Stock EJ22T vs Modded EJ22 vs Stock EJ25

[scottzg]

I know the following:

I pulled really hard on a fwd at wagon. I was surprised.

I pulled inch by inch on a tw

I can see that georryans and subejunkies 5mt turboes with exhausts are faster- its quite obvious.

Hardy and i are exactly the same; no surprise, 5mt na awd.

I think the at/wagon combo is as big of a handicap than na vs turbo.

[dzx]

I've got the 4.11 transmission in my sport sedan and it pulls really hard all the way to 140mph. When i first got the car i raced my friend's '96 svx from 65 up to about 110 with just a 4.11 tranny, lightweight flywheel and exhaust system and it was faster than his car. With the short throw shifter the shifting time is pretty negligible. Against the stage 2004 stage 1 wrx, he wasnt able to regain any of the ground he lost when i had to shift.

[90LegAWD]

The other conclusion to draw here is that the $1000 worth of mods to the NA didn't amount to a hill of beans.

exactly. modern ignition systems are as good, and sometimes better than aftermarket. non-damped crank pulleys = main bearing failure.

from all my modding experience, everything done to the NA car MIGHT equate to 2-3whp on an AWD drivetrain. headers, cams, internal work and tuning are the only things that amount to any significant power in ANY NA engine. PERIOD. anyone who has hands-on modding experience knows this.

[Brat4by4]

The point is for people who think that a healthy NA is just as fast as a healthy EJ22T. This pretty much thoroughly disproves this because a quite modified NA still gets out gunned by quite large wheel numbers on a dyno.

I assume that was from one of the earlier discussions. Yes the turbo has more torque and more horse power, I wasn't denying that. What I was saying before was that an na can KEEP UP, it isnt as fast but can keep up with a turbo. That's because the difference isn't really that much and the final drive ratio is higher on an NA than a turbo.

Ok. There is where we have to start facing up to the facts. Lets throw out the "wagons are slower because they are heavier" argument, if you wanna go race something with more horse and more weight, go to a tractor pull. I have not seen anything about a NA wagon mentioned, that's what you want to compare a Touring Wagon to.

Keeping up. Define that. If you lose more than 2 car lengths on a car, you really can't tell how well you are keeping up. I was following my buddy in his GL sedan (~95 hp), he was driving a car that he just bought. He got into it with someone and they took off while on the highway. I thought I wasn't that far back from them and then later on I found out they hit 130 mph whilst I was barely over the speed limit. But until then I thought they didn't get that far from me. Our sense of depth perception is not worth anything in judging keeping up.

Now the facts on "keeping up" as seen in a quarter mile. I have yet to see an N/A with a quarter mile time lower than a mid-16 second run. Most are high 16 second runs or 17's. My car out of the box with a 140,000 mile old exhaust and cats ran a 15.9 on my very first try with bald re-92's. I went back and dropped that down to a 15.7 (and after I finally changed the spark plugs my car would spin them in the rain when they wouldn't before, but I never went back to the track... i probably left another 1/10th out there). So that is a FULL SECOND faster. Ask any quarter mile guy and that is a LOT of time. People pay thousands of dollars to drop another whole second off of their times.

Ok, so what does that mean? If you pull a 16.7 in the NA and I pull a 15.7. That means I've put a second on you by time I'm through third gear. And what would happen if we keep going (like it was a highway on-ramp). By time you got to where I already was... I am more than 132 ft away from you at that time and continually pulling. Boosting in 4th gear is death to any NA. I'm not denying some people may have kept up with a sport sedan here or there. But there is always the driver, and there is always the health of the car. Just know that if you run into a healthy stock EJ22T with half a decent driver, you are going to get spanked whether you are modded or not.

If anyone of you wants to come to Ohio and try to run against Snowboarded's car (which is bone stock until spring ) with me driving it, you are more than welcome. Or do you guys want me to squeeze a 15.6 out of that one, too?

Hey Steve, maybe I could get into this book writing thing.

[Legacy777]

yeah ironicially, your car is probably slower now than other awd legacy's

I highly doubt that. I did drive the leg wagon home from florida. It had 4.111 gearing. It was slower.

Numbers wise, the numbers I put down on the dyno are comparable to what the 2.5 RS's put down on that same dyno.

So with that, the mods I have brought me from 130 hp up to RS level around 160. That's a nice jump.

I'll see if I can find a dyno sheet from one of the 2.5 RS guys who ran up there.

[Legacy777]

Let's try not to get into the "this is better then this" go around.

Bottom line, dyno numbers are just that...numbers. Do whatever you want with numbers. Comparing cars to cars....unless you have the same driver, same everything, it's a little hard to compare apples to apples on cars. Plus most of our cars are not stock. Even if they are near to stock, they are OLD!! and not all are running in the same condition.

So we can say who and what is faster all day long......but it's not apples to apples.

[Legacy777]

Haven't found a dyno sheet yet, but did find some numbers

These are from a 2001 2.5 RS

Numbers

128.2 whp @ 5750
137 ft/lbs @ 3750

Mods:

Ganz CAI
K&N
Subaru (Brospeed) Performance Intermediate Pipe and Muffler
Magnecore Wires
NGK Copper

I'm still looking for a dyno sheet to see the graph.

[entirelyturbo]

This NA vs. Turbo thing just won't die will it?

If we could take a brand-new AWD NA and match it against a brand-new AWD Turbo (wagon or sedan, AT or MT, doesn't matter as long as they're both the same), the fact of the matter is, the Turbo will smoke the NA. Period.

You can't argue with 30 extra hp and 44 extra lb-ft of torque from the Turbo.

[Brat4by4]

This NA vs. Turbo thing just won't die will it?

If we could take a brand-new AWD NA and match it against a brand-new AWD Turbo (wagon or sedan, AT or MT, doesn't matter as long as they're both the same), the fact of the matter is, the Turbo will smoke the NA. Period.

You can't argue with 30 extra hp and 44 extra lb-ft of torque from the Turbo.

You, my good man, get the NA driver seal of approval. This award is for those that have accomplished achievements in the field of recognition and successful delineation of facts. And if you are quoting factory peak numbers for those differences, both cars were under-rated (japanese manufacturer quirk) and don't forget the area under the torque curve.

[THAWA]

you're not understanding what I'm saying.

[dscoobydoo]

Here to add to the conversation/confusion/argument is the dyno for a bone stock -01 RS on the same mystang dyno



Now, I think with a few good mods, the 2.5 can outdo a stock turbo SS, but agreed, any mods to the turbo will push it out of the 2.5's territory

[entirelyturbo]

You, my good man, get the NA driver seal of approval. This award is for those that have accomplished achievements in the field of recognition and successful delineation of facts.

In acceptance of this award, I'd like to thank my calculator and pure common sense for helping me come to this shocking conclusion. Oh yeah, can't forget the ride I got in a bone-stock Turbo with almost the exact mileage of mine.

And if you are quoting factory peak numbers for those differences, both cars were under-rated (japanese manufacturer quirk) and don't forget the area under the torque curve.

Wouldn't surprise me, much the same way that the Imprezas in Japan almost assuredly have more than the 276hp they're claimed to have.

[scottzg]

I think someone needs to sell their sport sedan and get one of those big lifted trucks!

[Brat4by4]

I will get that 2.5RS graph layed out over the turbo one within the next couple of days, hopefully. How much do these Imprezas weigh in GC8 2.5RS trim?

What are you trying to say, Hardy? Word it very carefully.

[Legacy777]

here's the 2.5 RS dyno sheet for the numbers I posted above

http://www.main.experiencetherave.com:8 ... RSdyno.jpg

again....mods are


Mods:

Ganz CAI
K&N
Subaru (Brospeed) Performance Intermediate Pipe and Muffler
Magnecore Wires
NGK Copper

[Brat4by4]

Ok, overlayed the stock EJ25 and stock EJ22T on the same graph... and it ain't pretty. The 2.2 hammers the 2.5 like a red-headed step child. The area under the turbo torque graph is over 20% more than the 2.5 AND shifted 250 rpm sooner (by the way, since the EJ22 graph was incomplete in the lower RPMs, the turbo would have had more than 11% under the graph but how much remains unknown). Does anyone have approximate weights on the GC chassis in 2.5RS trim? The engine if anything seems weaker than a EJ22, but a NA BC would not overcome a GC if the GC is significantly lighter. The 2.5 does breath better into higher RPMs though.



Josh, that graph you have for the modded 2.5RS is pretty distorted. Any chance you could get it rescanned or do you want me to tweak it over the EJ22T graph the best I can, anyways?

And Hardy, explain yourself from you last post. I don't want anyone here being misunderstood.

[Legacy777]

That was what someone posted on nabisco.....I don't think he has the original piece of paper any more.

[scottzg]

23 horsepower

hammers the 2.5 like a red-headed step child.

Both outputs sound pretty pedestrian. Ya figure a typical family sedan like a camry or a accord put out more than 60 more ponies...