06 Stage 2 WRX vs Evo IX - Page 2
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 70

This is a discussion on 06 Stage 2 WRX vs Evo IX within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; Originally Posted by Trunkmonkey56 I just want to say that stage 2 in the 06 wrx is as far as ...

  1. #16
    Registered User WRX88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,304
    Quote Originally Posted by Trunkmonkey56
    I just want to say that stage 2 in the 06 wrx is as far as I will go untill I upgrade the suspension and brakes. Then I will at least go with the 18G turbo, but more likely something in the green sized turbo. That will be plenty of power for the street/weekend racer in me Stage 2 now is more than the rest of the car can handle in turns and gets up to scarry speeds pretty quick so better brakes are in order. Both would be a need by the time I got a bigger turbo and intercooler, even if it is just the VF39.

    My thoughts exactly.... but i doubt i will ever be upgrading the turbo. Maybe if I had a stronger tranny....

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pembroke Pines, FL
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by Novtec1
    watch those EVO IX's tbe, ecu flash and boost controllers make em pretty quick, good run though
    Exact mod path that I'm going with, watch out STi's!
    2006 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX
    Works Drop in Filter, TTP Engineering 3" Downpipe, 3" Ultimate Racing Test Pipe, GReddy Evo2 exhaust, Walbro 255lph Fuel Pump, Forge UNOS MBC @ 22-23lbs, Fighters Garage LICP, Custom Dynoflash, S2000 Antenna, Stewart Warner Boost Gauge

  4. #18
    Registered User dcpatters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    1,174
    Quote Originally Posted by BoostJunkie21
    Exact mod path that I'm going with, watch out STi's!
    Even now (stock), the Evolution's are not to be taken lightly. Great cars.
    2008 Evo X GSR. Custom tuned, Works panel filter, Intercooler pipe upgrade, TBE.

  5. #19
    Registered User Cavadini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Lincoln, NE
    Posts
    926
    Quote Originally Posted by DeBlas66
    The TRs are going to surprise a lot of people. For 24k we got a real fast car that with the proper mods and tuning is going to beat or keep up with heavily modded EVOs and STis, for 8-10k less.
    no offense but it will take a wrx TONS of mods to TRY to hang with a "heavily' modded evo. A lightly modded evo 9 goes low low 12's. There was a stock turbo'd evo with exhaust, engine management and a tune running 12.10@115mph. You let me know when the regular wrx's start flying that quick with 2k in mods I LOVE my wrx, but EVO 9's are out of this world for performance.
    07 Mercedes-Benz E350
    Saks Fifth Ave Edition

    04 WRX VF34+TMIC SOLD
    12.62@108 1.7 60'
    295whp & 302tq on Mustang Dyno
    MODS

  6. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pembroke Pines, FL
    Posts
    202
    Just to back up what Cavadini stated, I went 12.5@109mph with a 1.8 60ft and I'm still on stock exhaust. I only have a flash and mbc and I'm already putting down 300whp/310wtq.
    2006 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX
    Works Drop in Filter, TTP Engineering 3" Downpipe, 3" Ultimate Racing Test Pipe, GReddy Evo2 exhaust, Walbro 255lph Fuel Pump, Forge UNOS MBC @ 22-23lbs, Fighters Garage LICP, Custom Dynoflash, S2000 Antenna, Stewart Warner Boost Gauge

  7. #21
    Registered User Cavadini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Lincoln, NE
    Posts
    926
    Quote Originally Posted by BoostJunkie21
    Just to back up what Cavadini stated, I went 12.5@109mph with a 1.8 60ft and I'm still on stock exhaust. I only have a flash and mbc and I'm already putting down 300whp/310wtq.
    werd, and by the way, that angers me It only took me a new turbo, injectors, fuel pump, enginemangement, exhaust, and a good tune to run .1 slower.....hahaha
    07 Mercedes-Benz E350
    Saks Fifth Ave Edition

    04 WRX VF34+TMIC SOLD
    12.62@108 1.7 60'
    295whp & 302tq on Mustang Dyno
    MODS

  8. #22
    Registered User blackjack_davie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    10
    Well, I'm really new to the car thing honstly. The most powerfull thing i drive is a 6ton ford econoline van with a catapiller v6 turbo. 0-60 in 15 seconds with 300 horsepower. But i have flashy lights that get my past cops and red lights so things even out.

    Actually I used to have illusions of joining the custom bike trade. So i have a rough idea of certain things.

    My understanding of engines is as such.

    Line format engines are made for High end horse power and torque. Yamaha YZF 1000prior to 2000 (pre R1 with the blue and purple scheme on a white base) was a good example of a Line 4 that didn't realy have phenominal acceleration but had a high top speed and further more was able to maintain top speed even up an incline where CBRS were loosing power.

    Then there were your V engines. the Harlies with there acute agle V's and crotch rockets with there 90 and greater angle V's and the Yamaha V max. These bike had phenominal torque and great acceleration. There power bands stayed towards the lower RPMs.

    The same thing aplied to cars I thought. Toyota Supra with a twin turbo Line 6 fast top speed. Viper with V6 fast acceleration.

    please note that I am aware that other things like gear ratios, valve timing, flywheel weight, affect speed and acceleration also. But what I'm trying to get at with the top examples is that my belief was that a car company decides what they want their car to do so then they pick the right engine base for it. For a Vehicle to be used on flat straight surfaces where speed is the most important they go for a Line format engine and then use valve timing and other engine and trany modifications to either focus in on the engine type's natural ability or to make up for its weeknesses. This is the info I have to go on, if i'm wrong please explain.

    So to make this jermane to the thread. If the Evo has a line 4 engine and an adapted 4 wheel drive (adapted from front wheel), and the STI has a boxer enjine (my assumtion is that the boxer delevers beter lowend to midrange power though i know the sti gets better power at its top end) shouldn't the STI beat the Evo in a Quater mile strip?

    Unless the evo's turbo and valve timing changes the powerband focusing peek horse at a lower RPM.

    the thing that bothers me about the video also is that the STI of 06 has a driver controlled differential splitter. Does the STI shown have the same thing. If so, if he split the torque ratio to favor rearwheele would that account for the tire squealing, and if the STI understeers so much, how do you change that?

  9. #23
    Registered User mike05STi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    2,720
    Actually blackjack,

    Any piston engine can can perform any of those tasks you have listed. It's more about the bore & stroke and the air flow/fuel delivery. You can make a V8 a short stroke high-revving high-end screamer or a longer stroke lower revving torque monster. The same is true for every other type of engine. Look at the V8s and V10s of the F1 cars. They rev to over 15,000 rpm, yet the Chevrolet V8s and the Viper V10 don't rev as high and don't have as much HP, but they are very torquey.
    Of course there are variables and exceptions across the board but you can pretty much make any type of reciprocating (piston) engine perform any specific task.

    As for reducing the understeer for the STi, I've been told stiffer rear sway bar and stiffer steering rack bushings will help.
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
    -Albert Einstein

    Some people go through their whole lives wondering if they ever made a difference in the world. Marines don't have that problem.
    -Ronald Reagan

  10. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pembroke Pines, FL
    Posts
    202
    Evo9's already make more power than STi's stock for stock and when modding comes into play, the STi is left in the dust.
    2006 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX
    Works Drop in Filter, TTP Engineering 3" Downpipe, 3" Ultimate Racing Test Pipe, GReddy Evo2 exhaust, Walbro 255lph Fuel Pump, Forge UNOS MBC @ 22-23lbs, Fighters Garage LICP, Custom Dynoflash, S2000 Antenna, Stewart Warner Boost Gauge

  11. #25
    Registered User WRX88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,304
    Although I'm totally satisfied with my car and the mods i have done with it, i wouldn't mind taking an evo. I'm gonna test drive an evo and an sti over the summer and see which one i like better.

  12. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    173
    Speed = $$$
    DSM = Drain Savings Monthly

  13. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pembroke Pines, FL
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by udelslayer
    Speed = $$$
    DSM = Drain Savings Monthly
    Very true, but Evo's aren't DSM's.
    2006 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX
    Works Drop in Filter, TTP Engineering 3" Downpipe, 3" Ultimate Racing Test Pipe, GReddy Evo2 exhaust, Walbro 255lph Fuel Pump, Forge UNOS MBC @ 22-23lbs, Fighters Garage LICP, Custom Dynoflash, S2000 Antenna, Stewart Warner Boost Gauge

  14. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    173
    What makes it not a DSM?

  15. #29
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pembroke Pines, FL
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by udelslayer
    What makes it not a DSM?
    The fact that Chrysler had nothing to do with creating the Evo. Go here and educate yourself: http://www.machv.com/diamstarmoth.html
    2006 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX
    Works Drop in Filter, TTP Engineering 3" Downpipe, 3" Ultimate Racing Test Pipe, GReddy Evo2 exhaust, Walbro 255lph Fuel Pump, Forge UNOS MBC @ 22-23lbs, Fighters Garage LICP, Custom Dynoflash, S2000 Antenna, Stewart Warner Boost Gauge

  16. #30
    Ike
    Ike is offline
    Registered User Ike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi.
    Posts
    764
    Considering Evo IXs can trap 105-106 stock and dyno about 30-40whp more than a stage 2'06 would this doesn't seem quite right. Maybe your car is stronger than most or your friend's Evo is weaker than most <shrugs>

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself. We strongly suggest that you stay away from using aol, yahoo, msn, and hotmail accounts. Sometimes the mail server blocks the emails from our server. As a result you will not receive any notifications including the confirmation email.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •