http://forums.nasioc.com/forum...66990

holy crap, is all I can say! all those guys with $$$ in their STX WRXs are going to be pissed...

 

It *might* still be fair only if they keep the evo stock.

But if the evo gets put in stx, so should the sti. These two are just born to compete against each other.

 

Bleh! From what I've heard this car should be excluded from STX and go straight to ASP where I think it could contend quite favorably when modded to the limit. Some of the dyno numbers that have been coming out on these cars are ridiculous, with AWD and short gearing they're going to be able to use it all as well. Not to mention the suspension and chassis doesn't seem to be any slouch.

Oh well...

E36 M3 - still excluded... bah!

 

As stated on the Street Touring boards the Evo is about 100lbs heavier than the current WRX and the Evo is pretty much weaned out to the top of it's power. While current STX mods should bring the WRX up to par with the Evo in the power department even though the Evo has 40-60 more hp.

But the STi is not legal and shouldn't be allowed into STX due the the 2.0L turbo limit for the rules.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CivicSiRacer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">As stated on the Street Touring boards the Evo is about 100lbs heavier than the current WRX and the Evo is pretty much weaned out to the top of it's power. While current STX mods should bring the WRX up to par with the Evo in the power department even though the Evo has 40-60 more hp.

But the STi is not legal and shouldn't be allowed into STX due the the 2.0L turbo limit for the rules.</TD></TR></TABLE>

That's not his point...

The EVO with STX legal mods isn't going to stay at the stock power figures.


My opinion, there needs to be an inclusion/exclusion list for STX... Neon SRT-4 SHOULD be allowed, STi and EVO 8 should NOT be allowed. My 2 cents.

 

With an EVO 8 or STi I would assume your gaining in the range of 20-30hp under the STS/STX rules of just adding a K&N cold air intake, header, cat replaced or moved and mandrel bent larger cat back free flow exhaust system. And then there are the mods/upgrades you can do to the turbo system itself.

I think in time and with proper tuning the EVO 8 and STi will be putting down Hp and Tq numbers well beyond the spec sheet data.

 

Well what I was trying to say that since the WRX is choked off alot from factory and the Evo is basically running as hard as it can, I think the hp/torque numbers would be closer. The Evo is running at a mind boggling 19psi.

But remember Autocross is 90% driver, 5% car and 5% CRAZY MOJO too I still think the Evo should be legal cause it does meet the requirements of the class 2.0L engine, while the STi has a 2.5L.

 

If the EVO makes it in, then why not the STi and the later M3's? I mean, since the SCCA seems to have their heads even further up their asses when it comes to ST rules, why not just ruin STX altogether?

Or, put all FWD cars in STS (regardless of diffs) and all AWD/RWD/turbo cars in STX? Open up the STX boost rules and let everyone reflash their ECUs and add boost to their hearts content.

It's almost time for ST1, ST2, ST3, etc.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CivicSiRacer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well what I was trying to say that since the WRX is choked off alot from factory and the Evo is basically running as hard as it can, I think the hp/torque numbers would be closer. The Evo is running at a mind boggling 19psi.

But remember Autocross is 90% driver, 5% car and 5% CRAZY MOJO too I still think the Evo should be legal cause it does meet the requirements of the class 2.0L engine, while the STi has a 2.5L.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I've seen some RIDICULOUS dyno numbers being put out by EVO's with just exhaust mods and a simple intake and slightly more boost(think 300+AWHP). Since you can't bump the boost up in STX(I think) - the WRX is still going to be running ~14psi max on a much smaller turbo, which goes to about 10psi at redline.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My opinion, there needs to be an inclusion/exclusion list for STX... Neon SRT-4 SHOULD be allowed, STi and EVO 8 should NOT be allowed. My 2 cents.</TD></TR></TABLE>

There is an exclusion list,

From http://moutons.org/sccasolo/Ru....html:

"Additionally excluded cars: BMW M3 (E36 and E46), BMW M5 (all), Mitsubishi Evo 8, Subaru Sti."

Yet if that is changed, I can easily seeing the EVO8 having an easy time with a modded WRX and ITR.

[rant]I still personally don't see why the E36 M3 is excluded from STX. The power is not overwhelming, the suspension is good but nothing REALLY trick(which the EVO8 and STi are bordering on STOCK IMO!). I think it would most other cars in STX could easily compete with an E36 M3 with the proper preparation, which I don't think the class has really seen. I'm not saying I want this because I think I could win the class, as I would soundly get my **** handed to me by my local STX competitiors, as well as BStock currently( ), but just looking at the situation logically, it seems an E36 M3 is definitely not an overdog - especially if the EVO8 is allowed in the class.[/rant]

BTW - all M5's are excluded as well. I can't see even a well setup E39/E34 M5 even coming CLOSE to trouncing any of the current cars in STX. While it not really fitting with the character of the class - these things are HUGE vehicles to pilot on a tight autox course. I've seen a handful autocross at a BMWCCA event, and while they can kinda move on a high speed course - the only way to describe them attacking it is by power alone. Just brutishly attacking the pavement to push this ungainly sedan around the cones. They really haul some *** on a track though!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Def &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Some of the dyno numbers that have been coming out on these cars are ridiculous</TD></TR></TABLE>

Anybody know whp of stock Evo 8s? At least according to the magazines, this thing seems to be way faster than what 271 hp should do on a 3100 lbs awd car. Heck that's just about 30-35 hp more than what my talon should be making at the crank and I'm no where near 4.5 sec 0-60 or 13 flat 1/4. I would guess just like dodge did with the srt4 (which makes like 225 at the wheels instead of at the crank), Mitsu could have under estimated (on purpose?) the EVO's power. There's no way 19 psi (stock boost on the evo) on the 4g63 using that turbo makes *only* 271 hp at the crank.

 

[QUOTE=WRXRacer111
holy crap, is all I can say! all those guys with $$$ in their STX WRXs are going to be pissed... [/QUOTE]

Looks like Grady Wood and Howard agree...EVO in STX.!!

 

If the car fits the rules, it should not be excluded, period. Don't you think people were bemoaning having to run against the WRX? If what everybody is saying about the Evo is true, Mitsubishi just built a better car. People with WRXs made the wrong decision. Queue the violins. Babies. 95 whp Civics win in STS. Drive better.

:edit--This was pointed more at the nasioc.com forum not at anyone here:

 

I'm just peeved at the loop hole people found with the update/backdate rule for STS/STX 2000lbs and a 1989 Civic Si motor = FAST!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hracer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Anybody know whp of stock Evo 8s? At least according to the magazines, this thing seems to be way faster than what 271 hp should do on a 3100 lbs awd car. Heck that's just about 30-35 hp more than what my talon should be making at the crank and I'm no where near 4.5 sec 0-60 or 13 flat 1/4. I would guess just like dodge did with the srt4 (which makes like 225 at the wheels instead of at the crank), Mitsu could have under estimated (on purpose?) the EVO's power. There's no way 19 psi (stock boost on the evo) on the 4g63 using that turbo makes *only* 271 hp at the crank.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Go over to Japan and you'll never see a car coming for a OEM dealer/maker that claims to make more then 300hp TOTAL!! 300Z TT, Supra TT, Skyline GTR, EVO 1-8 and any other turboed supercar made on the island. It's been a gentleman agreement for years to underlist the actual Hp output of their cars for I think safty reasons??
So I think it's funny that both the EVO 8 and STi come to america under that Illusionary (wink wink nudge nudge) 300 Hp number.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 91SiKen &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If the car fits the rules, it should not be excluded, period. Don't you think people were bemoaning having to run against the WRX? If what everybody is saying about the Evo is true, Mitsubishi just built a better car. People with WRXs made the wrong decision. Queue the violins. Babies. 95 whp Civics win in STS. Drive better.

:edit--This was pointed more at the nasioc.com forum not at anyone here:</TD></TR></TABLE>

This is the entire point of an exclusion list. Some cars fit the rules but are greater than the intended sum of their parts.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hracer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Anybody know whp of stock Evo 8s? At least according to the magazines, this thing seems to be way faster than what 271 hp should do on a 3100 lbs awd car. Heck that's just about 30-35 hp more than what my talon should be making at the crank and I'm no where near 4.5 sec 0-60 or 13 flat 1/4. I would guess just like dodge did with the srt4 (which makes like 225 at the wheels instead of at the crank), Mitsu could have under estimated (on purpose?) the EVO's power. There's no way 19 psi (stock boost on the evo) on the 4g63 using that turbo makes *only* 271 hp at the crank.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Actually just the opposite. Shiv at Vishnu Tuning has dynoed over a half dozen broken in cars and came up with around 175 whp on all of them. Thats only about 20hp more (on that dyno) than a WRX.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
This is the entire point of an exclusion list. Some cars fit the rules but are greater than the intended sum of their parts.</TD></TR></TABLE>

This can also be viewed from the other direction, that some people have crappy cars, and are excluding the good ones so they don't have to compete against them. Who says the E36 M3 or the EVO aren't supposed to be as good as they are? I think the manufacturers definately intended for them to be that good. Other companies took shortcuts, dumbed it down, or basically couldn't do as well. Why should the owner of a good car be left out because other people bought the wrong car and are whining about the fact that now they can't win? The M3 and EVO are intended for performance driving. So they are built for it. I think the SCCA may be inhabited and run by a few too many people who as children took their ball home when they were shown up on the playing field.

Man I want an EVO. But for now I am stuck in my rust heap Street Mod car... at non-SCCA events.


Modified by 91SiKen at 2:41 PM 5/29/2003

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 91SiKen &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
This can also be viewed from the other direction, that some people have crappy cars, and are excluding the good ones so they don't have to compete against them. Who says the E36 M3 or the EVO aren't supposed to be as good as they are? I think the manufacturers definately intended for them to be that good. Other companies took shortcuts, dumbed it down, or basically couldn't do as well. Why should the owner of a good car be left out because other people bought the wrong car and are whining about the fact that now they can't win? The M3 and EVO are intended for performance driving. So they are built for it.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
using that philosophy, there would be no classes. Open, fastest car wins. So what if a vette is faster than a civic, its a performance car and is built for it.

Every class has a target performance potential. All cars are supposed to be within that window. If there is a car outside of that window, then it ceases to be a cohesive class and defeats the purpose of classing entirely.

 

Your reading too much into what I am saying I think. All I am saying is if it fits the class on paper, with an honest accounting of power and weight and everything else, it should be in the class. If a car that fits the class raises the bar, that will just force everyone else to try harder. I believe in classes. I just believe that disallowing something because it is better is tantamount to cheating.

Examples:
The group I autocross with doesn't divide cars in to SM and SM2. I drive against Birkens for Pete's sake, which should be in DMod. I beat Corvettes that aren't in my class all the time. A Corvette that has run in One Lap is in my class. My buddy set FTD in a (naturally aspirated) street mod CRX Sunday, at an event that included Vipers, prepared class cars, Corvettes, Porsches, WRX's, etc etc. Should a CRX with a GSR motor on Kuhmos be able to beat anything on slicks?

:Edited for clarity:

 

or spend more money to buy and EVO 8 or STi.

 

Or start questioning questionable claims instead of immediately bemoaning and whining a "situation" that may not even be a "situation" at all.

Karen
not a real blonde

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CamaroFS34 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">not a real blonde</TD></TR></TABLE>

Too easy...... i'll leave this one alone

 

From what I heard, from this guy, who was told by this other guy, who read something somewhere that this "situation" really doesnt exist after all

-Tom

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 91SiKen &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If the car fits the rules, it should not be excluded, period. </TD></TR></TABLE>

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Def &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

[rant]I still personally don't see why the E36 M3 is excluded from STX. The power is not overwhelming, the suspension is good but nothing REALLY trick(which the EVO8 and STi are bordering on STOCK IMO!). I think it would most other cars in STX could easily compete with an E36 M3 with the proper preparation, which I don't think the class has really seen. I'm not saying I want this because I think I could win the class, as I would soundly get my **** handed to me by my local STX competitiors, as well as BStock currently( ), but just looking at the situation logically, it seems an E36 M3 is definitely not an overdog - especially if the EVO8 is allowed in the class.[/rant]

</TD></TR></TABLE>

Well, while you're at it, why not the rest of BSP... Let's see a ZR1 or Gran Sport on street tires...