Tell us how it goes. when it happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue02Z
Printable View
Tell us how it goes. when it happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue02Z
You are the only person who takes everything so personally. Get a life, nobody wants to hear you bitch and complain because you get offended when people bash your precious imports.Quote:
Originally Posted by jrc1122
Nobody cares what you personally think, so it doesn't matter. If you love imports so much go somewhere else. It isn't that difficult of a concept, this isn't an import site.Quote:
Lets move on-- Personally, I think Wesman should be banned from any thread about any car that has less than 8 cylinders, because you have the same rubber stamp response for every single post. IT is old, and unrealistic. I have seen Evos and STIs beat LS1 many of times, and I have seen it the other way around.
Once again...your opinion. Nobody cares.Quote:
I never once said they were superior, I am just not so shallow or arrogant to believe that my car is completely superior in every aspect. Because it just
isn't true.
Evos and STIs suck in the snow with their stock performance tires. You'll get further with a FWD with all seasons then you will with an STI/Evo with summer tires.Quote:
What's next-- I could say that the EVO/ STI is better in the snow, and you would probably argue that. Comical.
I beat a STi at muncie speedway by 3/10 of a second......I'm pretty much stock except shortthrow and K&N + free mods and spec 2 clutch. Sadly, no video proof, only got a video of spanking a 04 GT by a good second :itsok:
I honestly don't think he knew how to drive. (Sti)
Man.. you guys get all the good runs, I wish I could find a stock or near stock LS1 to run with around here. But regardless like it's been stated before about the AWD vs RWD if we'd go from a dig you'd have to run me down and come to the 1/4 near dead even being both cars are low 13, high 12's with a driver mod. But from a 40 roll or higher, the stock Evo's and STi's just don't have enough to run with an LS1. Plus with all STi's being a 6-spd. with such low gear ratio they are just constantly shifting.. It would get so annoying, that's why I'm glad my Evo's the 5spd.
And also just so everyone knows I'm not a troll, I posted in the "new to site" section with the title "sup guys" around 2 weeks ago explaining why I was here.
High 12's in an STi or Evo?? I don't think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4G63inside
All the ones I've seen at the track have run high 13's. You're only going to hit a low 13 if you can drive your car perfectly, if you don't launch it just right you won't be running any low 13 second magazine times.
I'm lucky enough to own both an LS1 TA and a turbo Subaru Legacy GT. All I can say is that on the nice days, the Trans Am comes out of the garage!
On the rainy/cloudy/snow days, its all about the Subaru.
No comparing the two in a highway race, but 0-60 (typical stoplight encounters), they're pretty close.
Don't bash Subie, they're not rice. Subaru's are well made cars, with respectable power. Not like Honda, Hyundai or Toyota crapt. That STI should beat you 0-60, after that though your going to start reeling him in.
Kind of a pointless race really, there's little chance of you ever beating him off the line, even with DRs, and there's no chance for him to hold you off once the race hits the high mph numbers.
Most drivers of the awd cars I've ran into don't know how to launch them and bog them, so I usually get to kill them good from get go.
If your Subaru Legacy GT is close to your Trans Am in ANY race there is something seriously wrong with your T/A.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2000LS1Bird
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesman
Well not to rain on your parade or anything but the fastest all stock Evo RS was a 12.65 @ 111mph I believe with a 1/4 tank of gas. I've ran a 12.85 @ 108 in my stock 8.. It's all about the driver and the 60' time, when it comes to getting the best time out of any car. As far as seeing most running high 13's.. anything above a 13.6 for a stock Evo with a 10.5 hotside (05 and up) in my book is basically terrible.
Troll alert.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4G63inside
If you think anyone is going to believe those bullshit numbers than you must be on drugs.
You're honestly going to say that this Evo somehow gained 10MPH in 1/4 mile trap speed compared to every other stock Evo ever tested?? First off, the Evo RS has the same HP as ever other Evo (220-230WHP) and weighs 3219lbs. Its PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for the car to trap at 111MPH in stock form. Thats how its obvious that you are full of shit.
I've never seen a stock Evo run below a 13.5. Its just not common with average drivers. Most mag times (prepped track, professional driver) pull low 13's at 102MPH, which is about all the car is capable of. I also don't believe that you can a 12.85 @ 108 MPH in stock form, once again the car doesn't have enough power to hit 108MPH in the 1/4 in stock form, and a 12.8 is very uncommon.
I don't know whats so hard about the concept of Wheel Horsepower and weight that you ricers can't understand. With the stock power the car is putting to the wheels and the stock weight, the average driver will run a high 13 at about 100MPH. With a perfect, clutch frying launch and a perfect driver, low 13's are possible at around 102MPH. You're numbers just don't add up in any way, shape, or form.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesman
Call me what you want.. but to get on point, your basically saying that the difference between a high 13 second car and a low 13 second car is only 2mph in trap speed? :thinkin: Your forgetting the 60' time as I mentioned in my previous post, along with the addition of the gear ratio. If you have the same identical car that on one run cuts a 1.6 60' and on the next run it does a 2.0 60'... your already 4 tenths of a second behind and trying to play catch up, which isn't going to happen because the cars in this example are identical, and 1.6 has the jump and already gaining speed vs. the 2.0. On the 2.0 run your ET & trap speed are going to be lower than the 1.6 run.. it's just simple math if you think about it.
But let's get back on topic, cause I'm not here to have a pissing match. Good run with the STi, keep us updated with any new runs. :D
sti's are fun to run i have run one once. it was close. i pulled over 40 but up til then there was an advantage to the sti. gah i hate ricers though. they are so annoying. dude i know was trying to tell me that a stock 08 s2000 would walk all over my car without breaking a sweat. i told him to show me a stock s2000 that could do that and i would lick the spray paint on the hood of his civiv. lol.
I'll chalk that up to your obviously lack of knowledge of the Subaru Legacy GT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesman
The mags say 0-60 in 5.9.
Its AWD, Manual Trans, and Turbocharged. In a 0-60 sprint, it IS close to my TA, or any other generally stock LS1. The Legacy runs a low 14 in the 1/4, so past 60, its not much of a race. But from a stoplight, it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmybling31
:haha: I had people tell me a S2000 could beat a C5 Vette. I had a 2002 S2000 and there's no way it could hang with my T/A except for a 40 - 70 race. Before and after that the car does not have much go to it.
Seems that you are the one with the lack of knowledge. LS1 F-bodies have been documented to run between 4.8 and 5.2 seconds 0-60. Thats an average of a full second faster than your Legacy GT - WITH the Legacy having an AWD launch.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2000LS1Bird
Not only that, but there is no comparison in actual acceleration. Meaning without launching either car, it wouldn't even be a race. Factoring in drivetrain loss, you're Subaru is putting about 190HP to the wheels. The LS1 is putting ~300WHP down. Not only that, but the Legacy 2.5 GT weighs 3530lbs, which is more than an LS1 F-body.
So basically you're saying that your Legacy GT, which is down 110WHP and weighs almost 100lbs more, is just as fast 0-60 as your Trans Am.
Like I said, no offense, but something is seriously wrong with your car if the Legacy feels just as fast.
Just drop the "no offense" line of crapt already. You're clearly trying to pick on me, call my Trans Am slow, or otherwise put me down.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesman
The '05 Legacy GT has a curb weight of 3300 lbs, right at what an A4 Trans Am weighs.
The Legacy has a final drive ratio of 4.11, my A4 Trans Am 2.73.
I've run both cars at my local 1/4 mile track, its in Tulsa, and its typically a slow track. The Legacy ran a 14.4 @96mph, the Trans Am a 13.5 @103mph.
However, although I've never lined them up together, 0-60 I still maintain they would be less than a carlength apart.
--
In racing it's not just wheel hp and weight. There is also grip and gearing. Just because someone does not have the same power their gearing makes up for it.
How many guys here went to 3.73 or 4.11 gears and drag raidals and how much of a difference at the track did you have? I bet you had a big difference.
Power is nothing without grip.
Please, someone post a video so he could see with his own eye's ! Apparently thats the only way he'll believe anything about STi's and Evo's. Besides, STi's and Evo's are not made for this kind of racing (though they do very well). Let see a LS1 around a track (wet or dry) against either vehicle or in the dirt/snow !
Actually F-bodies handle damn well with a few suspension mods. Plenty of guys road race their LS1's, what are you trying to imply?? An LS1 with upgraded suspension and tires will easily handle just as well as an STi or Evo, it just takes some actual skill to drive it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daz-E
As for the dirt/snow?? Pointless to wreck a street car by doing that shit. If you want to go offroading, buy a damn truck.
Its pretty easy to hydroplane an F-body as well.
Thats one reason why my Trans Am is never gonna see the rain. :)