My STI vs. Stealth TT ? - Page 2
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 48

This is a discussion on My STI vs. Stealth TT ? within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; Originally Posted by SGOSWRX My buddy runs 13.3s - 13.4s in his Stealth Turbo with basically the same mods as ...

  1. #16
    Registered User John M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Milledgeville, GA
    Posts
    749
    Quote Originally Posted by SGOSWRX
    My buddy runs 13.3s - 13.4s in his Stealth Turbo with basically the same mods as you mentioned. Its fast off the line and then slows like an STi. Should be a drivers race.
    A friend once bought a 92 Stealth with 145k miles on it. We put a MBC @ 16 psi and ran 13.2 @ 103 and we had touched nothing else on it. If it was just as slow with a full exhaust I'd be embarrassed. A properly-running car with the listed mods should do no slower than 12.90s at 105+. That should be enough for a stock STi.
    John M
    2000 Lincoln Continental - slow DD with the DOHC 4.6 and a Superchips tune
    1992 Lexus SC400 - slow resto project
    2005 Legacy GT Limited - SOLD Feb 2011 - Forged internals, FP HTA Green @ 22 psi.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    84
    Haven't checked the forum in a few days and there seems to be some interest in this race. We haven't run them yet but I will be sure to say the outcome regardless if I win or lose. We were going to run them today but we both had things to do. Should be a intersting race though. I will also be sure to film the race. The funny thing is everytime we see each other we talk smack back and forth. I saw him run his car at the track last year where he ran a 14 second 1/4 mile but at 107 mph. His excuse was bald tires but with the high trap speed in comparison to the bad 14 sec time, I can tell he pulls hard once under momentum.

  4. #18
    Registered User WRX-ERROR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Wilkes Barre, Pa
    Posts
    779
    14 sec and trapped 107? GEEZ what was his 60'? Bald tires would hurt him unless it was wet out.

    Sounds like this guy doesn't know how to launch the car. If thats the case with a good jump from the dig you should smoke this car bad.

  5. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    84
    yeah, he's my friend, but I will say he is not the best driver. The car just came back from the shop because he blew the second gear out and the second gear synchonizer. I still give him trouble about running a 14 second 1/4, and he still blames the bald tires.

  6. #20
    Registered User Fox05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Valdosta G.a.
    Posts
    977
    Ok I to have a 2005 STi, and I also have a friend with a dodge stealth i think stealth es not the turbo its automatic and he said he found a bolt on twin turbo kid for 1000 bucks and he swears up and down that stock with out a turbo that his car is a classic muscle and it is goin to walk all over my STi. He knows nothing about cars he took half the engine apart when it ran good and now it dont run wortha damn but he said he found a bolt on turbo kit do they make that he said it came with everything gauges up pipes exhaust twin turbos and says his stock engnine with like 170k miles is gona have like 35-40 pounds of boost and that its gona make my car look stuiped but yet when it was runnin he never would go to the local track always wana go do bemis our buisist damn street in valdosta well i declinded and now it dont run so im wait what do yall think about this kid
    |^^^^^^^^^^^^^^| ||_____
    |.........Beer................| ||.....'|";\,___.
    |_...__...______...__..._|_||_|__|__..._|
    ..(@).(@)........(@) (@)................(@)............

  7. #21
    Registered User elohdaeh78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Long Valley, NJ
    Posts
    706
    Two weekends ago i saw a guy with a 1st generation VR-4 with at least exhaust and boost controller running at the track, he was struggling to break into the 14s so the age of these cars has alot to do with their abilites. I bet your average stock TT stealth today would be a mid 14 second car just due to the wear and tear of the engine.
    2005 WRX (Short throw shifter, lightweight pulley,STI Splitters,Tein H-Tech springs,Up/Down Pipe, ERZ Catback, Cobb Stage 2, ASA JH8 with Yokohama ES 100s) 13.680@100.46mph

  8. #22
    Registered User Fox05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Valdosta G.a.
    Posts
    977
    What about a stock stealth tt well taken care up and a stock sti. Who would win in the 1/4, equal drivers and condidions?
    |^^^^^^^^^^^^^^| ||_____
    |.........Beer................| ||.....'|";\,___.
    |_...__...______...__..._|_||_|__|__..._|
    ..(@).(@)........(@) (@)................(@)............

  9. #23
    Registered User John M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Milledgeville, GA
    Posts
    749
    The STi is still a quicker car stock. The 3S needs only a MBC and 2-3 extra psi to make up the difference though.

    The 3S engine itself is quite stout, having recently been pushed to 790 whp on stock internals. Neglected cars usually end up with a failing voltage supply to the fuel pump, blown o-rings in the IC piping, and things like that that kill any hopes of performance.

    I know a guy who bought a nice 300Z TT from a lady who was convinced it was ruined; he paid like $3k for it. She was told it needed a full engine rebuild and didn't want to spend the thousands of bucks for the fix. I looked at the car after he bought it and it was perfect except for a split rubber hose leading to one of the throttle bodies. One $50 part later and the car was healthy again.
    John M
    2000 Lincoln Continental - slow DD with the DOHC 4.6 and a Superchips tune
    1992 Lexus SC400 - slow resto project
    2005 Legacy GT Limited - SOLD Feb 2011 - Forged internals, FP HTA Green @ 22 psi.

  10. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by VR4
    the latest gen stealths are the fastest of all the 3000gt/stealths cause they are the lightest. Some manage to pull low 13's bone stock. Other ppl are right in talking about the condition of his car, if its good you'll get a good walking, if not who knows what will happen.

    My vr4 held even with a 99 gsx600 on the highway, then with the same mods after some stuff broke I lost to a G35. Very fragile cars.
    I don't mean to be rude, but......

    How does 3800-4000lbs, 320hp, and about the same amount of torque equate to "low 13s in the quarter mile?" When the Stealths/3000GTs were new to market, I never saw one run faster than a 13.9 1/4 bone stock.

    An STi weighs between 500-700lbs less than a stock VR4, and is short just 20hp. I don't see how just a boost controller and a few other "minor" mods are going to make up for the huge weight disadvantage that the 3000GT has.

  11. #25
    Registered User John M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Milledgeville, GA
    Posts
    749
    Magazine time: 13.6 @ 100

    http://stealth316.com/images/mt_5-97-p15.jpg
    (must refresh after clicking link due to site security restrictions)

    There has been a factory freak proven to run 13.0s but it was running 15-16 psi because of some defect. They never meant the car to leave the factory at that kind of boost setting.

    Anyway, like I posted before, MBC at 15 psi and NO other mods = 13.20s easily, and that was on a 150k+ mile old car without even checking the condition of anything else, not even the air filter or plugs.

    My 92 Stealth ran 12.90s with a MBC, downpipe, and rewired fuel pump. My 94 is in my sig; it still had stock turbos and a stock cat-back.

    It's not all about peak power. The 3S makes its power from 2500 to 7500 rpm.
    John M
    2000 Lincoln Continental - slow DD with the DOHC 4.6 and a Superchips tune
    1992 Lexus SC400 - slow resto project
    2005 Legacy GT Limited - SOLD Feb 2011 - Forged internals, FP HTA Green @ 22 psi.

  12. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    202
    My neighbor has a stealth TT, its real early 90's and has not been modded very throughly I dont believe. If memory serves me correctly he's doing mid 12's, and its much faster than my STi.

  13. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by John M
    Magazine time: 13.6 @ 100

    http://stealth316.com/images/mt_5-97-p15.jpg
    (must refresh after clicking link due to site security restrictions)

    There has been a factory freak proven to run 13.0s but it was running 15-16 psi because of some defect. They never meant the car to leave the factory at that kind of boost setting.

    Anyway, like I posted before, MBC at 15 psi and NO other mods = 13.20s easily, and that was on a 150k+ mile old car without even checking the condition of anything else, not even the air filter or plugs.

    My 92 Stealth ran 12.90s with a MBC, downpipe, and rewired fuel pump. My 94 is in my sig; it still had stock turbos and a stock cat-back.

    It's not all about peak power. The 3S makes its power from 2500 to 7500 rpm.
    I'd like to see that link that you posted, but for some reason my computer won't open it. Does it work ok for you?

    As far as those cars running mid 13s bone stock, I'm not calling you a liar, but I just find it very hard to believe that a car with 320hp that weighs nearly 4000lbs is going to be running those times......awd or not. With the power to weight ratio, it just doesn't sound feasible to me. Like I said, I'm not calling you a liar. I just personally don't see it happening. I had a stock 94 LT1 Camaro (still have it, but not stock) and I "raced" a VR4. We were on a 2-lane highway and I was behind him. He took off from a light under throttle so I decided I'd oblige. Once his AWD advantage had disappeared, I started slowly reeling him in. By about 70mph I had to get off the gas because I would've ran right into his trunk. As a side note, my LT1 Camaro ran between 13.90s and 14.20s stock at between 97-100mph.

  14. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    27
    Many of you guys need to learn, its not always about peak power numbers, What its really about is the area under the curve. The extra displacement helps out a lot in the torque department. Those cars do run mid 13s no problem stock. Also your going by factory crank HP ratings.... which are many times much differrent then what the car actually makes.

  15. #29
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister 2
    Many of you guys need to learn, its not always about peak power numbers, What its really about is the area under the curve. The extra displacement helps out a lot in the torque department. Those cars do run mid 13s no problem stock. Also your going by factory crank HP ratings.... which are many times much differrent then what the car actually makes.
    Mister2, but what I do know is that VR4s make around 300ftlbs tq, correct? Again, an STi weighs nearly 500lbs less than a VR4 or Stealth, and is still only 20hp short. How is a car with 3.91 gears, 3300lbs, 300hp/300tq, AWD (STi) run the same #s as a 3800lb car that has close to the same power output going to run the same times?

  16. #30
    Registered User 04wrx4keeps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Central NY/ Western PA (for school)
    Posts
    520
    I have heard soooo many different things about these cars, but what I know is that the last few times I have been to the track theres 2 of them that always come with a couple of different LT1 f-body's. I havent had a chance to talk to any of them but I've watched them all run a few times and both of the 3000's struggle to break into the 13's, and they both appear at least reletively modded (loud exhaust, bov on one, guages in one as well.).

    I do know that they are very heavy, Twin Turbo V-6's can deffinatly make serious power, but I cant see 120+whp gain from a couple of lbs of extra boost, and that would be what it would take to run that much weight into the 12's, especially since I've heard from many people they dont launch well.

    The whole thing about the stock 3000GT running with an STi, or anywhere far into the 13's just seems rediculous. A brand new VR4 wouldnt have had more than 270whp or so, and 20whp extra isnt going to make up for the 500+ lbs of extra weight. With a perfect driver I could imagine maybe 14.0 or 13.9 with perfect conditions for the VR4.

    The whole thing about the VR4 making more tq for longer makes no sense either, most of both cars time while accelerating down the strip will be spent in their torque curve, especially with both being awd cars. The STi is at little to no disadvantage here anyway, it makes pleanty of torque for most of its power band especially with its closer gearing. Even with the little bit of extra torque in the 3000 it will seem like less because the tq/weight ratio will be worse than the STi; I havent checked yet, but I would bet even if you took multiple points on a dynograph, the STi makes close to 250wtq for a good deal of the rpm range, and not whole lot less than that anywhere.
    Last edited by 04wrx4keeps; 06-27-2005 at 12:24 AM.
    Cobb Stage 2.5 VF-34 + uppipe
    Best ET so far - 13.1@103 with a 1.81 60'

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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