Just ran the car finally to get some numbers with the new forged lower end. The car ran 13.370 at 110.4 mph. Thanks to Steve at 1st performance for getting past the engine rebuild disaster and keeping it running. The best part of this run however was going up against supercharged and turbocharged WRX who came in with a trap of 101. Yes, that is correct, supercharged AND turbocharged. The installation and design was incredible. He had a roots bloower under the hood feeding a larger turbo. He also claimed that the power (450 claimed horsepower) came on at 1700 with the supercharger which overcame the lag from the larger turbo. They seem to have done everything right including the computer control of the system. He had a small lead at 330' because of his 1.98 0-60' time (mine was 2.24, best of the night for me) but then it was all over when I hit 3rd. I got a .3 second jump on the light but the horsepwer differential was obvious and the trap speed showed that.
1/4 mile time and a supercharge/turbo WRX Kill
- Thread starter rconaway
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
instangator
New Member
- Aug 6, 2003
- 78
- 0
- 0
Looks like you drive like [email protected] w/ a 2.4 60'. Nice time though, and I'm sure your car has a lot left in it.
No BS. It was an amazing amount of work. When he got out of the car, he ripped the helmet off his head and slammed it back in the car. Then he yelled something to the guy he was with. They both got in the car and left immediately after that. That sad part was that he didn't know how to drive that well. I had 8 runs that night, none of them over .5 seconds and most of them under .4. That run was a .389 but my best of the night was a .129. His was a .68 which cost him off the line. However, his 1.98 60' was something I have only seen 1 time in my life with street tires. Either way, the trap speeds don't show 450 hp as he claimed.
adding a supercharger, much less a roots style, to a turbo'd car would be stupid if it were possible. why put an inefficient, heat soaking mechanism in front of a much more efficient turbo? it just doesn't make sense. i call 
.
.
Huh...could have been to amazing. Only trapping 101mph....sounds more like an amazing expense and and amazing waste of time and effort to me. A new STi will run 13.3X's and they've got no where near the money and/or effort in their car that this guys seems to.rconaway said:
jstreet0204
Active Member
I agree it would be much easier and efficient to run sequential turbos and have a small turbo make up the lag before the big one kicked in.DBMSTNG said:adding a supercharger, much less a roots style, to a turbo'd car would be stupid if it were possible. why put an inefficient, heat soaking mechanism in front of a much more efficient turbo? it just doesn't make sense. i call
GTsleeper
New Member
DBMSTNG said:adding a supercharger, much less a roots style, to a turbo'd car would be stupid if it were possible. why put an inefficient, heat soaking mechanism in front of a much more efficient turbo? it just doesn't make sense. i call
I gotta go with DBMSTNG on this one doesn't make much sense. I can see running twin turbo's but a root style on a 4cyl. with turbo. Plus an STI can run with an 03-04 Cobra trapping high 12's low 13's. By the looks of your ride all you need is a good set of Dr's and you should be in the 12's easily possibly 11's with practice and right suspension set-up. I see you point though running factory tires and rims must be fun terring the tires up, and by the way nice car.
GTsleeper
New Member
Didn't see what you had for your suspension set-up before my fault on that comment. Get some tires so we can really see you wip some WRX's ass!
The suspension is all road race. It makes it tough to launch but with practice I kept improving all night until the WRX kill. Started out with a 2.4 0-60 and 14 second 1/4 mile at 107.
I talked to the guy earlier in the night and he explained his set up to me this way: The larger turbo has significant lag and comes on pretty hard. The supercharger in front of it was able to spool the turbo up at 1700rpms. I didn't see if he had some type of butterfly system to bypass the supercharger at some point but the s/c was running a magnetic clutch like an air-conditioner compressor to turn on and off as needed by the supercharger. More amazing was the packaging. Very impressive and definitely not budget limited based on what I saw. However, and this is the part that most of ricer crowd don't get, Why spend $15K on a $30K car and push an engine/tranny combo to the ultimate limit to get times that a GT can do for $4K on top of $21K and last 100,000 miles. Sort of stupid and pointless in my opinion. Yes it makes it faster than all the other little 4 cylinder cars but the reality is that 101mph in the quarter is not all that great for that much money. There is no substitute for cubic horsepower.
I will also tell you that on a road track, I not only ran the WRX's down the straight but ran with them in the corners and I'm still working on my driving skills. As the day went on, I put a race level RX-7 and and Porsche GT into the dirt trying to keep up in the corners so I'm getting some of it down. I'm sending Santa my wheels and tires lists for christmas right now.
When people tell me their 1/4 mile times, I tend to go with a direct comparison on my car on the same night in the same lane. For example, when I ran against a Z06, I ran 13.1 at 110 while he ran a 12.9 at 113. This was impressive and I had a direct comparison. Friday night there were 3 Pontiac GT's running 14.2's at 98 mph which I think was the best I saw. Another direct comparison. So now if someone tells me how fast their cars are, I try to compare it against what I saw the same night I ran. Sort of kills the BS factor since I know what my car runs with the dyno numbers I last saw and the weight of the car is known.
I will also tell you that on a road track, I not only ran the WRX's down the straight but ran with them in the corners and I'm still working on my driving skills. As the day went on, I put a race level RX-7 and and Porsche GT into the dirt trying to keep up in the corners so I'm getting some of it down. I'm sending Santa my wheels and tires lists for christmas right now.
When people tell me their 1/4 mile times, I tend to go with a direct comparison on my car on the same night in the same lane. For example, when I ran against a Z06, I ran 13.1 at 110 while he ran a 12.9 at 113. This was impressive and I had a direct comparison. Friday night there were 3 Pontiac GT's running 14.2's at 98 mph which I think was the best I saw. Another direct comparison. So now if someone tells me how fast their cars are, I try to compare it against what I saw the same night I ran. Sort of kills the BS factor since I know what my car runs with the dyno numbers I last saw and the weight of the car is known.
GTsleeper
New Member
rconaway said:
Never done a road track or seen one thats organized. Do you go by times or just a straight race with a line up. And I still think once santa brings you your tires your 1/4 mile time will improve a great deal. I have seen a n/a 03 GT hit high 12's with just gears, tires, exhaust and the front sway bar taken off plus some lower control arms and a programmer. Of course he can drive his ass off but he did it.
GTsleeper
New Member
My bust it was the front stabilizer not sway bar. Took it off just for the 1/4 track. He saw it in a magazine and decided to try it on his.
My goals with the car aren't the 1/4. My goals are 200mph at the Silver State Classic or some other similiar race and road racing. I do plan on making more changes to the rear end including a Steeda 5-link to get the car to plant better under acceleration and corner better. However, I don't plan on turning up the horsepower until I get better wheels, change the differential, and change the gearing to 3:55's. I'm sort of buried in the redline at the trap. The goal is a pair of Ultra-lite II's with 18.x9.5" wheels, 275's in the front and 295's in the back.
