Stock WRX STi Against Three Tuned WRX Cars
10-27-2003, 01:00 PM
#1
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Stock WRX STi Against Three Tuned WRX Cars
How does the stock STi stand compared to three very well modified WRX cars. Find out at Acura-CL Automotive News:
http://www.acura-cl.com/forums/forum...s=&forumid=142
http://www.acura-cl.com/forums/forum...s=&forumid=142
10-28-2003, 07:20 AM
#2
Lead Footed
Interesting points to note here.
I just get all worked up everytime I hear someone say "no way you could have beat that FASTER car", "it has way more HP
Well, there's a lot more to winning races and being quicker than just more HP yadda yadda . . .
This note within gavriil's post is just one key point.
* * * Here's where things got interesting. The Rally Performance WRX ran the 1320 in 13.6 seconds at 101 mph and the all-powerful SPI WRX ran it in 13.8 seconds at 102 mph. Those of you who already inspected the dyno chart are screaming in disbelief. How is it possible that the SPI car could be beaten by the least powerful car in the test? The answer is twofold. First, all you dyno disciples need to look carefully at the SPI car's torque curve. See that huge lag until 4000 rpm? That matters * * *
There are of course a multitude of things that also make a difference. So the next time someone says they beat a "technically" faster car, whether by pure trade rag numbers or fact, they probably did win. There'd be no reason to mess around racing someone if one could just show someone the latest issue of Rash&Trash, and had over the money to the loser.
OBTW, I managed to beat a Mustang GT last night . . :P
Ruf
I just get all worked up everytime I hear someone say "no way you could have beat that FASTER car", "it has way more HP
Well, there's a lot more to winning races and being quicker than just more HP yadda yadda . . .
This note within gavriil's post is just one key point.
* * * Here's where things got interesting. The Rally Performance WRX ran the 1320 in 13.6 seconds at 101 mph and the all-powerful SPI WRX ran it in 13.8 seconds at 102 mph. Those of you who already inspected the dyno chart are screaming in disbelief. How is it possible that the SPI car could be beaten by the least powerful car in the test? The answer is twofold. First, all you dyno disciples need to look carefully at the SPI car's torque curve. See that huge lag until 4000 rpm? That matters * * *
There are of course a multitude of things that also make a difference. So the next time someone says they beat a "technically" faster car, whether by pure trade rag numbers or fact, they probably did win. There'd be no reason to mess around racing someone if one could just show someone the latest issue of Rash&Trash, and had over the money to the loser.
OBTW, I managed to beat a Mustang GT last night . . :P
Ruf
10-28-2003, 09:08 AM
#5
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by RUF87
Interesting points to note here.
I just get all worked up everytime I hear someone say "no way you could have beat that FASTER car", "it has way more HP
Well, there's a lot more to winning races and being quicker than just more HP yadda yadda . . .
This note within gavriil's post is just one key point.
* * * Here's where things got interesting. The Rally Performance WRX ran the 1320 in 13.6 seconds at 101 mph and the all-powerful SPI WRX ran it in 13.8 seconds at 102 mph. Those of you who already inspected the dyno chart are screaming in disbelief. How is it possible that the SPI car could be beaten by the least powerful car in the test? The answer is twofold. First, all you dyno disciples need to look carefully at the SPI car's torque curve. See that huge lag until 4000 rpm? That matters * * *
Interesting points to note here.
I just get all worked up everytime I hear someone say "no way you could have beat that FASTER car", "it has way more HP
Well, there's a lot more to winning races and being quicker than just more HP yadda yadda . . .
This note within gavriil's post is just one key point.
* * * Here's where things got interesting. The Rally Performance WRX ran the 1320 in 13.6 seconds at 101 mph and the all-powerful SPI WRX ran it in 13.8 seconds at 102 mph. Those of you who already inspected the dyno chart are screaming in disbelief. How is it possible that the SPI car could be beaten by the least powerful car in the test? The answer is twofold. First, all you dyno disciples need to look carefully at the SPI car's torque curve. See that huge lag until 4000 rpm? That matters * * *
HP ratings are AT THE CRANK as we all know. How much power is put on the ground is what matters.
WHich many times makes me wonder why dont manufacturers state that number instead. Or both crank and wheel HP.
Talking about that, I have been reading several articles now confirming that the way HP is reported in the USA will be changing in the near future. A 3rd party, witness will have to be present during the engine tests and it will become law that engines should not fall more than 3% of the claimed peak HP rating.
All of the above by the way are happening in Europe currently and I believe Japan as well.
10-28-2003, 10:15 AM
#6
Lead Footed
Originally posted by gavriil
Talking about that, I have been reading several articles now confirming that the way HP is reported in the USA will be changing in the near future. A 3rd party, witness will have to be present during the engine tests and it will become law that engines should not fall more than 3% of the claimed peak HP rating.
All of the above by the way are happening in Europe currently and I believe Japan as well.
Talking about that, I have been reading several articles now confirming that the way HP is reported in the USA will be changing in the near future. A 3rd party, witness will have to be present during the engine tests and it will become law that engines should not fall more than 3% of the claimed peak HP rating.
All of the above by the way are happening in Europe currently and I believe Japan as well.
Ruf
10-28-2003, 10:50 AM
#7
Pro
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Stoneham MA
Age: 47
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHich many times makes me wonder why dont manufacturers state that number instead
unless everyone plays by this rule, it's going to hurt the company's who advertise at the wheels. Most people don't know the difference.
Trending Topics
10-28-2003, 11:11 AM
#8
Stay or leave
Its pretty obvious why in America they provide HP at the crank, cause its a larger number! And the larger the number, the more people seem to like it, the more it sells, and the more money they make.
10-28-2003, 01:36 PM
#9
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by Reddly9007
Its pretty obvious why in America they provide HP at the crank, cause its a larger number! And the larger the number, the more people seem to like it, the more it sells, and the more money they make.
Its pretty obvious why in America they provide HP at the crank, cause its a larger number! And the larger the number, the more people seem to like it, the more it sells, and the more money they make.
HP at the crank is what everyone around the world claim. It's the way the tests are done and the tolerances that are in question in the USA.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
handsom-hustla
Car Parts for Sale
70
11-13-2015 05:04 PM