View Full Version : Even with STI
snosk8tr123
12-11-2007, 02:55 PM
My b7 is chipped with giac and i have the forge dv and bov spacer. I was even with an STI from light-to-light speeds. But when we reached higher speeds he had more power. He was stage 2 (exhaust+software). An srt8 was racing next to us too but he was just destroying us. I never thought i'd be as fast as an sti. That surprised me
redhott06
12-11-2007, 04:26 PM
that doesnt seem right for some reason.. sti is lighter with more power, am i wrong?
08lichmanj
12-11-2007, 07:00 PM
yeah but i think the torque is similar if not greater when chipped with a few bolt ons for the a4 iirc
viperdsa
12-11-2007, 07:48 PM
Still doesn't seem right. The STI is putting down 300 300 at the crank stock, looked up Cobb stage II numbers and thats at about 250hp and 300ft/lbs at the wheels. IDK. Giac must be putting some special stuff in their tunings. [drive]
snosk8tr123
12-12-2007, 10:10 AM
Haha the old one's are 300 300. BUt the newer ones are about 293 hp and 290 tq. I was really surprised when it happened but it did. He was passing me at higher speeds but from light-to-light, we were even.
snosk8tr123
12-12-2007, 10:30 AM
but it was stage 2, which is the mystery
1-CLEAN-A4
12-12-2007, 12:06 PM
haha maybe we ran the same guy. Was it a black one? I had the same outcome EXACT same situation. I think he is a terrible driver though b/c we shouldn't be able to keep up with him i don't think. I have Revo stage2, TP, and mufflers hehe. I'm also quattro, AT. Go figure.....I am pushing close to about 20 lbs. of boost with revo i think, I can't really pay attention to it while driving
b6onboost
12-12-2007, 12:13 PM
The SRT8 and STI have near identical performance.
STI: 4.9 0-60 13.3 in the 1/4
SRT8:4.8 0-60 13.4 in the 1/4
Fastest chipped B7 i've heard of posted 5.6 and a 13.9
Drivers equal, and cars all running properly...the STI would've been destoying you like the SRT8.
snosk8tr123
12-12-2007, 07:12 PM
Maybe the driver sucked, but he was nice. It was a white sti. Im pretty sure the srt8 was modded cause it was way loud. Btw it was the JEEP srt8 not the Chrysler.
07audi4
12-12-2007, 08:49 PM
It was prob just a wrx with an STi spoiler
sean1.8t
12-12-2007, 09:40 PM
Haha the old one's are 300 300. BUt the newer ones are about 293 hp and 290 tq.
The SRT8 and STI have near identical performance.
STI: 4.9 0-60 13.3 in the 1/4
SRT8:4.8 0-60 13.4 in the 1/4
Fastest chipped B7 i've heard of posted 5.6 and a 13.9
Drivers
haha, you guys read Car&Driver too much..
go take a stroll over on NASIOC sometime and see what these cars actually do.(or evolutionnm forums, SRT4 forums, etc..)
the stock(saying it again for claryfication, 100% STOCK) 2007 STi can put down 300Awhp and pull a 12.9 quarter mile..
hell, evo's can get into the mid 11's with just $1500 in mods(this being specific to the RS models)
INTEGRATION
12-13-2007, 01:34 AM
Keep it safe guys- try not to endanger other people if it's possible.
Haha the old one's are 300 300. BUt the newer ones are about 293 hp and 290 tq.
they are exactly the same...its just that the newer cars have SAE cetified horsepower.
Looky \/ \/
SAE-certified horsepower
In 2005, the Society of Automotive Engineers introduced a new test procedure for engine horsepower and torque.[5] The procedure eliminates some of the areas of flexibility in power measurement, and requires an independent observer present when engines are measured. The test is voluntary, but engines completing it can be advertised as "SAE-certified".
Many manufacturers began switching to the new rating immediately, often with surprising results. The rated output of Cadillac's supercharged Northstar V8 jumped from 440 hp (328 kW) to 469 hp (350 kW) under the new tests, while the rating for Toyota's Camry 3.0 L 1MZ-FE V6 fell from 210 hp (157 kW) to 190 hp (142 kW). The first engine certified under the new program was the 7.0 L LS7 used in the 2006 Chevrolet Corvette Z06. Certified power rose slightly from 500 hp (373 kW) to 505 hp (377 kW).
PS. A stage 2 STi will pwn any 2.0T that has the factory turbo.
snosk8tr123
12-17-2007, 07:43 PM
then i dont know what happened. but we were even
he probably wasnt trying.
sean1.8t
12-18-2007, 07:00 PM
he probably wasnt trying.
no need to be a harsh about it.. there are many different senario's that could have been present for the outcome of this "race"
he could have been driving a 2.5RS with all the body/badges swapped
he could have bought the STi, and then removed the turbo and put it on his Honda VTAK!
his wheels could have been installed backwards
he could have had a boost leak
there could have been a tailwind for the A4, while simultaniously beeing a headwind for the STi
there could have been little VAG gnom's on rollerskates pushing your car from behind to give you an extra 100hp
the list goes on...and on..
haha, jk[:)]
evilgabbie
12-18-2007, 08:46 PM
either way .. grats on keeping up =)
personally.. i think it's not always the car.. come on, we aren't studying for school, don't always just compare specs from magazines or onlines
we aren't all professional drivers.. i think you know what i mean
bander9
12-19-2007, 10:05 AM
X2 nice run i honestly think he was a bad driver becuase i have raced a couple of guys in stis in my 07 mustang with full exhuast and toasted them but i remember i raced a black one one day and i was barely nudging him by not even half a car all the way up to high speeds. i consider myself to be a pretty decent driver but i think he actually knew how to drive his car cause i know stis are supposed to be faster than mustangs. very nice though a kill is a kill who cares what anyone says
sean1.8t
12-19-2007, 08:56 PM
either way .. grats on keeping up =)
personally.. i think it's not always the car.. come on, we aren't studying for school, don't always just compare specs from magazines or onlines
we aren't all professional drivers.. i think you know what i mean
i think the "bad driver", "good driver" thing is funny. there were pressing the gas pedal down for a given period of time while shifting.. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to do that.. if it was a road coarse/autoX/drag, then you might have an argument there
evilgabbie
12-19-2007, 10:25 PM
some people shift weird
bander9
12-20-2007, 03:05 PM
i think the "bad driver", "good driver" thing is funny. there were pressing the gas pedal down for a given period of time while shifting.. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to do that.. if it was a road coarse/autoX/drag, then you might have an argument there
good pint but some people just dont know which gear or rpms to start at and how to shift gears
i bet the STi didnt shift at all
marty was here
12-20-2007, 06:07 PM
lol @ bad driver in the sti
jimmyrecluse
12-21-2007, 07:57 AM
No way, your car is super. That STI driver sucks. He has a fake STI. He wasnt trying. He was playing with you. That isnt right. STI didnt know you were racing. STI driver couldnt shift. There was something wrong with his car. He didnt have any oil in his car. No way. You are wrong. You didnt hang with him.
mehmehmehmehmeh mehmehmehmehmehmehmeh
^^^ I dont know if you are being serious, but youre right.
jimmyrecluse
12-23-2007, 12:00 PM
^^ Im not. Just the usual know it all responses.
I wasnt there. I dont know. Will I think I can "beat all" STI's? no. Whatever he experienced is what it was.
Six Speed Turbo
12-24-2007, 12:22 AM
i bet the STi didnt shift at all
When I read this s#!t I was laughing, because I could picture a guy in a STi driving from light to light redlining the S#!t out of his car in first gear the whole time they're racing. Then Jimmy says some crazy S#!t about the STi not having any FuC#!nG oil in his car. This forum never seems to be at a lack of sarcasm/people making fun of other peoples stories............... really leaning towards the making fun option.
RobE and Jimmy you are two silly Moth#&F*Ck#rs........ but you are good in my book.
jimmyrecluse
12-24-2007, 09:06 AM
^ Same here man. You have always been cool.
tomasmdiego
01-29-2008, 05:11 PM
i beat an 900hp STI in reverse
VonPooper
01-30-2008, 05:12 PM
you were even because you have a forge diverter valve. if you had for example...a 710n...the sti would have walked you.
Pat@Forge
01-31-2008, 08:25 AM
IT would have been a mean feat to put a 710N on a 2.0T :)
Slo.Mo.Shun.
01-31-2008, 10:49 AM
I must have been a WRX, since not even Kristokes 13.7 quarter mile would have done.
SeattleAWD
02-06-2008, 09:53 AM
0-60 times are irrelevant. If you held with him at all, he's gonna pull on ya like crazy in anything above 70. He has bigger engine displacement.
As a former Subaru owner, I can tell you that the flywheel to wheel horsepower conversion is horrible on Subarus. AWD will always cost you some of the power, but IIRC the Audi does a much better job in the conversion. That could be why you held with him at all.
sean1.8t
02-06-2008, 10:50 AM
0-60 times are irrelevant. If you held with him at all, he's gonna pull on ya like crazy in anything above 70. He has bigger engine displacement.
As a former Subaru owner, I can tell you that the flywheel to wheel horsepower conversion is horrible on Subarus. AWD will always cost you some of the power, but IIRC the Audi does a much better job in the conversion. That could be why you held with him at all.
haha, you have no idea what you are talking about. the subaru's and Audi's hp loss throught the drivetrain is almost identical. longitudinal engine setup with equal length halfshafts.. around 22-25% of crank power lost through the drivetrain
now the mitsubishi power/drive train setup is a bit better. it's a transverse motor setup with uneven halfshafts.. the 4g63 guys claim around 18-20% loss
and he didn't win because he has more displacement, that's part of it. but the main reason that an STi will easily pull on a stock turbo'd FSI is due to the fact that it has a MUCH bigger turbo.. it can flow at over 400bhp. the stock k03 maxes out at like 250bhp on the 2.0. if that
INTEGRATION
02-06-2008, 02:42 PM
haha, you have no idea what you are talking about. the subaru's and Audi's hp loss throught the drivetrain is almost identical. longitudinal engine setup with equal length halfshafts.. around 22-25% of crank power lost through the drivetrain
now the mitsubishi power/drive train setup is a bit better. it's a transverse motor setup with uneven halfshafts.. the 4g63 guys claim around 18-20% loss
and he didn't win because he has more displacement, that's part of it. but the main reason that an STi will easily pull on a stock turbo'd FSI is due to the fact that it has a MUCH bigger turbo.. it can flow at over 400bhp. the stock k03 maxes out at like 250bhp on the 2.0. if that
I never knew the STi engine was a "longitudinal" layout :P *sarcasm*
But as for the Evo, the AWD system is a bit different though; it's like the A3, it favors a front wheel drive bias which has very different characteristics vs. quattro.
sean1.8t
02-06-2008, 04:38 PM
I never knew the STi engine was a "longitudinal" layout :P *sarcasm*
[confused]
...
kristokes
02-06-2008, 04:49 PM
I was even with an STI from light-to-light speeds. But when we reached higher speeds he had more power.
This just means the STI didnt know how to launch the car. lol
AND you still LOST. lol So technically you werent even with an STI
INTEGRATION
02-06-2008, 06:13 PM
[confused]
...
Well the STi has a "boxer" engine with horizontally opposed cylinders (like Porsches) so technically it's not longitudinal. Longitudinal refers to an "straight" inline cylinder engine placement.
sean1.8t
02-06-2008, 07:11 PM
Well the STi has a "boxer" engine with horizontally opposed cylinders (like Porsches) so technically it's not longitudinal. Longitudinal refers to an "straight" inline cylinder engine placement.
haha, no. it doesn't.. being an inline or "flat"(the word you were looking for to describe the boxer engine) is not an indication of longitudinal or transverse..
transverse = crankshaft going from side to side of the vehicle
longitudinal = crankshaft going from front to back of the vehicle
no matter where the cylinders are, or where they are pointing has nothing to do with those terms.. its the crankshaft that determines that [;)]