TomsSVX sets NEW RECORD!

[solarsvx]

why are we referring to a 3000gt?

simple fact is the svx falls short of the 90s sports cars

supra's//300zxtt//rx7tt//mr2/dsms/300gtvr4s// to list a few of the imports

the svx was never intended to compete with those cars, it was intended for a luxury gt car which it does very well

also for 7,000$ i can by a 1g AWD turbo dsm for 3k spend 4k in mods and make it 400+ monster thats runs in the 12s


IMO keep the svx clean and original buy a weekend car a dsm//honda//nissian and have fun with it, parts are cheap, they are easy to work on, even a 2.5 rs if you want to stay in the subby world

keep the svx for its luxury and its uniquness

but i can understand tom//buds/and phast idea's of making a svx fast, "which still has not hapened" but my hat goes off to them for trying something no one has dared to try, "and there is reasons for that" and to prove there can be a svx that runs 12s with 400+ hp and can pull 1g in the turns in full luxury


to be honest what the svx comunity sees in the svx ,is far diffrent then what the sports car enthusiats see's because we own one and we think the world of them, you dont see people trading there vettes//evos and sti's to buy a svx to go fast they buy it for its luxury and rareness,

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by Minjin

I don't want to step on any toes here but a bone stock Stealth TT or a 3000GT VR4 with 300hp and weighing about the same (if not more) as an SVX does the 1/4 in high 13s. Making it go much faster does NOT require cubic $$$s. In fact, dropping into the low 13s, high 12s is quite trivial.

Note also that both SVX and twin turbo 3K/S started out at about the same price. And how has time treated them? Its hard to find a twin turbo 3K/S for less than 6 grand whereas SVXs have difficulty selling for a grand. The market has spoken as to which is the better car...

The 93-97 VR4s cost $8-12 thousand MORE than the SVX. For comparison of performance the Base and SL 3000GT models should be compared with the SVX-not the VR4.

I don't see any of you 3000GT biased fans making that comparison.

Lee

[Kelvin]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

The 93-97 VR4s cost $8-12 thousand MORE than the SVX. For comparison of performance the Base and SL 3000GT models should be compared with the SVX-not the VR4.

I don't see any of you 3000GT biased fans making that comparison.

Lee

I'm not bringing up cost. Obviously I think SVXs are of higher quality, and better looking than 3000Gts. So ignore cost!

This is what I don't understand:

1. Both have AWD
2. Around the same weight
3. Tom's has near 400hp, if ecutune's dynos are correct
4. 3000GTs have 300hp, if mitsubishi is correct
5. A 400hp car is turning SLOWER times than a similar car with 300hp.

This ladies and gentlemen, does not make sense (cue chewbacca).

[XT6Wagon]

lets stop feeding the troll/idiot I guess.

[Kelvin]

Are you calling me an idiot for asking a question that nobody can seem to answer? Just trying to clarify this.

[AlcyoneDaze]

Its kinda dissapointing that Subaru didn't make a car that was competetive with sports cars of its day, and instead made something more akin to a SC300, rather than a 3000GT or a 300ZX...

While the SVX can run base NA V6 models, its not a real competitor with the twin-turboed models - facts of life for us SVX owners

[crusader8]

Originally Posted by Kelvin

Yeah, I agree Minjin. I mean, with the SVX putting about 280hp TO THE WHEELS, and only turning a 13.9, I think something is running badly. It just doesn't add up. Weight is 3525+ driver, mitsu 3000Gts are around there, make only 300hp, and turn faster times. You're talking ALMOST AS MUCH HP to the wheels as a 3000GT makes at the crank, and it's slower? I don't get it. There's definitely a bottleneck, somewhere.

well, comparisons are running wild now arent they. we can compare all day and bring up every car you want and talk about power to weight ratios. then bring up how supras came factory turbo'd with forged internals. lets talk about civics too...its the same damn thing. Every car theres been a comparison to has had a large aftermarket and following. There is a recipe to make most cars run exact times. All you need to do is follow it. If SVX's sold as much as supras and VR4s then SVX's would have a bigger aftermarket and be in the 10's by now with professional developers making it happen dropping alot of money into research.

Here you have a dedicated few making it happen. you have a handful of vendors and do it yourselfers making cars go fast on a budget.

[solarsvx]

Originally Posted by AlcyoneDaze

Its kinda dissapointing that Subaru didn't make a car that was competetive with sports cars of its day, and instead made something more akin to a SC300, rather than a 3000GT or a 300ZX...

While the SVX can run base NA V6 models, its not a real competitor with the twin-turboed models - facts of life for us SVX owners

i agree, im sure the svx wold have sold alot more units but again subaru wasnt known for such a drastic design in cars,

not many cars have held the test of time like the svx, it still one of the sexiest cars out there =>

[AlcyoneDaze]

yeah its sexy, but a twin-turbo version pushing 400hp from the factory woulda been sexier

[SVXMAN2001]

It amazes me how condescending people can be, TomsSvx, Mike (ecu-tune), chuck, and all the others have progressed to unthinkable levels with the svx. I remember coming on board in 2001 and the mere thought of a 5spd svx was laughed at, now look where this forum is 6spds, turbo's, s/c's, engine management, koodo's to all of you! Of course there is going to be hurdles in the process, but that's expected when paving new ground.

Also all this talk of 1/4 mile times and hp and no mention of gear ratio's, that is a variable that must be included and where comparisons to other cars (supra's, 3000gt's) makes former arguments for "if they can do it why can't the svx" null and void.

[It's Just Eric]

Hmm..Let's play quotes.

That's what I don't understand. The SVX, with the 7500 dollar supercharger kit, and 6spd, makes more power than a 3000GT, yet it's slower than one. I really don't get it.

This is initially your question. A legitimate one, which was answered sevral times:

The eg33 was not designed with FI in mind.

Let us also not forget that the 6spd is SLOWING his drag times. It eats 15more WHP than a 5spd. It has horrid gear spacing for drag racing. Even worse without a DCCD controler you have an open center diff, which makes for very limited traction given that the car was designed around the front wheels keeping 1/2 the power.

The power and torque curves fell on their face after 3500rpm... The engine quit making power and began to fall... This is ALL due to the fact that the stock cams were made to keep low and mid-range power up for the low gear ratio in the stock car... Gives the car great power on the highway....

the 6mt IS slowing me down because I spend all day at 5500rpms and up while I am racing... and I am not making any power there.
Tom, If it is declining after 3,500 then its no wonder. Powerband being a mess coupled with a transmission not geared to it...

he engine isnt really making more than a stock 3kgt. before tom was making 240whp and the 3000gt is making closer to 300. this 400hp kit makes 400hp at the engine after 25%+ drivetrain loss is a different story though.

And yet you ask again:

This is what I don't understand:

1. Both have AWD
2. Around the same weight
3. Tom's has near 400hp, if ecutune's dynos are correct
4. 3000GTs have 300hp, if mitsubishi is correct
5. A 400hp car is turning SLOWER times than a similar car with 300hp.

Now...pardon me for pointing it out...but in my first response, I noted that the engine internals needed to be rebuilt to make power from the supercharger...I probly should have been more specific to say that they need to rebuld the engine to get a proper tourque curve, to make use of the supercharger. But then..I DID mention that the hp noted was only being made at a certian rpm..I suppose I should have been more specific to say, that the rpm the engine makes the power is actually lower than the 6 speed transmission allows. The 6 speed's short gear ratios are meant to keep the engine in the 4500+ rpm range, to help keep the sti's boost up. Here's a graph to help your brain figure out what Im talking about:

Okay....so here it is, made slightly more dramtic as to illustrate th point. The SVX clearly, is making its power at a lower RPM, due to the fact the engine was never meant to be forced induction. Even with a supercharger, it has a similar to stock hp curve. Now, a car that is forced induction from the factory is tuned specificly to make its power at a higher RPM. The green circle is showing what tom's transmission is letting him use. You can see for a factory tuned forced induction car, its RIGHT where it needs to be. The power goes up as his rpm increases. But on the svx motor, it just isnt making the power it needs at those rpms. There's two solutions to this problem....Get a transmission that is better geared, or, go ahead and build the motor right. The transmission would likely need to be built to cope with the hp, hence why many people want to run the 6 speed (Dyno proven to hold over 70 HP without failure) So tom is killing two birds with one stone and rebuilding the engine to do forced induction in the first place

If you STILL dont get it, just go back to playing your forza's and your gran turismos and whatever else it is you get your facts from. You DID ask a good question, but it would seem to me you ignored the answers given.

[SVX PlayBoy]

F*cking Owned!! Hahahahaha

[cdigerlando]

Hopefully the new cam profiles will allow better breathing up top. This is the scariest part of the build to me. I'm going to have to tune to this cam and not know where to start, if it is even an improvement, or drivable. I'm hoping that Mike (LAN) will have some good guidance in this area, since I am using a stand alone (Tec II). I don't think the build does anything except lower the compression and strengthen the engine for power. These two things are the currently known bottlenecks that we are dealing with, and I think that Mikes solutions are top knotch in this area. When we know more about the power bands we develop, then we can determine which type of transmission will be best for our engine builds. These power and torque curves will also vary depending on the SC or turbocharger that we are using. I'm crossing my fingers that my turbo will suite my goals. Some dyno tuning is definitely needed to get this all worked out.

[cdigerlando]

Originally Posted by Kelvin

Yeah, I agree Minjin. I mean, with the SVX putting about 280hp TO THE WHEELS, and only turning a 13.9, I think something is running badly. It just doesn't add up. Weight is 3525+ driver, mitsu 3000Gts are around there, make only 300hp, and turn faster times. You're talking ALMOST AS MUCH HP to the wheels as a 3000GT makes at the crank, and it's slower? I don't get it. There's definitely a bottleneck, somewhere.

Its probably not breathing correctly. I am more interested in the integral under the curve, not the curve peak. That will give you speed at the track. Hopefully the cams and valves work out this issue.

[TomsSVX]

This is the dyno plot from Mikecg's car running 9psi... Thats where I am at right now... The AFR gets funky almost all the way through and the h/p you can see maxes out early and begins to fall slowly...

That being said, you will see significant improvement with the built motors and the power curve will look much more linear as that is what a PD blower like ours should look like... say all you want, we are breaking ground and we are doing our best to keep everyone informed of our progress... You really want to bite the hand that feeds?? Keep *****ing about how there is no progress and I will keep your assumptions as such...

Tom