EVO Vs. RX-8 Vs WRX Vs 350z

[K2e2vin]

no in 4-stroke form the 13b is acutally 2.6L. if you dont want to compare it to skylines, which by the way are around $30,000 here in the US for the R33(so you know its cheaper in Japan). If you want to put it in another class..put it against the s2000; which many of the ideas were copied from. doesnt the rx-8 tailight look familiar? or how bout that structural backbone? and the s2000 makes power close to what the rx-8 makes.

 

[dohcvtec_accord]

But it's not a four-stroke. It displaces 1.3 liters of stuff. If you took a true 2.6L rotary (which obviously don't exist), the power numbers would be huge.

You can't get a new Skyline for $30,000 here in the States, R33 or not. Those are used cars that Motorex imports. A new Skyline would cost a hell of alot more.

I know that some styling things were copied from the S2000, but what does that have to do with anything? Once again, the Renesis makes better horsepower AND torque from less displacement and a lower cost from the dealer. Does this mean the F20C is shite?

 

[Samba Green Sol]

Originally posted by ef9civicgen4@May 29 2003, 11:35 AM
To all those pussies that say they would take a Mustang, i'll admit they are fast, but they'll break down! i drive the shit out of my little SOHC Civic, and it still hasn't broken down on me and it has 160000 miles.


And last of all, a qoute. "Mustangs are like tampones, every pussy has one."

you know, when you talk about mustangs...the gt's aren't that great. but when you talk about the cobra's, they haven't been out long enough to know how reliable they are. and you call people names for wanting one...RACE ONE! hondas are definately some of the most reliable cars, but we're talking about performance. sohc civic-127 hp...new cobra-390 hp. this whole domestic vs. import talk is stupid. faster is faster. i'm sure someone out there has a geo metro that will smoke a new cobra, and i respect that as much as anything else that goes that fast. people don't buy mustangs for the reliability, especially the cobra. and other than ricers, people don't buy hondas thinking they are fast. i own a honda, and i love my car. but until i do some work to it, it won't hang with the bigger engine cars. and for the argument "well they got more engine"...it's still faster, they win. here's the bottom line, have fun with what you have, but if something can ABSOLUTELY EAT YOUR LUNCH on the track or on the street...don't diss it. by the way, the cobra's engine is pretty well built. it isn't just a normal mustang engine with a supercharger, in the same way that lightnings are just supercharged f-150's.

 

[K2e2vin]

Originally posted by dohcvtec_accord@May 29 2003, 03:53 PM
But it's not a four-stroke. It displaces 1.3 liters of stuff. If you took a true 2.6L rotary (which obviously don't exist), the power numbers would be huge.

You can't get a new Skyline for $30,000 here in the States, R33 or not. Those are used cars that Motorex imports. A new Skyline would cost a hell of alot more.

I know that some styling things were copied from the S2000, but what does that have to do with anything? Once again, the Renesis makes better horsepower AND torque from less displacement and a lower cost from the dealer. Does this mean the F20C is shite?

4-stroke equivilent*; you are right, how much it sucks in...mazda doesnt know how they are measuring b/c displacement for the rotary is determined through one stroke-- you would have to measure TWO chambers, not one, per rotor; 13b has 2 of them(rotors) and each chamber is 654cc. 654*2*2= 2616cc. There you go...

You cant find any real new skylines anyway, but in Japan the R33s are around 30k with VERY low mileage; the R34, which has way much more features than the r33, retails for around 40-50k in Japan. But how much does our mustangs and vettes cost over there? the same as a skyline would cost here.

Again IT HAS MORE DISPLACEMENT...the s2000 has a 2L engine and the renesis is 2.6, as i explained above. and the s2000 still makes power fairly close to the rx-8. the s2000 is some 100lbs less than rx-8, shorter wheelbase. it just makes 10hp less than rx-8(at crank) but makes 4lbs more torque at wheels.

 

[Samba Green Sol]

by the way, i've read that the braking system on the evo and sti are almost identical. the sti puts better times on the track seeing that it has more power and they both weigh (amazingly) the same...3250 if i remember correctly. but every article i've read has the evo handling better. one magazine, i think c&d but i'm not sure, actually had a retired rally driver drive them both, and said he felt safer with evo at it's peak than with the sti at it's peak. i think the sti would make a better street car though, because you aren't going to race around sharp turns anyway (unless you have a deathwish). as for the 350z and rx-8, i haven't read much about them. they both look pretty cool. i like the rx-7 better. the G35 just ticks me off. should have been a skyline. dumb move in my opinion.

also, about the evo, 19.5 pounds of boost is pretty cool, but i wonder how well they will hold to mods. cars like that are already so tweaked, a lot of times it takes serious money to do anything much with them. the sti pushes 14.5 i think. i would feel safer upping the boost on that the evo. but that's just me.

 

[Samba Green Sol]

Originally posted by K2e2vin@May 29 2003, 02:20 PM
Again IT HAS MORE DISPLACEMENT...the s2000 has a 2L engine and the renesis is 2.6, as i explained above. and the s2000 still makes power fairly close to the rx-8. the s2000 is some 100lbs less than rx-8, shorter wheelbase. it just makes 10hp less than rx-8(at crank) but makes 4lbs more torque at wheels.

i don't know about the rx-8, but where the s2000 suffers is low end. all honda's pretty much, but with a 9000 rpm redline, they are very peaky. cool car, but for the money, get a z28 or ss camero (z28 is cheaper and you could supercharge it with the extra money, or at least have a start at it). not sure about the z, but the ss is rated at 325 hp, and chevy usually underrates hp. and you want to talk about torque, the camero, or pretty much any v-8, will have considerably more.

 

[K2e2vin]

Originally posted by Samba Green Sol@May 29 2003, 04:23 PM
by the way, i've read that the braking system on the evo and sti are almost identical. the sti puts better times on the track seeing that it has more power and they both weigh (amazingly) the same...3250 if i remember correctly. but every article i've read has the evo handling better. one magazine, i think c&d but i'm not sure, actually had a retired rally driver drive them both, and said he felt safer with evo at it's peak than with the sti at it's peak. i think the sti would make a better street car though, because you aren't going to race around sharp turns anyway (unless you have a deathwish). as for the 350z and rx-8, i haven't read much about them. they both look pretty cool. i like the rx-7 better. the G35 just ticks me off. should have been a skyline. dumb move in my opinion.

also, about the evo, 19.5 pounds of boost is pretty cool, but i wonder how well they will hold to mods. cars like that are already so tweaked, a lot of times it takes serious money to do anything much with them. the sti pushes 14.5 i think. i would feel safer upping the boost on that the evo. but that's just me.

the sti has slower steering b/c of the use of a small gear on the steering rack. smaller gears make it easier to turn but also causes it to turn slower.

 

[K2e2vin]

Originally posted by Samba Green Sol+May 29 2003, 04:28 PM-->

K2e2vin

@May 29 2003, 02:20 PM
Again IT HAS MORE DISPLACEMENT...the s2000 has a 2L engine and the renesis is 2.6, as i explained above. and the s2000 still makes power fairly close to the rx-8. the s2000 is some 100lbs less than rx-8, shorter wheelbase. it just makes 10hp less than rx-8(at crank) but makes 4lbs more torque at wheels.

i don't know about the rx-8, but where the s2000 suffers is low end. all honda's pretty much, but with a 9000 rpm redline, they are very peaky. cool car, but for the money, get a z28 or ss camero (z28 is cheaper and you could supercharge it with the extra money, or at least have a start at it). not sure about the z, but the ss is rated at 325 hp, and chevy usually underrates hp. and you want to talk about torque, the camero, or pretty much any v-8, will have considerably more.

but do you think a larger engine(displacement wise) should also have the same problem as a smaller motor?

thing is, rx-8 doesnt get my vote, nor does it impress me.

thing is lots of companies underrate the hp of their top line cars. yes v-8s have torque because its basically two i-4s. while i-4s have one piston power stroke every 180 degrees, the v8 has two pistons pushing the crank every 180 degrees. if i can afford it i would like is a 1967 ford mustang

 

[Domeskilla]

Originally posted by Samba Green Sol+May 29 2003, 03:28 PM-->

K2e2vin

@May 29 2003, 02:20 PM
Again IT HAS MORE DISPLACEMENT...the s2000 has a 2L engine and the renesis is 2.6, as i explained above. and the s2000 still makes power fairly close to the rx-8. the s2000 is some 100lbs less than rx-8, shorter wheelbase. it just makes 10hp less than rx-8(at crank) but makes 4lbs more torque at wheels.

i don't know about the rx-8, but where the s2000 suffers is low end. all honda's pretty much, but with a 9000 rpm redline, they are very peaky. cool car, but for the money, get a z28 or ss camero (z28 is cheaper and you could supercharge it with the extra money, or at least have a start at it). not sure about the z, but the ss is rated at 325 hp, and chevy usually underrates hp. and you want to talk about torque, the camero, or pretty much any v-8, will have considerably more.

z-28 is 310.. and yea, z-28 being mid 13's and ss being low 13's, stock. Well worth the cizash.

 

[MR.B]

1. you must be fuckin crazy to think you'll be running 10's with a simple turbo upgrade on the EVO
2. the nickname for the Subaru is "Subi", not "Scoobie"
3. a "rex" is what most people call a CRX not an RX-7 or -8
4. can't argue with you about the 350Z, i'd rather have the G35 also

I just left the DSM camp and now coming back to honda's...
As far as the 10sec pass, I think it can be done considering I have friends that have mid to low 11 sec 1st gen DSM's... Keep in mind the 1st gen cars are really heavy...
About 3,500 pounds depending on what model and options..
These cars are running mid 11's with full interior and the FP green hybrid t3/t4 with all the supporting mods...
All the supporting mods they have pretty much come stock on the EVO.. Plus the evo is 200 pounds lighter....

Now where I am from we don't refer to CRX's as rex but as crix.. If you try to pronounce CRX as a word it would more sound like Crix or Cricks
Either way who cares, you say tomato I say tamato or however it goes>>>

Also if you check some WRX froums you will hear them refer to subaru's as scoobie's..

 

[sportlinecrx]

WRX sti. the IT editors took it to the track and it ran 13 seconds flat! its the most balls-to-the-wall japanese factory tuner car on the US market. even the JDM wrx can't beat it. can u imagine what it can do after someone plays with the boost!

 

[K2e2vin]

Scott Oldham of SCC got the evo to 13.5, so that is pretty close.

 

[Samba Green Sol]

Originally posted by K2e2vin@May 29 2003, 02:39 PM
but do you think a larger engine(displacement wise) should also have the same problem as a smaller motor?

what are you asking me k2e2vin? by the way, i also would love a 67 fast back mustang

 

[K2e2vin]

Originally posted by Samba Green Sol+May 31 2003, 12:20 AM-->

K2e2vin

@May 29 2003, 02:39 PM
but do you think a larger engine(displacement wise) should also have the same problem as a smaller motor?

what are you asking me k2e2vin? by the way, i also would love a 67 fast back mustang

renesis vs. f20c; they make almost the same power, the s2000 has 4lbs more torque at wheels, i dont know how much hp the rx-8 has at the wheels so i will use crank power, which the rx-8 has only 10hp more. also the renesis is larger displacement wise; 2.6L vs. 2.0L so you would expect more power from the renesis.

 

[Samba Green Sol]

Originally posted by K2e2vin@May 30 2003, 10:30 PM
renesis vs. f20c; they make almost the same power, the s2000 has 4lbs more torque at wheels, i dont know how much hp the rx-8 has at the wheels so i will use crank power, which the rx-8 has only 10hp more. also the renesis is larger displacement wise; 2.6L vs. 2.0L so you would want to expect more power from the renesis.

in many cases this is true. but tuning is very important. displacement isn't the only way to make power. compare the f20 to the gt mustang 4.6. only a 20 horsepower difference. f20-240 hp and the gt is rated at 260. that's more than double the engine. tuning plays a big part in the s2000 being so close in power. it's a much better tuned engine. raises this question...is the s2000 impressive, or the gt pathetic? anyway man, i'm going to bed, so it will be tomorrow or later before i can reply again, but i'll reply as soon as i'm on again. good night, and God bless.

 

[K2e2vin]

dont just look at hp figures but torque, which the gt is rated 302lbs vs the s2000's 153lbs(at crank), almost twice more.

 

[liquid00meth]

the STi owns you all

 

[Samba Green Sol]

on the issue of torque, let me point you back to my post mentioning cameros. i don't only consider horse power, but i do find it impressive that a 2.0 makes almost as much as a 4.6. i also said that hondas are peaky and make little to no power down low. from a stop the stang would most likely pull, but from a roll, i bet it would be much closer. but here's my theory, faster is faster, if it's fast i respect it. and you wanna talk about cheap cars that are fast, you can't beat the new dodge srt4, not in the new car class anyway. i've actually seen them pull into the 13's in one article (i think it was like 13.9 but still) and i'm not sure that gt's will do that. pretty impressive either way for a car that cheap, especially considering it's a neon...though it doesn't say neon anywhere on the car. i'm really going this time. have work in the morning.

 

[Havok]

Originally posted by liquid00meth@May 30 2003, 11:49 PM
the STi owns you all

That post was very informative, thank you for helping me make my next car decision.

 

[E_SolSi]

the rotary engine is not a 2.6, 3.9, 857857.7, or anything else its a 1.3
it doesnt matter how you want to try to justify it
oh but it makes 3 compressions for every revolution
all that means is that its a more efficient engine design than the standard piston engine
it doesnt ingrease the displacement