Stock Evo Qtr Record so far - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28

This is a discussion on Stock Evo Qtr Record so far within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; im beginning to think that the sti and evo are gonna be neck and neck in almost all the performance ...

  1. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    315
    im beginning to think that the sti and evo are gonna be neck and neck in almost all the performance categories. sti i believe might be a tad quicker in the qtr as it should more power and displacement with the evo faster in the corners.

    although only one person so far as hit 13.1 for a stock evo some others are hitting 13.5s-13.8s which is sti territory. it will be a very interesting battle indeed. i hope mitsu also delivers a higher version of the evo the time the sti comes out with acd and 6 speed tranny.
    Kory "I love Rexes and STis"

    - 2006 Toyota Rav4 Limited V6
    - 2001 Acura CL Type S
    - 1998 Prelude S
    - 1997 Eclipse GSX
    - 1996 Eclipse GS

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    gurnee, il
    Posts
    45
    In case anyone hasn't noticed, the 230AWHP dynoed stock does not equate to 271 crank HP. Its more like 300-320 crank hp.

  4. #18
    Registered User PolarisSnT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Staten Island, NY
    Posts
    3,864
    Originally posted by boostyle
    In case anyone hasn't noticed, the 230AWHP dynoed stock does not equate to 271 crank HP. Its more like 300-320 crank hp.
    Howd you figure that out? I believe you I just want to know your method. Although you cant rule out underrating the STi as well.
    Dan- 2004 PSM 5spd

    "Days get shorter, nights get longer, snow gets deeper, life gets better."

  5. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Morristown, NJ
    Posts
    359
    Very impressive time and I am not shock at how fast they are either.
    FS: 02 WRX with JDM V7 RA-C

  6. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    gurnee, il
    Posts
    45
    Originally posted by PolarisSnT
    Howd you figure that out? I believe you I just want to know your method. Although you cant rule out underrating the STi as well.
    I am not ruling out underrating the STi.

    271HP with 25% drivetrain loss (average % for AWD)...

    271 x .25 = ~68
    271 - 68 = 203AWHP

    320 x .25 = 80
    320 - 80 = 230AWHP

  7. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Apex, NC.
    Posts
    29
    Sorry guys i am having a hard time believing the times. I have raced a few evos street and track and the race was about even. On the track i was faster i ran a 13.9 and he ran 14.3 all day the only thing i have done to my car i dp and air box mod. I know the driver has a lot to do with times on track but not that much. I hope i did not step on any feet with this post. I just had to put my 2c in

  8. #22
    Registered User Shaitiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Streamwood, IL
    Posts
    571
    Originally posted by NCREX
    Sorry guys i am having a hard time believing the times. I have raced a few evos street and track and the race was about even. On the track i was faster i ran a 13.9 and he ran 14.3 all day the only thing i have done to my car i dp and air box mod. I know the driver has a lot to do with times on track but not that much. I hope i did not step on any feet with this post. I just had to put my 2c in
    Ok, what were his/her 60ft times? What are your mods and what were your 60ft. times? Oh, and at what elevation? If you are going to doubt, don't leave out the details that lead you to believe its not true. Thanks
    Team Mullet Racing
    2004 White Evolution VIII - Wingless and Altezzaless
    www.forgivendriven.com

    SOLD - Stage 4 WRX Wagon - 12.7 at 106mph - SOLD

  9. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    315
    Originally posted by NCREX
    Sorry guys i am having a hard time believing the times. I have raced a few evos street and track and the race was about even. On the track i was faster i ran a 13.9 and he ran 14.3 all day the only thing i have done to my car i dp and air box mod. I know the driver has a lot to do with times on track but not that much. I hope i did not step on any feet with this post. I just had to put my 2c in
    it is always good to question times, but the owner has posted his timeslip in the original thread and so far seems to be a very credible evo owner. but of course nothing is 100% but this seems reliable
    Kory "I love Rexes and STis"

    - 2006 Toyota Rav4 Limited V6
    - 2001 Acura CL Type S
    - 1998 Prelude S
    - 1997 Eclipse GSX
    - 1996 Eclipse GS

  10. #24
    Moderator Osiris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    876
    Originally posted by Shaitiger
    That's about what I expected. I'm indeed impressed, but you need to learn something about this forum. You can't post anything positive regarding an Evo VIII or an SRT-4. Its just a matter of seconds until folks start shooting it down .
    Some of us respect our competition and have friends that drive our competition www.victorbrant.com
    - Jason

    South East Region
    2002 Black and Bronze WRX

    "hihihi" - R.I.P. Jonathan Braxton Hawkins -

  11. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In Ray's house while he's jacking it in his car.
    Posts
    2,599

    EVO AWHP

    I was just curious as to where you heard that the EVO dynoed at 230 AWHP. I have read Vishnu's dyno of this vehicle (you can access it at www.vishnutuning.com), and they have it rated at 180 AWHP, whereas they rate the stock WRX at 155 (with California's 91 octane gas . . . it rose to 188-190 with 93 octane.). Either way, it would seem to me that both of these would seem to be actually making less than Mitsubishi's claimed crank horsepower. I trust that Vishnu would not be attempting to deceive their customers, as they will be selling products for both vehicles. I am accusing you of disseminating false information, I am merely curious as to where you got you numbers. I have been looking for articles on various car's WHP (including the EVO), but I have been having a hard time finding very much information.

  12. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    gurnee, il
    Posts
    45

  13. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In Ray's house while he's jacking it in his car.
    Posts
    2,599
    Unfortunately, there was no AWHP figures for any other car besides the EVO at the site that you posted, which disallows a comparison of other cars to the EVO on their dynamometer. However, I would encourage anyone to read the article on this subject at http://www.vishnutuning.com/lancer.htm as there is plenty of useful information contained therein. It should also be noted that they have done extensive testing in the car (they do not give exact numbers, but going from their given information, I would assume that it would be at least a couple dozen). This is compared to just one car. I am not trying to take anything away from the EVO, as I know that it is an extraordinary vehicle, but I simply do not believe that Mitsubishi would underrate its engine by fifty or so horsepower. The US market, to the best of my knowledge, has no limits on the amount of horsepower that its cars may produce (although I could be wrong on this, as I believe that they did at least in the late Sixties because I have heard that certain cars, like the Chevelle for instance, had been underrate purposefully . . . but they produced something like 600HP). So, therefore, I would assume that Mitsubishi would like to give as high of numbers for their cars as possible, giving them a bigger edge over their main competitor. This is not to say that underrating cars is not possible, I am sure that we have all heard stories about the SRT-4 being underrated, but, also, the place where I read this was at www.sportcompactcarweb.com, and they stated in their article that it was a prototype car that they were testing. This means, of course, that this is not the same car that would be purchased from the dealer. I am just curious as to others' thoughts on this subject, and if anyone knows any other websites that publish reliable WHP figures, that would be a wonderful tool for everyone interested.

  14. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    315
    Originally posted by zoophagy
    Unfortunately, there was no AWHP figures for any other car besides the EVO at the site that you posted, which disallows a comparison of other cars to the EVO on their dynamometer. However, I would encourage anyone to read the article on this subject at http://www.vishnutuning.com/lancer.htm as there is plenty of useful information contained therein. It should also be noted that they have done extensive testing in the car (they do not give exact numbers, but going from their given information, I would assume that it would be at least a couple dozen). This is compared to just one car. I am not trying to take anything away from the EVO, as I know that it is an extraordinary vehicle, but I simply do not believe that Mitsubishi would underrate its engine by fifty or so horsepower. The US market, to the best of my knowledge, has no limits on the amount of horsepower that its cars may produce (although I could be wrong on this, as I believe that they did at least in the late Sixties because I have heard that certain cars, like the Chevelle for instance, had been underrate purposefully . . . but they produced something like 600HP). So, therefore, I would assume that Mitsubishi would like to give as high of numbers for their cars as possible, giving them a bigger edge over their main competitor. This is not to say that underrating cars is not possible, I am sure that we have all heard stories about the SRT-4 being underrated, but, also, the place where I read this was at www.sportcompactcarweb.com, and they stated in their article that it was a prototype car that they were testing. This means, of course, that this is not the same car that would be purchased from the dealer. I am just curious as to others' thoughts on this subject, and if anyone knows any other websites that publish reliable WHP figures, that would be a wonderful tool for everyone interested.
    yeah i also agree that more numbers to compare would be nice but the evo is still very young and comparing numbers from different dynos are useless. it's definately hard to believe that mitsu would overrate the car by 40-50bhp when track times prove it has much more than that.
    Kory "I love Rexes and STis"

    - 2006 Toyota Rav4 Limited V6
    - 2001 Acura CL Type S
    - 1998 Prelude S
    - 1997 Eclipse GSX
    - 1996 Eclipse GS

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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