Ultimate Impreza 2.0 or 2.5 ?
21 November 2002, 06:34 PM
#62
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
scoobee,
to make it clear,
a 2.5 is a better bet than a 2.0.
it has greater low down torque, and can run more power at the top too, and up to the same rpm!
greater gas flow means the same size turbo can spool up faster, so in all its power curve can be higher than that of the 2.0 at any point. Simple as that.
If you want to build a 2.0 to high power you really need a closed deck block. This means sourcing it and buying it. You could do the same with a 2.5 in the first place too, albeit for slightly more money.
After that, all the bits you need are the same cost, and no harder to come buy.
If you want to run more power then you will need to strengthen bits that you would not have needed to on a 2.0, but thetn you are in a different ball park power wise.
The benefit is that at the same output as you intended on the ,20, you are running a lower specific power output. You can run less boost to achieve exactly the same thing. How can that be worse?
I will be happily running my 2.5 at 350 bhpp and at around 0.6bar with any luck.
The beauty is I have done it carefully, so in theory I should be able to make a good 500 when I feel like turning the boost up, and only using half the map the rest of the time when I want a normal car that is still seriously rapid, and reliable!
to make it clear,
a 2.5 is a better bet than a 2.0.
it has greater low down torque, and can run more power at the top too, and up to the same rpm!
greater gas flow means the same size turbo can spool up faster, so in all its power curve can be higher than that of the 2.0 at any point. Simple as that.
If you want to build a 2.0 to high power you really need a closed deck block. This means sourcing it and buying it. You could do the same with a 2.5 in the first place too, albeit for slightly more money.
After that, all the bits you need are the same cost, and no harder to come buy.
If you want to run more power then you will need to strengthen bits that you would not have needed to on a 2.0, but thetn you are in a different ball park power wise.
The benefit is that at the same output as you intended on the ,20, you are running a lower specific power output. You can run less boost to achieve exactly the same thing. How can that be worse?
I will be happily running my 2.5 at 350 bhpp and at around 0.6bar with any luck.
The beauty is I have done it carefully, so in theory I should be able to make a good 500 when I feel like turning the boost up, and only using half the map the rest of the time when I want a normal car that is still seriously rapid, and reliable!
21 November 2002, 06:40 PM
#63
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yikes, Spend up into the teens of thousands just to turn the boost down and run at 350 ????? My WRX would cuff you as it's lighter anyway and will put all its power down ALL the time !!
21 November 2002, 06:47 PM
#64
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
erm, my 22b weighs in at around 1200kg (without me).
Have replaced panels with carbon fibre etc. it started off at 1230 anyway.
It is actually lighter than a type r and doesnt have extra weight in terms of airbags and abs equipment.
By the wya dont be put off by the price, a lot of the money has gone on buying bits outright that didnt need replacing, for example, I now have a comletely spare 22B engine with a new crank, uprated rods and pistons and ca complete set of heads. So worst case scenario, I could put the 22B lump back in and run it as standard.
Plus my engine costs included things like billet flywheel, uprated synchro kit from mark, big garrett, custom pipe work, and most significantly and pectel ecu.
It could have been done much cheaper, but in my mind, I wanted to do the job completely.
Have replaced panels with carbon fibre etc. it started off at 1230 anyway.
It is actually lighter than a type r and doesnt have extra weight in terms of airbags and abs equipment.
By the wya dont be put off by the price, a lot of the money has gone on buying bits outright that didnt need replacing, for example, I now have a comletely spare 22B engine with a new crank, uprated rods and pistons and ca complete set of heads. So worst case scenario, I could put the 22B lump back in and run it as standard.
Plus my engine costs included things like billet flywheel, uprated synchro kit from mark, big garrett, custom pipe work, and most significantly and pectel ecu.
It could have been done much cheaper, but in my mind, I wanted to do the job completely.
21 November 2002, 06:49 PM
#65
Scoobeee,
Someone gave me a job, because have an established background in engineering, have worked in more fields than most other people and don't behave like an arsehole.
I think the question was what engine size for the ultimate impreza, and not, as some seem to have made it, 'What engine size has produced the highest RR figures published on Scoobynet?'
Seeing as it was you that asked the question originally, then why don't you read the replies and make an informed decision. If you want the Ultimate impreza, get a bigger engine, even if you don't use it to make more power, it will be easier and nicer to drive, more reliable, and the engine will have great resale value. But you will definitely need deep pockets, as the standard gearbox just can't cope with torque available from even mild 2.5 engines.
That said, a bigger engine is time consuming, hard work, and requires great attention to detail. Or just a wad of cash, and buy a short motor from Australia.
When you have made your decision, i would be interested to hear what and why, I can even help you get some bigger injectors for sensible money.
This is a public forum where people can let you see what they want you to see, and nothing is ever as it seems, so please think carefully before spending thousands on your up and coming project.
Paul
Someone gave me a job, because have an established background in engineering, have worked in more fields than most other people and don't behave like an arsehole.
I think the question was what engine size for the ultimate impreza, and not, as some seem to have made it, 'What engine size has produced the highest RR figures published on Scoobynet?'
Seeing as it was you that asked the question originally, then why don't you read the replies and make an informed decision. If you want the Ultimate impreza, get a bigger engine, even if you don't use it to make more power, it will be easier and nicer to drive, more reliable, and the engine will have great resale value. But you will definitely need deep pockets, as the standard gearbox just can't cope with torque available from even mild 2.5 engines.
That said, a bigger engine is time consuming, hard work, and requires great attention to detail. Or just a wad of cash, and buy a short motor from Australia.
When you have made your decision, i would be interested to hear what and why, I can even help you get some bigger injectors for sensible money.
This is a public forum where people can let you see what they want you to see, and nothing is ever as it seems, so please think carefully before spending thousands on your up and coming project.
Paul
21 November 2002, 07:04 PM
#66
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote - "erm, my 22b weighs in at around 1200kg (without me)."
but once you put an engine in it ...........
Pavlo - You are the one that came back with the most useless replies thank you very much. Others were talking from experience and being quite open regarding the drawbacks of a 2.5
but once you put an engine in it ...........
Pavlo - You are the one that came back with the most useless replies thank you very much. Others were talking from experience and being quite open regarding the drawbacks of a 2.5
21 November 2002, 07:15 PM
#67
Scoobeee,
You will see that there is a clue at the beginning of my earlier posts. Look out for such things "NOS boy", or "NOS numptie". These minor details let you know that I wasn't replying to you, but someone else.
I would also recommend that you get sense of humour transplant. I can't think of anyone to recommend at this time.
However, if you want to get some ultimate parts for whatever engine you decide to build, then goto Lateral performance where Mark can help you with speccing and supplying the right engine parts for whatever you do, and point you to the right people for various services. Also check the Engine section in the scoobyshop, where you will find LP and other companies offering various things like rods, pistons, kits etc.
Paul
You will see that there is a clue at the beginning of my earlier posts. Look out for such things "NOS boy", or "NOS numptie". These minor details let you know that I wasn't replying to you, but someone else.
I would also recommend that you get sense of humour transplant. I can't think of anyone to recommend at this time.
However, if you want to get some ultimate parts for whatever engine you decide to build, then goto Lateral performance where Mark can help you with speccing and supplying the right engine parts for whatever you do, and point you to the right people for various services. Also check the Engine section in the scoobyshop, where you will find LP and other companies offering various things like rods, pistons, kits etc.
Paul
21 November 2002, 07:18 PM
#68
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pavlo-
i totally disagree with the arsehole bit,you have shown to be an arrogant pr1ck on here as far as i can tell!
all IMHO of corse
NOS
[Edited by NOS nova - 11/21/2002 7:41:43 PM]
Someone gave me a job, because have an established background in engineering, have worked in more fields than most other people and don't behave like an arsehole.
all IMHO of corse
NOS
[Edited by NOS nova - 11/21/2002 7:41:43 PM]
21 November 2002, 07:57 PM
#72
Scoobee, recognise this one?
Worked in that back in 54, oh the days just fly by....
Perhaps you should rephrase your question, as it seems you're not interested in the ultimate impreza after all.
Suggest you read this article which gives some good info about history of the EJ25 and EJ20, although the bit about RA internals is suspect (conflicting stories from reliable sources).
I assume you're on about the ultimate car within a specific budget?
Paul
Worked in that back in 54, oh the days just fly by....
will it be the better option for the ultimate road car ???
We are trying to be practical here not idealist.....doh
Suggest you read this article which gives some good info about history of the EJ25 and EJ20, although the bit about RA internals is suspect (conflicting stories from reliable sources).
I assume you're on about the ultimate car within a specific budget?
Paul
21 November 2002, 08:42 PM
#77
Or I'm posting at the same time as you, so I don't always see your last post.
What I am doing may be of some interest, wind-ups and private jokes aside, it consists of the following:
Sti5 engine, supposedly low mileage, just rebuilt
S/H AP paddle clutch
Newer PS pump to clear inlet
Lightened new flywheel
Plug leads
All the above, £1500
Bosch coilpacks (from Australia) £85ish
Lateral performance rods £735
Uprated head stud kit (std is bolts) £???
Regular decat exhaust components £600ish
Regular induction kit £60ish
550 injectors (supplied by me) £270
Remapped (by me) factory ECU £free
Used TD05 Turbo £130
Front entry (welding and machining) conversion for turbo £120ish
Uprated Chargecooler Radiator £230
Uprated chargecooler pump £150
The ignition parts are required because it's going into a 94 car, same goes for the PS pump, and inlet parts. If you have a 97-> car, these won't be a problem. I wouldn't like to add it all up, but I am sure someone will! Should be good for a 350hp car (like david's car), with the potential for more should I decide to spend more on the turbo (like harvey's car).
I am still tempted to use a stroker crank, as I do like the idea of less lag, and better drivability. Although power potential will go up, if you go for reduced lag, you wont get much more power, if any. Ultimatlely power is dictated by the turbo, if you have a 600hp engine, but just a 300hp capable turbo, you will get 300hp.
As you will notice I have got some new, some used parts. I will also have an engine to sell or rebuild when I'm done, the sale of which will offset a small chunk of the cost. Anyone else doing it will need to sort something with the ECU and injectors are not always easy to come by. The above uses standard turbo configurations. If you want to use some of the biggest turbos, you will need custom exaust pipework, external wastegate, quality solenoid(s).
You'll notice nothing done with the gearbox, but I'm sure it will come, (by design or otherwise). I'm not going for all out power and torque so bigger rear diffs probably won't come into it. But I suspect that this time next year, I will have spent another chunk on uprated gear parts of some description.
As far as brakes and suspension goes, they are undecided, but this is more of cruiser (for now), with suspension that suits the (expanding) family.
The problem is that it never ends. Once you have 250hp, you want 300, then 350, then 400 and so on and so on. I can highly reccomend getting a complete new engine to work on, which keeps the car on the road in the meantime.
If I was after the ultimate road car, I would still prefer a 2.5, even if I didn't go for mega power, so no billet crank, custom XYZ and so on. As it means even a good sized turbo will spool nice and early, which means fewer gearchanges, allows longer gearing, more relaxed everyday driving.
There was/is a similar thread on the MLR (Lancer Register), and someone (Blade) was considering a high spec 2.0 litre engine over a 2.2 or larger. You may wish to seek it out. However, it's concerned with a track only car, but the 2.0 engine looked like staying the last time I looked (9000rpm redline though).
Paul
What I am doing may be of some interest, wind-ups and private jokes aside, it consists of the following:
Sti5 engine, supposedly low mileage, just rebuilt
S/H AP paddle clutch
Newer PS pump to clear inlet
Lightened new flywheel
Plug leads
All the above, £1500
Bosch coilpacks (from Australia) £85ish
Lateral performance rods £735
Uprated head stud kit (std is bolts) £???
Regular decat exhaust components £600ish
Regular induction kit £60ish
550 injectors (supplied by me) £270
Remapped (by me) factory ECU £free
Used TD05 Turbo £130
Front entry (welding and machining) conversion for turbo £120ish
Uprated Chargecooler Radiator £230
Uprated chargecooler pump £150
The ignition parts are required because it's going into a 94 car, same goes for the PS pump, and inlet parts. If you have a 97-> car, these won't be a problem. I wouldn't like to add it all up, but I am sure someone will! Should be good for a 350hp car (like david's car), with the potential for more should I decide to spend more on the turbo (like harvey's car).
I am still tempted to use a stroker crank, as I do like the idea of less lag, and better drivability. Although power potential will go up, if you go for reduced lag, you wont get much more power, if any. Ultimatlely power is dictated by the turbo, if you have a 600hp engine, but just a 300hp capable turbo, you will get 300hp.
As you will notice I have got some new, some used parts. I will also have an engine to sell or rebuild when I'm done, the sale of which will offset a small chunk of the cost. Anyone else doing it will need to sort something with the ECU and injectors are not always easy to come by. The above uses standard turbo configurations. If you want to use some of the biggest turbos, you will need custom exaust pipework, external wastegate, quality solenoid(s).
You'll notice nothing done with the gearbox, but I'm sure it will come, (by design or otherwise). I'm not going for all out power and torque so bigger rear diffs probably won't come into it. But I suspect that this time next year, I will have spent another chunk on uprated gear parts of some description.
As far as brakes and suspension goes, they are undecided, but this is more of cruiser (for now), with suspension that suits the (expanding) family.
The problem is that it never ends. Once you have 250hp, you want 300, then 350, then 400 and so on and so on. I can highly reccomend getting a complete new engine to work on, which keeps the car on the road in the meantime.
If I was after the ultimate road car, I would still prefer a 2.5, even if I didn't go for mega power, so no billet crank, custom XYZ and so on. As it means even a good sized turbo will spool nice and early, which means fewer gearchanges, allows longer gearing, more relaxed everyday driving.
There was/is a similar thread on the MLR (Lancer Register), and someone (Blade) was considering a high spec 2.0 litre engine over a 2.2 or larger. You may wish to seek it out. However, it's concerned with a track only car, but the 2.0 engine looked like staying the last time I looked (9000rpm redline though).
Paul
21 November 2002, 10:30 PM
#78
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: www.cumbrianscoobs.co.uk/bbs
Posts: 4,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just had a look on cobb tunning at there prices for short block enigines:-
2ltr forged pistons open dec block etc $3950 + $1000 core exchange
2.2ltr ej20 short block forged pistons etc semi closed dec £4450 + $1000 core exchange
2.5ltr ej25 closed dec forged piston etc $4950 +$1000 core exchange
all in us $
mike
2ltr forged pistons open dec block etc $3950 + $1000 core exchange
2.2ltr ej20 short block forged pistons etc semi closed dec £4450 + $1000 core exchange
2.5ltr ej25 closed dec forged piston etc $4950 +$1000 core exchange
all in us $
mike
21 November 2002, 10:44 PM
#79
I am only just in from a hard day and am amazed by all this ****.
You guys that have not driven a 2.0litre 424bhp car can postulate as much as you want.Not driven my car anyway.
I am off to the pub.
Adam M. You are presumptios and full of ****.
There are talkers. There are dreamers (550ft lbs) and there are do-ers. If any do-ers want to learn by my experiences and get more power than I have and learn from my experiences then I am happy to help.
By the way my car is very drivable and did 377 bhp on a VF28 standard turbo before other mods and an Ion spec turbo took it to 424bhp.
The results and mods can be seen here www.tyneteesscoobies.com.
Thanks Martin for the site.
You guys that have not driven a 2.0litre 424bhp car can postulate as much as you want.Not driven my car anyway.
I am off to the pub.
Adam M. You are presumptios and full of ****.
There are talkers. There are dreamers (550ft lbs) and there are do-ers. If any do-ers want to learn by my experiences and get more power than I have and learn from my experiences then I am happy to help.
By the way my car is very drivable and did 377 bhp on a VF28 standard turbo before other mods and an Ion spec turbo took it to 424bhp.
The results and mods can be seen here www.tyneteesscoobies.com.
Thanks Martin for the site.
21 November 2002, 11:01 PM
#80
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Harvey,
Dont know you but your figures are impressive
But your attitude to others stinks
Surely you cant be blind to the fact that others ARE & HAVE emulated the Rigoli cars over here? :confused :rolleyes
Just becuase they don't go to rolling road days to get power graphs as they do it on engine dynos thats thier choice.
But even with my limited knowledge you have a lot of tourque & power at quite a limited power band..
Me personally would rather have a large torque curve rather than it all going mad for a short space of time.
But each to thier own I suppose - thats why I'm chosing to do my monster build on an Evo rather than my old P1
Chris
All IMHO of course
Dont know you but your figures are impressive
But your attitude to others stinks
Surely you cant be blind to the fact that others ARE & HAVE emulated the Rigoli cars over here? :confused :rolleyes
Just becuase they don't go to rolling road days to get power graphs as they do it on engine dynos thats thier choice.
But even with my limited knowledge you have a lot of tourque & power at quite a limited power band..
Me personally would rather have a large torque curve rather than it all going mad for a short space of time.
But each to thier own I suppose
- thats why I'm chosing to do my monster build on an Evo rather than my old P1Chris
All IMHO of course
21 November 2002, 11:05 PM
#81
Harvey, relax!
To be a do-er can I be doing what's to be done, or does it have have already been done? Can I concerntrate on doing the do in preperation for it being done?
I need to do more anyway, I have about 150kg more to move than you Harvey.
Anyway, done here.
Paul
To be a do-er can I be doing what's to be done, or does it have have already been done? Can I concerntrate on doing the do in preperation for it being done?
I need to do more anyway, I have about 150kg more to move than you Harvey.
Anyway, done here.
Paul
21 November 2002, 11:44 PM
#82
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 1999
Location: SSO2003 2nd, SSO2005 1st, SSO2006 2nd, TACC Rd4 5th 4wd: In my car ;-)
Posts: 2,637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really hope that this doesn't get too personal. People are entitled to express their opinions, whether they be right or wrong. Even you NOS 
To be honest, we can only really talk of our own experiences, and those of the people we come into contact with, and let's be fair these are going to be pretty limited, when it comes to the big wide world of Subaru tuning !
People will approach engine tuning/builds in different ways. It doesn't mean one way is right, or one way wrong, just depends on what you're trying to achieve..........
Harvey has chosen one route, and it's been very successful, I chose a different route, and I'm happy with the results (gudgeon pin aside).
I'm sure many other options will be tried, and who knows, we may all be proved wrong !!!
Mark.
To be honest, we can only really talk of our own experiences, and those of the people we come into contact with, and let's be fair these are going to be pretty limited, when it comes to the big wide world of Subaru tuning !
People will approach engine tuning/builds in different ways. It doesn't mean one way is right, or one way wrong, just depends on what you're trying to achieve..........
Harvey has chosen one route, and it's been very successful, I chose a different route, and I'm happy with the results (gudgeon pin aside).
I'm sure many other options will be tried, and who knows, we may all be proved wrong !!!
Mark.
21 November 2002, 11:47 PM
#83
I think the best bet is to wait until after well lane 4. Where various people will be running a whole range of engine configurations from 2 to 2.5 with plenty in between.
Just reading on autospeed, the Rigoli car runs 42psi of boost, oh dear.
4 bar map sensor please!
paul
Just reading on autospeed, the Rigoli car runs 42psi of boost, oh dear.
4 bar map sensor please!
paul
21 November 2002, 11:50 PM
#84
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scoobeee is correct with regards power vs torque. The more power an engine generates, the more work it can do in a given time frame, hence...
Harvey, I've just read your post on i-club regarding your recent 1/4 run. 12.48 @ 110mph.
If this is correct then your car certainly doesn't have 417bhp. Not trying to make your day any harder but thats down to the universal law of motion, not me.
Knowing a cars ET, terminal speed and total wieght will give you a more accurate bhp figure than a rolling road (which quite literally is pick a number..any number, especially on a turbocharged car).
Just as an example compare your time and more importantly your terminal speed against Secret Agent Man's 12.77 @ 110. It doesn't add up. Quicker times are indicative of good traction/technique. Higher speeds indicate more power. Your terminal speed with 420bhp should be around 120mph.
At the end of the day who do you believe... Sir Isaac Newton or Well Lane?
Harvey, I've just read your post on i-club regarding your recent 1/4 run. 12.48 @ 110mph.
If this is correct then your car certainly doesn't have 417bhp. Not trying to make your day any harder but thats down to the universal law of motion, not me.
Knowing a cars ET, terminal speed and total wieght will give you a more accurate bhp figure than a rolling road (which quite literally is pick a number..any number, especially on a turbocharged car).
Just as an example compare your time and more importantly your terminal speed against Secret Agent Man's 12.77 @ 110. It doesn't add up. Quicker times are indicative of good traction/technique. Higher speeds indicate more power. Your terminal speed with 420bhp should be around 120mph.
At the end of the day who do you believe... Sir Isaac Newton or Well Lane?
21 November 2002, 11:57 PM
#86
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm not sure I like the way the Well Lane 4 lead up is going.
I intended coming down mainly to meet you folks have a nose round your cars and give my budget banger a thrash on the rollers.
It appears that there is quite a lot of money being thrown at a number of cars recently with the intention of, dare I say "winning" WL4
Perhaps we need to move the focus to this being more of a social occasion rather than being a biggest number competition ?
I intended coming down mainly to meet you folks have a nose round your cars and give my budget banger a thrash on the rollers.
It appears that there is quite a lot of money being thrown at a number of cars recently with the intention of, dare I say "winning" WL4
Perhaps we need to move the focus to this being more of a social occasion rather than being a biggest number competition ?
21 November 2002, 11:58 PM
#87
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Norn Iron
Posts: 2,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But estimating HP from 1/4 mile times does not allow for slow gearchanges etc, which would give an incorrect ESTIMATE of power.
I still havent figured out what all the argueing is about anyway. I dont think an engine alone would make it the ultimate impreza, and regards 2.0 or 2.5, the answer is pretty simple.
Bigger is better.
If anyone can give downsides to increasing engine size, then say them. I certainly cant think of any. Any engine can be built to suit certain needs, but the main aim of any engine upgrade is to make a car go faster. A bigger engine will always help.
I still havent figured out what all the argueing is about anyway. I dont think an engine alone would make it the ultimate impreza, and regards 2.0 or 2.5, the answer is pretty simple.
Bigger is better.
If anyone can give downsides to increasing engine size, then say them. I certainly cant think of any. Any engine can be built to suit certain needs, but the main aim of any engine upgrade is to make a car go faster. A bigger engine will always help.
22 November 2002, 12:04 AM
#88
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I would say the price of a 2.5 is the downside
My measly 370 bhp 345 lb-ft 2.0, in a lightweight car, is more than enough to keep me WIDE awake !!!!
My measly 370 bhp 345 lb-ft 2.0, in a lightweight car, is more than enough to keep me WIDE awake !!!!
22 November 2002, 12:05 AM
#89
hypoluxa,
You need to distinguish peak power from the power predominent through the used power curve. Don't forget that harvey has 3.9 diffs, which means he may currently be a little out of the power band (mapping isn't finished I understand) for some of the time spent in each gear.
I don't want to get into arguments, but I was one of the 30 or so people that watched Harvey's car on the rollers at Well lane, so I think it's a little unfair to state that it "doesn't have 417hp".
Still, all will become clear in january.
Paul
You need to distinguish peak power from the power predominent through the used power curve. Don't forget that harvey has 3.9 diffs, which means he may currently be a little out of the power band (mapping isn't finished I understand) for some of the time spent in each gear.
I don't want to get into arguments, but I was one of the 30 or so people that watched Harvey's car on the rollers at Well lane, so I think it's a little unfair to state that it "doesn't have 417hp".
Still, all will become clear in january.
Paul
22 November 2002, 12:10 AM
#90
Subaru Tuning Specialist
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 7.74 @179 mph 1/4 mile - road legal
Posts: 6,654
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm with the 'power' people on this one
I personally can easily produce 500lb-ft of torque....but I would be struggling to produce 0.1 bhp
I personally can easily produce 500lb-ft of torque....but I would be struggling to produce 0.1 bhp