TomsSVX sets NEW RECORD!

[XT6Wagon]

If you bought a $7500 supercharger kit, but already had all the supporting mods like an engine that won't explode under boost, a transmission that can handle the power, fuel system that works, etc..... .

You wouldn't have a 14.9 sec car. It would be much much faster.

The problem is that the $7500 you are looking at has ALOT of supporting mods included. Its actualy one of my pet peeves how people look at a "all inclusive" setupd and ***** about the cost, then run out and spend 1.5 times as much getting the same stuff, just $300-500 at a time to make thier $2500 turbo/supercharger kit run at all.

The TRD supercharger kits are terrible for doing that. Its a supposedly OEM quality kit, and yet has no safe provisions for dealing with timing or fuel in the one I saw. Nothing like running lean and NA timing on a moderately high compression motor with a supercharger slapped on.

Oh and if you want to look at some BAD supercharger kits? I know some of the Jacksonricing kits were completely useless. Spend as much money as the Focus SVT crate engine to bring your base 2.0 zetec car upto... stock focus SVT crate engine power. Sounds great!!! where do I sign up.

So given that Subaru never made a EG series motor based off of the TURBO EJ line of engines, We don't have a completely bulletproof base to start from, and thus must limit power until the engine can handle the power. That said, once the EG33 gets built, power should be insane. I really don't like the SVX heads compared to what we see today on the STi's and the like, but on the other hand you have 6 ports sharing the flow instead of 4 so, even these old style heads will beat thier 4cyl versions. We don't have enough cam. Its being solved as we speak. Pistons and rods are weak, Easy to get and already figured out.

Even better these old SVX's have some advantages.

More cylinders to devide the power across, means lower cylinder pressures for a given HP. Not only that but you have more bearings to handle the pressures. Firing pulses are closer together and smoother making for less stress on the driveline and crankshaft. Thier ignition style means that you CAN run a MSD DIS-4 box on them where as the STi's according to MSD need to retrofit some stuff to get it to work.

So the potential once ALL the pieces are together is going to be insane. 1000HP skylines do it on alot smaller engine, less stiff bottom end, longer crank, etc.

[It's Just Eric]

Clearly, you play too much gran turismo. Horsepower is just a number...and is usually represented in such a way that it makes it seem more than it is.
400 PEAK hp...Meaning that only at a certian rpm, for a second of it's rev range..its making THAT horsepower. The rest of the time...meh. Probly making power over stock, but nothing to write home about. (More notably on turbochargers)

Also keep in mind the svx isnt a light car, by any means. 3700 pounds might be light compared to a battleship, or a 58 fleetwood...but the fact of the matter is it's alot of weight to push around when you have similar displacement as a jumbo sized bottle of soda...Or an average cup of coffee, as trends seem to be going.

Then there's the engine itself. It was engineered and manufactured to produce 230 bhp and 229 ft lbs tourque, making those numbers at (I forget) rpm. Here's where things get technical:
Some pople are under the misconcepion that a cold air intake will make 5 or 10 more horsepower...Such may be the case on say...a poorly engineered large displacment V8 out of an older americian car..but nowadays, car manufacturers genrally make their intakes flow more air than the car needs. And the same goes for exhaust systems....

Although simple bolt on accesories may make a few more horsepower...all your doing is making the stronger links of the chain stronger. the engine, at this point, becomes the issue
the heads need to be ported, to flow the extra air in and exhaust out. The cams have to be adjusted, to hold the valves open longer. The springs need to be stiffened, to close the valves faster. The pistons need to be reinforced, and anything that moves could do so better if they're lightened. An engine build on sn svx is just...Well, not feasable for the average svx owner. Im sure if you read all the research that LAN, Tom, Old Tom, Mychalo, and other have done, youd realize its no a one man effort. You cant exactly order engine parts from summit, and having peices custom fabricated to specs that YOU have to figure out is not only time consuming, but mony consuming as well.

The fact is...The svx engine was never meant to make THAT much horsepower (Though some things would surely point that it CAN) The SVX wasnt even supposed to be that that fast either...otherwise it wouldnt be a luxury car, it wouldnt be built like a panzer, and it would weigh as much as a bag of potato chips. If anyone is going to break into the 12's, itll only be with the engine rebuilt, to better handle the power theese guys are making, or with 1,000 lbs take out of it (Of course, 1,000 lbs means it just isnt an svx anymore...so guess what Tom is doing?)That said, xt6wagon guy is correct...And beat me to this post by 7 minutes

[Kelvin]

Originally Posted by It's Just Eric

Clearly, you play too much gran turismo. Horsepower is just a number...and is usually represented in such a way that it makes it seem more than it is.
400 PEAK hp...Meaning that only at a certian rpm, for a second of it's rev range..its making THAT horsepower. The rest of the time...meh. Probly making power over stock, but nothing to write home about. (More notably on turbochargers)

True, however, the factory engine produces 230hp, meaning only at a certain rpm, for a second of it's rev range, and it can push a heavy SVX down the track in 15.5 seconds. One would assume that increasing the power by 170hp would increase that speed quite a bit, not a mere 1.5 seconds.

Also keep in mind the svx isnt a light car, by any means. 3700 pounds might be light compared to a battleship, or a 58 fleetwood...but the fact of the matter is it's alot of weight to push around when you have similar displacement as a jumbo sized bottle of soda...Or an average cup of coffee, as trends seem to be going.

With a supercharger, the engine has effectively increased it's displacement, as more air and fuel than the actual displacement of the cylinders/bores/heads is being shoved into it than would normally be possible. So much more, that it's making almost 170hp more than stock.

Then there's the engine itself. It was engineered and manufactured to produce 230 bhp and 229 ft lbs tourque, making those numbers at (I forget) rpm. Here's where things get technical:
Some pople are under the misconcepion that a cold air intake will make 5 or 10 more horsepower...Such may be the case on say...a poorly engineered large displacment V8 out of an older americian car..but nowadays, car manufacturers genrally make their intakes flow more air than the car needs. And the same goes for exhaust systems....

Although simple bolt on accesories may make a few more horsepower...all your doing is making the stronger links of the chain stronger. the engine, at this point, becomes the issue
the heads need to be ported, to flow the extra air in and exhaust out. The cams have to be adjusted, to hold the valves open longer. The springs need to be stiffened, to close the valves faster. The pistons need to be reinforced, and anything that moves could do so better if they're lightened. An engine build on sn svx is just...Well, not feasable for the average svx owner. Im sure if you read all the research that LAN, Tom, Old Tom, Mychalo, and other have done, youd realize its no a one man effort. You cant exactly order engine parts from summit, and having peices custom fabricated to specs that YOU have to figure out is not only time consuming, but mony consuming as well.

True, but seeing as how other japanese GTs make pretty incredible power when boosted, and about SVX power when not, I would assume similar performance. One can take an older skyline, throw a turbo kit on it, and make 400hp quite easily, and turn good times at the dragstrip. Our cars are not much heavier than theirs, and in some ways, the engine has many advantages. Keep in mind that this is without headwork, too!

The fact is...The svx engine was never meant to make THAT much horsepower (Though some things would surely point that it CAN) The SVX wasnt even supposed to be that that fast either...otherwise it wouldnt be a luxury car, it wouldnt be built like a panzer, and it would weigh as much as a bag of potato chips. If anyone is going to break into the 12's, itll only be with the engine rebuilt, to better handle the power theese guys are making, or with 1,000 lbs take out of it (Of course, 1,000 lbs means it just isnt an svx anymore...so guess what Tom is doing?)That said, xt6wagon guy is correct...And beat me to this post by 7 minutes

So how do you explain big HP supras, skylines, 300ZXs, and 3000GTs? All of these cars are fairly similar in size, weight, and NA power to the SVX, and all of them, with 400hp, turn pretty fast times. I don't understand what's holding this car back. It seems to me like once you took a stock engine, added boost, and made power, the car would be going quite a bit faster, but honestly these 13.9 times don't seem a whole lot different from people with just 5spd swaps.... weren't some people here turning 14.5s or so with just the 5spd?

Again, not trying to 'crap on the parade', I just don't understand. An increase of 170hp should make more of a difference than 1.5 seconds, especially if it's a manual. Something seems funky here.

[XT6Wagon]

I love how you counter our points by using all factory turbo cars, all with built 6cyl engines from the factory. Oh and all with ECU's designed around the needs of boost. Even more imporantly you ignore the cubic $$ these peopel spend too. Its not a case of you wake up one morning and suddenly you have a 600HP supra.

Like I said, If there was an OEM EG33 built for boost put into any car in the world, we would be very much better off since even if you don't own that exact motor its alot easier to swipe parts from it than to do all the R&D yourself.

BTW, I've dragraced a 500+ HP supra and won.... With my bone stock Jaguar with a full tank of gas. Nothing says poor modification plan when you run a 13.4@114 with a 2.0 + 60ft. Reaction time was over a second too given the poor launch capiblity of the Supra. Mind the Jag takes a week and a 1/2 to shift gears and covers the entire MPH trap shifting from 3rd to 4th.

100 less HP and a ford 8.8 solid axle and a GM auto transmission would have that supra running mid/high 12's easy with less engine wear.

[cdigerlando]

Kelvin......a lot of the fun in developing the SVX motor, is that it is a challenge. After building the motor we may find out that it exceeds the capabilities of some of the afore mentioned turbo autos. Or it may show that we are all a bunch of dumbasses for trying it.

I would definitely agree that upgrading an STi or a low milage supra takes a lot less money because you don't need to rebuild the motor. But don't forget, we are working on older cars, that have much less value to start with. So if it works out, it may actually cost a bit less to mod the car.

If you get into a project I would suggest a couple of things. Don't have it a as your daily driver, and be prepared to spend a lot of time on it. If you don't have these things, save your money and get an STi.

[Subafreak]

Well all im gonna say "is not too bad Tom" Now you have given me a time to beat. I was equal to your time before but now i must smoke your time.

Be prepared for a challenge in the soon to almost soon...perhaps distant future.

[Kelvin]

Man, all this talk of weight makes me want to go nuts with a few hole saws this summer.

[Minjin]

Originally Posted by XT6Wagon

I love how you counter our points by using all factory turbo cars, all with built 6cyl engines from the factory. Oh and all with ECU's designed around the needs of boost. Even more imporantly you ignore the cubic $$ these peopel spend too. Its not a case of you wake up one morning and suddenly you have a 600HP supra.

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...

[sicksubie]

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...

Again you are dealing with factory F/I cars versus N/A cars. You CANNOT make comparisons. Factory F/I cars HAVE all the supporting mods in place already (to a certain extent). A simple ECU reflash can harness surprising numbers of ponies. N/A cars do not have that capability. The above comparison of a F/I car that has 70 more crank horsepower (and probably came with a manual from the factory too) to a N/A SVX is ridiculous. As far as the market deciding which is a better car that is not correct either.

[NikFu S.]

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...

You are comparing a turbo car to an NA car. Ofcourse the 3S is going to go faster it's designed from the ground up to run FI. It has a huge aftermarket and the R&D has been practically finished for years. The SVX R&D has only started within recent years. Your comparison makes no sense and is flawed on every fundamental level. The 3S held their value better because they are far more common (popular) and ricer boys will pay through the nose for one. I did, I had a Stealth, and I regret ever even looking at it.

[Kelvin]

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...

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.

[Minjin]

Originally Posted by sicksubie

Again you are dealing with factory F/I cars versus N/A cars. You CANNOT make comparisons. Factory F/I cars HAVE all the supporting mods in place already (to a certain extent). A simple ECU reflash can harness surprising numbers of ponies. N/A cars do not have that capability. The above comparison of a F/I car that has 70 more crank horsepower (and probably came with a manual from the factory too) to a N/A SVX is ridiculous. As far as the market deciding which is a better car that is not correct either.

Why can't you make comparisons? I'm not comparing how modable they are. Of course, the N/A car is going to lack in that respect. I was simply comparing a heavily modified SVX with a bone stock 3K/S (that is less powerful) that has similar weight and luxury and both cost about the same new. If that doesn't invite comparison, I don't know what does. Since SVXs are now all but worthless, you could look at it as cheap performance, but the math shows that it really isn't by the time you finish all the mods. I have no complaints about people trying to make them fast. People like certain cars and they also like a challenge. However, don't use the weight thing as a crutch because I've already disproven that.

Originally Posted by NikFu S.

You are comparing a turbo car to an NA car. Ofcourse the 3S is going to go faster it's designed from the ground up to run FI. It has a huge aftermarket and the R&D has been practically finished for years. The SVX R&D has only started within recent years. Your comparison makes no sense and is flawed on every fundamental level. The 3S held their value better because they are far more common (popular) and ricer boys will pay through the nose for one. I did, I had a Stealth, and I regret ever even looking at it.

My comparison is very valid and I kind of figured it would get some panties in a bind but I didn't think it would this much.

The 3K/S is far more common? Lets look at production numbers for US and Canada combined:

3000GT VR4 - 15539
Stealth TT - 9651
----------------
Total = 25190

vs

SVX = 15199

So about 10k more. Not the huge numbers you are probably thinking though. Although, I don't understand your logic in saying that because its "far more" common, people will pay through the nose for them.

I'm not here to attack the car. I'm just pointing out something that seemed to be overlooked. I know some of you are more worldly and don't think that the SVX is the bestest car in the world but others seem to have blinders on...

[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.

[NikFu S.]

How hard is it to understand the SVX has not had ANY tuning until very recently? This is new ground being covered. You are comparing two cars because they have similar shapes and weight but fail to realize there is a great deal of engineering differences under the surface.

The cars are not alike.

At all.

The eg33 was not designed with FI in mind.

Why don't we compare the SVX to the NA 3S. Which one is faster? Which one is nicer? Which one lasts longer? Thought so.

[mikecg]

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...

Hah.......... ha ha ha. The SVX doesnt sell more because of obsurity. The 3K/RT is also known to be a death trap. Subaru but much more money into safety and relieability. The 3k/RT engines are far less reliable, and the drivetains are only slightly more dependible and 10 times as complicated.