by a CLS6 with just AEM and lowered! I went to the track tonight and ran into a random member. We ran against each other and he beat me 14.4 to 14.9 (one of my worst runs). He ran a best of 14.3 (don't know the trap) while the best I could run was a 14.7 @96. I suck but it was fun. It was meeting you Nelson, if you read this (can't remember your username eventhough you told me twice!).

Other track notables:
stage 3 A4 (a buddy's car, also a member here) ran a 14.3 @96 on pump gas.
12.5 Supra (only really impressive import...everything else was american muscle)
13.5 Z on spray (not sure how much, but saw him refilling).
2 16-17 second big rigs! (not fast but unusual)
13.5 Evo
14.5 SRT
a few mid-12 cobras
a 13.5 mean sounding GTP

Oh and a sweet looking 13.5 new CLK55

 

14.9????/ and you have headers and icebox???

stock for TL-S is 14.8 you should of ran at least a 14.2 or 14.3

maybe next time man

 

I sucketh. my PB is a 14.6. I you're right though, other members have hit 14.2-14.5 with the similar mods. Oh well, what can I say.

 

____________

what s ur 60' time

 

ouch man, that sucks, keep trying though.

the "Z" ran a 13.5 with spray? wtf

 

60' time sucks. best I've netted is 2.33 and that was yesterday. I'm wondering if my 18s are hurting me? when I ran a 14.6 I was on stockers. I might use my wife's OZ SLs next spring.

my biggest issue with the times is my trap. I would want and expect at the least a 97. Nothing is wrong with the car because if it were an actuator I wouldn't be trapping 96. I don't think my normal 14.6-14.8 is terrible but it is on the higher end of the 14.2-14.7 average for my mods. I only know of 4 CLSs (no TLSs) that have run a 14.2-14.3 with just intake and headers because others have pullies too. The four I can think of in auto are mrsteve, bulldog01, mattg, and darrinb. I know a few have run 14.6 with just intake. Oh well. I think 60' would help me if I could launch but the trap still sucks!

 

13.5 evo? stock evo's should run really low 13's... tuned and modded right they run 12 and even 11's easily.

anyways, sounds like you had a fun night at the track

 

Yeah it was fun. Oh and I fogot that on my first run I lost to a 12.1 second cobra...looked sweet as hell!

 

^from behind

 

People can't drive them like that though. To get those times you need a serious clutch drop.

 

Work on that launch

I went last night too. My best was 14.2 @ 98. Couldn't get any back to back runs in which usually improves my time.

There were some fast f*cking imports last night. An eclipse GSX on nitrous ran 10.01 @ 139

 

good god 10.01 @139 is ridiculous and faster than any of the bikes I saw last night! I have seen a 9-second bike before, just not last night.

 

There were a few bikes in the 8's last night

 

Work on that 60'.

 

^my buddies 6speed "Z" ran a 13.6 stock....so thats why im asking, maybe it was auto, but still....

 

The evos suck on 1/4 mile. they run 14.1 at best. The should be capable or running running 13 sec if they had 30 more hp. The sti runs 13.1 @ best

 

Actually a stock evo is very capable of a low 13 since its just a smingen slower than an STi

 

ummmm.... tuned EVOs are much quicker than similarly tuned STis... stock they're a bit slower... but with few parts evos are quicker. and with some more parts for relatively cheap (compared to prices for our cl-s) they can run 11's.

stock they're abit slower than the STi.

how the hell would an AWD rally car, the EVO, run a 14.1 stock?! with a really bad driver

even with a bad driver they would be sub 14 second, mid-high 13's.


and mr. steve, you're right a low 13 second time stock would mean a serious clutch drop off the line, but thats how to get that killer 60' time that they need for good quarter mile runs... its all about the AWD launch since higher end they dont perform as nearly as well (as with the sti)

 

They'll run 14.1 or less, but at like 97 mph.

97mph means on the highway I'll smoke 'em

 

guys anything is possible w people who dont know how to drive, when i went to the track last week i saw a brand new c6 vette run a 13.4, really no excuse for that

 

Since when is 30 hp and lower geares in the diff a smingen. Mathamaticlly, its even impossible for a stock evo to break high 13's. While the STI has been tested by every magazine i've seen to run 13.1 and the evo 14.1.

Alot of people be talking like they actually understand the mechanincs of these cars but they cant even phatom how it really works.

 

Well phycisist Alex, please do tell me more about the evo You make it sound like you know so much yet you haven't proved you know shit.

show me a magazine that gets only a 14.1 with a stock evo and I will show you a dipshit that doesn't know how to drive (hopefully it wasn't you..if so I apologize about the dipshit comment). where the fuck are you getting your info from, what magazine? The evo is slightly lighter and gets its full torque earlier than the STi does at 3500 rpms vs 4k for the STi. You say "mathematically" well if you look "realistically" you will see that you are wrong! As a matter of fact here are some articles for you to read...I'm too lazy to find real world experiences:

http://motortrend.com/roadtests/seda...2_first_mitsu/
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=2

 

My buddy's Evo with an ECU flash and intake trapped 106 mph on pump gas, with 3/4 tank and full weight, and his school books. I don't think the car goes from a 14 sec car to a 12 sec car with $200.

 

Yeah there's a dude on here running 13.6 with his stock Z as well. That's why i too was wondering what was up with that run.

 

^^, theres not many people that can run 13.6 in a stock z, like i said above anything is possible, we dont know what went on with that z

 

 

here are some dynos of EVO8's and STi's from the same dyno.

 

This guy doesn't know what he is talking about. Those dynos are helpful Ray, thanks!

 

lol, dipshit...the Evo and STI are fucking IDENTICAL. You can't compare these cars because the drivability of these cars is CRUCIAL! I've seen them BOTH run bests of high 12's from awesome drivers. And I've seen em both in the mid 14s! I've been a member on the lancerforums forever, and it seems the general consensus of most board members on there run between 13.1 - 13.5. And I've seen the subie forums and they're the same shit. I would take the Evo anyday over the subie because the 4963 engine has been around forver and can be EASILY moddable....where the subie's 2.5l boxer is newer and isn't as experienced as the older version. From most things that I'v read, the subie will USUALLY top the Evo in the 1/4, but by a smidgen; that is, stock for stock. However, in the twisties, the Evo takes the Subie for one hell of a ride. Either way, they're both awesome cars, and people underestimate them. They don't realize these cars are WRC RALLY cars that have a SHITLOAD of background behind them. Now people are taking them and using em for the dragstrip and shit.

 

 

I don't know shit. Is that right Ferrizo, what ever your gay ass name is. You guys think that you can base information on peoples statments that "yae, i ran a 13.4 with my evo". Thats BULLSHIT everyone over exagerates. Know body wants to look like a punk ass bitch like frezzio. Mutha fuckas showing me dyno sheets. what does that have to do with 1/4 mile. You can have ass! much power ass! you want, that don't mean shit. Its all about traction. E.G. a Camaro ss has 309hp+ at the wheels an 04 Mustang cobra has 312hp at the wheels The sti has 232 at the wheels(they all run low 13's)...WTF does DYNO's have to do with The 1/4 mile. Each Horse power = 550 lbs of thrust. It's erelavent you fucken Idiot.
DEM1k- Who the fuck are you. Shut your fucken mouth....
UhhuH really you saw somebody run 12's in a stock evo and the MR version has yet to come out... Shut up you dork.
Look, This is about baseing your shit from non experiences and me baseing it on real life experience. I worked for car and driver in Michigan. Where most of the tests are done. They would take cars and run them down the track over 50 times to get the best 1/4 mile time, Skid pad, et cetera That 13.4 from an evo MR that car and driver got. Took them teens amount of try's and they only got a 13.4 with a proffessional drive, and you think you can run a low 13 in one. Your out of your little mind. oooo by the way I am a phycisist.

 

well you just made a complete ass of yourself

dont bash well respected members just becauase they you.

 

Hey johnny fucking nobody, just cuz you washed cars for C&D doesn't make you an expert. I've seen with my own eyes what the evo can do so you can kiss my ass. I'm so offended about you making fun of my name too Not only did you prove to all of us that you know shit, but you also provided some insight on your extensive vocabulary. You call me gay but who's the one that moved to frisco!?

Are you dumb?? this is a good quote, if you are trying to prove us right. Just a little info, since you obviously didn't learn anything at C&D, the EVO has the very similar output to the STi (read within 4%) with an AWD system (read it gets similar traction) so why wouldn't it be running in the mid 13s? I just don't get where you are coming from.

You are a tool and just made me dumber for having read your nonsense! I guess you missed what your former employer had to say but I guess they don't know dick either!

http://www.caranddriver.com/article...6&page_number=2

"The company puts the weight increase down to the heavier front and center differentials, but they don't seem to retard forward progress. Our MR tester hustled to 60 mph in 4.7 seconds and covered the quarter in 13.4 seconds at 104 mph. The Evo VIII clocked 60 mph in 5.0 seconds and the quarter in 13.6 at 101."

I guess knowing stuff about cars isn't a prerequisite to work at C&D!

 

doh! the car and driver link no longer exists!

 

The first one works (in my initial response), but more importantly the quote is below the link in my last post.

 

I don't see what's so hard to believe about the EVO running 13's. You do know the MR is only 5 hp more and 13 ft lbs tq...that's enough to make a 14.1 sec car a 13.4 sec car? Any car only gets it's best times from getting the fastest 60 ft. Launching it hard is a prereq to a good time in any AWD car....even the S4 biturbo with it's much better low end and tq. Why say the EVO has to be launched hard as if other cars don't have to? So are you admitting an EVO can pull 13's with a good launch? Jugding by how little the 4g63 has changed over the past 13 years, I'd say mitsu has a good grip on how to do things. So the STi and EVO make very similar power, weigh almost exactly the same, yet the gearing in the 2 cars accounts for a full second difference in the 1/4? The STi's displacement make it easier to drive fast. I know that from first hand experience. I think you should ask whatever school gave you a degree in physics for you $$$ back.

 

yeah, i feel dumber just trying to figure out this guy's spelling and grammar.

 

this thread needs to get back on track or someone is going to get dished a beating for highjacking it..

p.s. Feriz, sorry I missed the AIM you sent me the other day... I was in the middle of work.


carry on

 

damn bro..... 21 and you claim to be a phycisist, guess thats 4 years gone down the drain.....

 

I have nothing to say