MotorTrend Article - '05 Evolution MR vs '05 Subaru STI!!!

[Landshark]

Originally posted by Chiketkd
My wife wants a Lexus RX330.....

so does mine!

[svxsubaru1]

" Sorry but any car running more than 10lbs of boost is not "reliable". At pressures like 16 and 19lbs, all kinds of things can happen. Geez even mitsubishi admits that 19lbs is "within an inch of death" for that EVO's motor. I can only imagine what kind of power my LS1 would be putting out if it were built as much as the EVO and STI motors, and running 19lbs of pressure. I know a guy (goes by "jammin" on LS1tech) who has a twin turbo LS1 in his WS6 running 14psi. He dynoed over 1200hp at the wheels. Hasn't run it at the track so far. I don't know where that falls inside the LS1's tolerance envelope, but it's not real close to the edge. Even in an engine built like the LS1, it's still far from a reliable way to run.

So to summarize my long-winded response, doing anything to those engines that increases boost is not what anyone would consider a reliable way to increase power. " By Shadow248


Yeah my friends unrelible 89 turbo supra running 14 psi has just 150,000 miles on it with no problems. There have been many, many cars that run alot more than 10 lbs of boost that are relible, ive heard of Evo engine running 30 PSI that are relible on a stock engine.

Making more power than stock decreases the reliblity of any car, you need more engergy to put out more power, and to do that more force has to be put throught the engine. If tuned right a turbo running more boost will be just as relible as a NA car, but genrally less peaky. Genrally making more power out of a NA car requires higher revs which definitly takes away alot more reliblity than running more boost.

The Sti has pratcily no turbo lag at all, and is alway being comented on about the almost lack of turbo lag and huge amounts of torq at low RPMS it. The Sti can carry huge exit speed that no production rwd cars within it price range can match. The Stock Sti spec C, recently ran a sub 8 min lap at nurburgring 14.2 mile.


For right around $1000 grand you can get an easy 50 Hp and 80 ft pounds of torq. http://cobbtuning.com/sti/images/ap-sti-stage2.gif
Thats just with a exhuast and a remapped ECU. Only 650 for accse port and iam sure you could find a good used 3ich all the way back exhaust for $400.

[Landshark]

Originally posted by Shadow248
Pontiac G6: Fully loaded and AWD it falls just under $30k with leather, a premium sound system, a 260hp 3.9L V6, and a really nifty retractable roof. I know you don't care because it's a GM product and therefore is not good enough for you. But I highly suggest this one for the day you realize your wrong.

after more searching i still saw nothing about AWD, but needing 3.9L to get 260hp? that's sad. i guess they are showing improvement - Pontiac had to supercharge the 3.8L V6 to get a whopping......260hp! the Nissan Altima makes that much with a 3.5L NA V6.

[immortal_suby]

Originally posted by Shadow248
So to summarize my long-winded response, doing anything to those engines that increases boost is not what anyone would consider a reliable way to increase power.

Are you serious?

[Landshark]

Originally posted by immortal_suby


Are you serious?

he means a GM engine - they're fragile.

[immortal_suby]

This reminds me of the time my buddy spun a bearing in his grand am (aka the "grand scam") while he was racing me in the little red wagon.

Him on the cb, "Hey rat, my engine is knocking"
priceless.

Oh yeah, my point.
Since I know a guy with a pontiac who had an engine reliability problem then all pontiacs are unreliable junk. Also - since his had only 4 cylinders, then an eight cylinder pontiac must be double the trouble. Avoid them like the plague.

[Shadow248]

Originally posted by PA_SVX
I think the 400hp GTO might be nice, but it's SO bland.

I think bland might be a bit harsh. It's a good looking car, with an amazing interior. Definetly not at the level it should be, but considering how the whole deal came about, it's pretty impressive. If your speaking from a styling standpoint, I can see that. I think it's a good looking car, but that's about it. Could be so much better.

Originally posted by Chiketkd
Those twin turbo V8 RS6's are sweet but cost upwards of 70K. Stock, they run like 12.6 in the 1/4 mile.

Wicked looking cars. I'd never pay $70k for a VW though.

Originally posted by Landshark
G35 AWD sedan: i know many like the styling, but i don't. NA, difficult to increase power, brakes aren't going to cut it for what i want. the closest (not really) to what you think i should get.

Maxima: FWD - not an option, NA

Acura TL/Honda Accord - see Maxima

Pontiac G6 - nowhere on Pontiac's website does it say its available with AWD (traction control is not even close). 200hp from 3.5L? i already have 230hp from 3.3L

Did you actually look at the site? The G6-L (4d) and G6-GTP (2d)are both AWD.

Originally posted by svxsubaru1
Yeah my friends unrelible 89 turbo supra running 14 psi has just 150,000 miles on it with no problems. There have been many, many cars that run alot more than 10 lbs of boost that are relible, ive heard of Evo engine running 30 PSI that are relible on a stock engine.

And I know of two Supras that get new seals every 30k, and that's after they've leaked for 10k. The number of head gasket rebuilds mandi's brother-in-law has done on turbo eclipses more than doubles my age i'm sure. I could go on and on but it will just fall on deaf ears anyway.

Originally posted by svxsubaru1
Making more power than stock decreases the reliblity of any car, you need more engergy to put out more power, and to do that more force has to be put throught the engine. If tuned right a turbo running more boost will be just as relible as a NA car, but genrally less peaky. Genrally making more power out of a NA car requires higher revs which definitly takes away alot more reliblity than running more boost.

The truth is that AS A MATTER OF PHYSICS, a turbo engine is inherently less reliable than an NA design. That's not necessarily bad in itself...what is bad is high pressure. Seals are not designed for that, and even the ones that are are still forced to operate outside of their limits. By definition a head gasket is a sacrificial engine component. It can only be made so strong. When something goes wrong inside a combustion chamber, something has to give. Best thing to go is a replaceable metal gasket. Otherwise it's a piston, block, crank, etc. Within a combustion chamber with pressures fed by a 19psi intake charge, it's a matter of physics that the head gasket will go quicker than one on an NA car.

Originally posted by svxsubaru1
The Sti has pratcily no turbo lag at all, and is alway being comented on about the almost lack of turbo lag and huge amounts of torq at low RPMS it. The Sti can carry huge exit speed that no production rwd cars within it price range can match. The Stock Sti spec C, recently ran a sub 8 min lap at nurburgring 14.2 mile.

Rhys Millen apparently disagrees with you. I don't know you, so i'm going to have to go with him on this one. Sorry.

Originally posted by Landshark
after more searching i still saw nothing about AWD, but needing 3.9L to get 260hp? that's sad. i guess they are showing improvement - Pontiac had to supercharge the 3.8L V6 to get a whopping......260hp!

Needing 24 valves to make 260hp is sad. Pontiac does it with only 12.

Originally posted by imoortal_suby
Since I know a guy with a pontiac who had an engine reliability problem then all pontiacs are unreliable junk. Also - since his had only 4 cylinders, then an eight cylinder pontiac must be double the trouble. Avoid them like the plague.

Nice. You just saved me alot of typing.

[Royal Tiger]

The supercharged 3.8 made 240hp. The 3.8 dates back to 1982. While I'm not totally anti-pushrod, the Nissan 3.5 DOHC engine won more awards for design then just about any motor short of a RB26DETT, also a Nissan (Skyline GT-R R34). A DOHC motor is a better design. I know the LS2 is a great motor and has taken pushrods to a new high, but the DOHC design is superior. It's like the carb vs fuel injection debate. There were people in the late 50's up through the early 70's that could really get a multi-carb setup to run well, but fuel injection is definatly the way to go. Same with push rods vs DOHC. Think what a 6.0L DOHC Chevy motor could do. The Nissan 3.5 (VQ35DE) is FAR superior to the GM 3.8. The GM 3.5 that was available in the Olds Intrigue was a better motor then the 3.8.

[Andy]

Why is the Mr Universe Competition always won by humans?

[svxsubaru1]

"The truth is that AS A MATTER OF PHYSICS, a turbo engine is inherently less reliable than an NA design. That's not necessarily bad in itself...what is bad is high pressure. Seals are not designed for that, and even the ones that are are still forced to operate outside of their limits. By definition a head gasket is a sacrificial engine component. It can only be made so strong. When something goes wrong inside a combustion chamber, something has to give. Best thing to go is a replaceable metal gasket. Otherwise it's a piston, block, crank, etc. Within a combustion chamber with pressures fed by a 19psi intake charge, it's a matter of physics that the head gasket will go quicker than one on an NA car." Shawdow 248

Turbo cars run just as much preasure as a high performance NA car, the NA cars just have a higher compersion ratio than a trubo car, usaly . Theres a max presure for the fuel that you use and NA cars go right up that limit to. Its a matter of design and if the seal is operating out side its limit then it will go, but ther is still alot of room more power in alot of well designed turbo engines. The upgrades you listed for your engine alow more air to get into your engine which will cause, higher presure in the cylinders, just like adding more boost which will decrease the reliblity just like a turboengine if you use your logic.

"Rhys Millen apparently disagrees with you. I don't know you, so i'm going to have to go with him on this one. Sorry." By Shawdow 248

Read any article on the Sti the thing they take most about is huge exit speed becasue of the AWD, and the huge amount of torq at low RPMs. Can you show me the artcile or statment were Rhys MIllen said that.



Alve replaced many head gaskets on chevy 350s,and a couple ford 460s.

[Chiketkd]

Originally posted by Shadow248
Wicked looking cars. I'd never pay $70k for a VW though.

Shadow, the twin-turbo RS6 is an Audi not a VW...

-Chike

[Andy]

Originally posted by Chiketkd

Shadow, the twin-turbo RS6 is an Audi not a VW...

-Chike

I thought it was a Skoda

[Shadow248]

Originally posted by PA_SVX
The supercharged 3.8 made 240hp. The 3.8 dates back to 1982. While I'm not totally anti-pushrod, the Nissan 3.5 DOHC engine won more awards for design then just about any motor short of a RB26DETT, also a Nissan (Skyline GT-R R34). A DOHC motor is a better design. I know the LS2 is a great motor and has taken pushrods to a new high, but the DOHC design is superior. It's like the carb vs fuel injection debate. There were people in the late 50's up through the early 70's that could really get a multi-carb setup to run well, but fuel injection is definatly the way to go. Same with push rods vs DOHC. Think what a 6.0L DOHC Chevy motor could do. The Nissan 3.5 (VQ35DE) is FAR superior to the GM 3.8. The GM 3.5 that was available in the Olds Intrigue was a better motor then the 3.8.

The current SC3800 makes 260hp or 280hp depending on application.

You can tell me all you want about how DOHC is better technology than OHV. Yeah it's neat on paper and in principle. I agree it sounds better. But the bottom line is, the SC3800 does the same thing the Nissan 3.5 does, with lower maintenance costs. So I guess it depends on what's important to you. Both engines will run forever just fine. However when the SC3800 goes in for routine maintenance, you are going to be paying half of what you would for the same service on the nissan 3.5. But if having a "high-tech" engine is what's most important to you, then the nissan is your engine.

Originally posted by Andy
Why is the Mr Universe Competition always won by humans?

Because so far, no monkeys have entered.

Originally posted by svxsubaru1
Turbo cars run just as much preasure as a high performance NA car, the NA cars just have a higher compersion ratio than a trubo car, usaly . Theres a max presure for the fuel that you use and NA cars go right up that limit to. Its a matter of design and if the seal is operating out side its limit then it will go, but ther is still alot of room more power in alot of well designed turbo engines. The upgrades you listed for your engine alow more air to get into your engine which will cause, higher presure in the cylinders, just like adding more boost which will decrease the reliblity just like a turboengine if you use your logic.

Not true. Turbo engines ARE lower compression. Say 8.5:1 instead of 10:1 like an NA motor. However the pressure the turbo feeds into they cylinders more than surpasses
the flat ratio on a turbo motor. Thus the reason a 10:1 NA motor can run fine on 87 octane and an 8.5:1 turbo motor needs 93 octane to run normal.

My engine is a 10.5:1 ratio. No matter how nice of an intake I have it will not surpass 10.5:1 since it is the cylinder sucking in the air.

Originally posted by svxsubaru
Read any article on the Sti the thing they take most about is huge exit speed becasue of the AWD, and the huge amount of torq at low RPMs. Can you show me the artcile or statment were Rhys MIllen said that.

Car&Driver sept. 2004 EVO vs. STI article. Specifically the last page. That's where the driver's impressions are listed.

Originally posted by Chiketkd
Shadow, the twin-turbo RS6 is an Audi not a VW...

-Chike

Still has alot of VW in it. I don't trust that. Especially if i'm paying that much.

[Royal Tiger]

How can the pushrod motor have less maintanence costs? The DOHC has no pushrods to break and the cam is right there on top, not burried in the middle. I'm not sure about rocker arms. I want to say a DOHC doesn't have them but I'm not sure. If you look at specific output, the DOHC motor has always made more power. Hence the 6.0L DOHC Chevy motor comment. It WOULD be better, but the cost of making a whole new block design is prohibitive in a limited application like the LS2. The VQ35DE is used in Maxima's, 350 Z's, Pathfinders, Murano's, Altima's, FX35's, I35's, G35's, the up coming M35, etc... That's how Nissian was able to build a world class motor like the VQ. The cost is spread around numerous platforms.

[Chiketkd]

Yeah, reliability of DOHC motors has come a long way. I remember when I first was looking for a car in high school, being told that the twin-cam (DOHC) motors in some early Saturns were unreliable and had serious problems. Nowadays, the most reliable cars on the market - Honda/Acura, Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infiniti, Subaru, Volvo, BMW, Mazda, etc. all use DOHC motors ranging from the inline-4 to the V8, and these cars are known for going well over 200K miles with no blown gaskets, excess oil burn, etc.

My former '95 Camaro Z28 has 120K on the odometer when I sold it, and that GM V8 burnt 1 quart of oil every 3000 miles... My prior 1990 300ZX TT, had 136K on the odometer when I sold it, and it didn't burn a drop of oil for either me or the original owner.

-Chike