they cranked up the boost to 18 lbs, and tuned it with his intake and exhaust. its a custom tune. i've seen the dyno sheet myself.. its 285whp and 300ft/lbs of torque. its not lie.. ill snap a pic of the dyno sheet and car next time i see him.

 

STi's stock turbo in 2004 and 2005 was just a vf39... not a big turbo at all. and they are pigs. 3400 pounds + driver and AWD drivetrain loss during rolling races.

 

Who measures weight with the driver? 3,260 lbs isn't too piggish for a sedan. The VF39 is definitely a decent sized turbo for a factory 4 cylinder car. AWD drivetrain loss isn't as measurable as you think it is. Your post should be ignored/deleted.

 

it is pretty close to maxed out from the factory. versus the 16g in an evo which can be kept to make much higher hp levels.

and he could have used that money from the N/A mods and went straight to FI and the STi would not have had a chance. and yes AWD drivetrain loss is VERY noticeable when pulling on the highway. Have you ever tried? I had a WRX for my first car and I would never even think about trying to race in that element, the only thing AWD is good for is reducing driver error and getting off the line slightly faster IF the driver can launch it correctly (which is harder than launching a 2wd car imo). putting the power down to 2 wheels will always get you going faster than 4.

Stage 2 STi's max out the stock turbo. And then you are talking about buying a new turbo, new fueling, new injectors, a FMIC... might as well put all of those components on a lighter, more fun car. the s2k even has forged internals stock, where as the STi does not, so you'd have to upgrade those as well.

 

Mostly not relevant information. Considering other recent cheap factory turbo cars (2G DSMs, SR20DET powered anything, WRXs, Mazdaspeed MX-5, Mazdaspeed3, Mazdaspeed6, Mazdaspeed Protege, Cobalt SS, Mini Cooper S, 1.8T VWs, 2.0 FSI Audis/VWs, etc.) the STi is a equipped with a decent sized turbo, as stated before.

What does this have do with anything? It costs a good $6,000 to turbo an S2000 right, fyi.

First off, congrats on having a WRX as a first car. I had a 2002 WRX, back around 2002, with a VF34 and supporting mods. I'm completely aware that an AWD drivetrain does sap some power (which was stated previously). You, like most uninformed "car enthusiasts" blew it way out of proportion. AWD only costs about 3-5% more drivetrain loss over a RWD car. LOL @ your "only thing" AWD is good for.

And, for some reason, your argument has turned into "stupid 19 year old ricer reasons why the S2000 is a better car than the STi". I'm going to check out another section of S2ki now.

 

My friends Cobb stage 2 STi put 3 cars on me from 40-100. Stock I'd say we would be even from the same speed roll.

 

Just get some 4.77's. I pull on my friends stage 1 STI with just gears alone. Then i rape everyone elses stage 2 STI's when i spray a little nitrous.

 

a) not for how much money they cost. Almost all of those car's you listed are priced well below an STi.

b) I'm not saying it is cheap to turbo an s2k. I am saying that if you want a big HP car, an s2k is a better base than an STi. and you will reach the limits of the sti with just a turboback and ecu flash. so yes the s2k is maxed out N/A wise when it comes trying to tune for more power, but the STi approaches this not too much soon after.

c) not sure how credible 3-5% is or where you pulled that stat from, but even at that, that's still power being lost. it is out of it's element. AWD cars should look for races from a dig, and s2k's should look for races from a roll and preferably on the highway if you must street race (which I do not condone).

d) You do that, fag.

 

Uh-oh! No name calling, the mods will get offended if you call someone else a fag....yes that is correct, someone other than them.

Welcome to s2ki.

 

I just called him a harley rider.