sorry for my 2 antics as of late....if its already old to you, I dont know how IE still has any friends then . About the 16G info being wrong, all ya had to do it say, Drew, you are wrong on that account...or something like that. I seriously felt a lil anger in your post

 

It won't be the same, because the STi can't safely run as much boost on the stock internals as an Evo can. Also, the big torque is nice, but torque at low rpm only helps area under the curve, and not high end power. Particularly in a case like this, the 16G at sane boost levels for the EJ257 would spool early, have good midrange, then peter out a little bit. Heck, even the larger Green peters out a little bit. At that level and beyond, the restriction is the EJ257 itself and not the turbo. Build the internals on the STi, though, and you might be able to make something pretty crazy. I'm weird, though, I like hyperkinetic engines like the EJ207 that can rev for days. Midrange punch is nice, but I'd trade it away for the top end pull of a car like the Stage III Vishnu Evo anyday.

Sorry, that wasn't my intention, man. I also think IE is hilarious.

 

PS: I'm several hundred miles east, close to Dyno4mance. The only reason I know Tom is because we chat on the phone sometimes. He's a good egg in my book. Now that I understand that Drew was just ribbin' him a little bit, it makes a lot more sense. Sorry for the confusion.

 

Drew you can rib me if it makes you feel better. As far as STi and Evo with the same turbo which one will make more power I think both of you are correct. Same boost levels STI>Evo but unfortunately for the Sti the Evo is like the energizer bunny when it comes to boost. It keeps going higher and higher and the Sti goes boom if it tries to stay up. Drew go ahead fire away at me or Smoggy all is good in the hood.

 

Tards tend to get angery real easy.

 

Not here Mark. Thanks.

 

You gotta be kidding me if you think its a 6% correction to over 5000ft altitude...I highly doubt its 26% but its definitely not 6%...

 

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...hreadid=124576

btw, you seem to be forgetting that the STi has .5 liters on the evo's. comparing the STi with a 16g to an stock 16g turbo'd evo is like comparing an evo with a 2.5 stroker kit to an STi with it stock setup. i mean.. come on... COME ON!!!!

 

In Denver, 5000' above sea level, the somewhat.. ahem... question "correction factor" is anywhere from 1.2-1.3 depending on temp, humidity, etc,. So yeah, it is somewhat misleading since atmospheric corrections aren't one size fits all for all induction types.

Cheers,
shiv

 

Having had my car dynoed at MAC and then in Chicago later, I can definitely attest to the fact that the CO numbers are ... [cough] ... slightly optimistic ...[/cough]. In any case, optimistic or not, since the pull was done at altitude, it's pointless to compare to ANY dyno runs done closer to sea level.

l8r)