"Ricer" writes a letter to Car Craft...must read

Discussion in '1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-' started by GREENBIOCH, Dec 1, 2003.

  1. 13.8

    evo's dont run 13.3 more like 13.8 14.0 flats and evo and a gt would be a good race the evo would pull a little though but think of the price diffrence
  2. isn't the EVO 8 on the same grounds as the WRX STI?

    if so that would make it around low 13's since just the plain jane WRX is around what 13.9 or so range as you said
  3. Wow, Someone should put down the crack pipe.
    To think I once drove an import but I never had that opinion on domestics.

  4. the new wrx runs with the lancer they both run high 13's look it up
  5. Reno = Riceville usa... Check it out some time. Euro's and bright half-a$$ paint jobs seem to be the doom of the city. Sad thing is... theres not as many V8s around. Kinda miss having a decent race.
  6. http://users4.cgiforme.com/astrasylum/messages/1681.html
    WRX STI 13.3

    if I remember right there is a difference between the WRX STI and the WRX
    lets see some of the things I am able to bring up
    something like 227 hp (if I remeber right) vs 280HP (again if I remember right)
    but yet your going to tell me both run the same?
    diff suspension and tranny so yeah

    will go ahead and go over the sedan vs the STI here
    3085 vs 3263
    2.0L vs 2.5L
    227hp vs 300hp
    217lbs/ft vs 300lbs/ft
    5spd vs 6spd

    and since the BASE WRX ran low 14's maybe a high 13

    I would guess that the WRX STI would run around that 13.2 range I was saying earlier

    but if you really think all this and the 50hp isn't going to make you faster then by all means believe it

    now as far as the EVO8 goes
    3260curb weight putting it right about the STI
    I would easily again say 13.2-13.4 range

    maybe you should go ahead and read up more if your thinking a EVo runs high 14's as well as the STI

    and please if the STI runs 14's what does the base WRX run?
  7. Just Remember..there is no substitute for cubic inches! Whats the fastest accelerating vehicle on earth? not a jet plane..not a STANKel engine but a Blown and Injected V8! Go watch speed channel when NHRA is on see how many 4 cylinders are running in the 6's,5's or 4's..none!
  8. the wrx sti runs a 14.0 flat at the track with a 5.5 0-60 and the wrx runs a 14.4 at 5.9 seconds the lancer runs a 13.8 in the quarter and the evo runs a 13.3 so the lancer is faster than a gt but the price range of the two cars are rediculous my gt was $21,000 brand new off the lott and a evo 8 is $30,000 which is much more money. If you want something fast spend the extre money and get a cobra that runs the quarter at 12.9 and is only about $2,000 more. The cobra is a half a second faster and the wrx sti pushes 300 running 13.8 the lancer pushes 271 runnung 13.8's
    for the price its not worth it domestic all the way
  9. So shawn.. u gonna build ur engine to run 6's 5's or 4's? and its all about traction.. My awd DSM will smoke most cars off the line. it'll take some serious slicks to get that kinda grip.
  10. Lets not also forget that the EVO out slalomed MOST cars, even beating some of the exotics. If your going for more than just street light to street light and actually doing road coarses, then the evo's ur best bet. So its got half the engine and 5 doors.. whats there to worry?
  11. so your buying your car based upon something your car will never do?

    reminds of me the ricer excuse well when I put x part on I will be fast

    instead now it is

    yeah so I run x time but still my car is a domestic and they can run x times even if they are not streetable in any way

  12. need to get your story straight

    first you say this
    then you go on to say

    second the BASE wrx runs flat with a good driver
    the STI is around the low 13 range

    also you say the lancer is about a 13.8-14 flat range
    f you really think a 162hp AT MOST lancer is going to run a 14 flat then more power to you
    but I think your info is sadly mistaken

    ok here are some things for you to look at since you do not seem to understand them

    both of those show faster then your posted times

    and who knows of the quality of the driver

    both of these are also STOCK cars they are comparing

    do a search on the net and find out some things for yourself

    you are in the wrong buddy :)

  13. most the time ppl also bring up the skidpad
    which I find that very funny

    MANY ppl seem to think that a static rate turn, with a static load, on a static smooth flat surfance, at a static speed, going only one direction is going to have an effect on a very dynamic world of handling where the tracks are not smooth, your are not having a static load on your car since you have to brake, hit the gas and even turn a little harder or softer in a turn, your speed is always changing, and you are not always going to go the same direction
  14. True! I was trying to find my road and track magazine that has like all the supercars/cars with potential stats in it. I basing it on stats from the mag. All in all.. the evo is based on a rally inspired car used in the wrc. Most people who get the evo will probably just drag em, but they have the potential to mob on road courses.
  15. pjdellenger80 .... :owned:
  16. well i had to go look it up and i did and the sti runs high 13's . i looked it up in car and driver look it up
  17. double post
  18. hehe quote C&D
    I couldn't find where you found the info but most mags do no justice to cars times

    I remember R&T was sayin a LS1 camaro SS ran 13.9 at 105.5

    but doing some looking in at C&D I found that your 0-60 for the STI is off
    you claim 5.9
    I am seeing 4.9
    for 1/4 mile times I am seeing 13.3 for the STI 13.4 for the evo
    and with R&T test record with cars I wouldn't be shocked if they can go a little faster then that

    would you like me to bring more info to prove you wrong?

    and where is this PROOF that you have that you claim you read?
    more and more you are just digging yourself a deeper hole

    so what is it going to be?
    proof of what you say?
    admit you are wrong?
    or just walk away from the thread in hopes that you being wrong will go unoticed?

    oh yeah PS the mitsu lancer ( not the evo) with a whole wopping 162hp runs a 14.7
    you think with over 100extra hp it is only going to bring it to 14 flat?

    that's sad man if you really believe that
  19. also I am wondering about how you say a STI is going to run a 13.8 yet a Evo8 is going to run a 13.3

    the STI has more hp and more torque weighs about the same as the evo
    yet you claim (well the second time around) that the evo is faster

    somebody really need to read up on their info before they go about proclaiming "proof"
  20. this is from edmonds car review dont know if it is right but i looked it up so what do ayll think :Although it displaces a mere two liters, the Evo's turbocharged inline four puts out a robust 271 horsepower and 273 pound-feet of torque. As with the STi, the Evo has a functional water sprayer for the intercooler, just in case things get really heated. Those who have already looked at the "vital stats" will see that the Evo is down of power when compared to the STi, having nearly 30 less horses and nearly 30 less lb-ft than the Subie. In real-world testing, however, the difference vanished. When it came to the 0-to-60-mph dash, the Evolution actually beat the STi by a tenth of second, posting a 5.7-second run to the WRX's 5.8. By the end of the quarter-mile, though, the Mitsu was trailing the Subie by a tenth with a time of 14.2 seconds.