[AndrewSS]

your car is awesome, I love the pictures from the track, any chance of another incar video coming soon?

[Ben]

Originally Posted by munky69

any plans for a lighter wheel/tire combo? the fender idea is pretty neat. how did all those lotus's fair? it was one of my choices before teh wife said no 2 seaters

The original plan was the Enkei RPF1's. I am having some issues right now with Enkei and if the sponsorship deal we discussed previously falls through, I'll be going with the Volk CE28N's.

Frankly, the Volks are about a pound and a half lighter (~14 lbs vs 15.5 lbs) and I think they look nice too, so I wouldn't mind. They are just very expensive and Volk doesn't really deal, so I would be out of pocket a considerable ammount of money (2 grand or so) versus getting wheels for free or close to nothing (a few hundred bucks).

As for the loti... They are awesome cars. I drive them on the track quite a bit and they are just like big go-karts. There probably isn't a single car out there that can out-corner one and they aren't slow on the straights either. As far as lap times go, they are only about 2-3 seconds behind my car and the GT3's which is quite impressive. If you wanted an out-of-the-box, street legal track car with a warranty, the elise would be your best choice (besides an exige ).

[Ben]

Originally Posted by AndrewSS

your car is awesome, I love the pictures from the track, any chance of another incar video coming soon?

I brought the video camera with me to the track today, so I'll see what I can do.

Unfortunately the damn roll cage mount still hasn't arrived so I had to suction cup the camera to the rear window. My guess is it will be a bit shaky and the roll cage may block some of your vision, but it's better than nothing. I rolled up the windows though, so the sound should be awesome .

[Pitcherman]

Originally Posted by Ben

If you wanted an out-of-the-box, street legal track car with a warranty, the elise would be your best choice (besides an exige ).

What about the Atom.....does it not fit that profile?

[CicioSTi]

The car is looking really good Ben, I really like the fender.

I was wondering, just out of curiosity. Do you think that you would have the same effect as far as performance if the hose from the fender to the airbox.

I think for my application that a direct line might not be the best way to go, and I am thinking that by charging the fender with that cool air it will have the same effect without the direct hose.

Let me know your thoughts when you have time.

Thanks.

[Ben]

Originally Posted by Pitcherman

What about the Atom.....does it not fit that profile?

It's not really street legal in the U.S. and it's very hard to get. Otherwise, it would be the ultimate streetable track car. Now if you live in the U.K. on the other hand... The atom is definitely superior in every way, it's just not very realistic for 99.9% of people, so I didn't really include it in the profile .

[nice-rice]

The car is looking incredible man. Glad to see its progressing well, good luck with everything.

[Ben]

Bad news . The video didn't come out. The camera was too shaky and the exposure was all screwed up so you basically couldn't see the track out the window.

Better luck next time I guess. Sorry .

P.S. Thanks for the kind comments everyone . It's much appreciated.

[Swine]

Originally Posted by Ben

We're not talking about drag racing, and I'm assuming SVT Amateur meant stock engine / turbo anyway. I've yet to see an STi with the stock turbo clock a faster lap time at Willow Springs or Buttonwillow, but that's really not the point. This car is about weight loss, braking, handling, lap times, and most importantly, FUN. You need to chill man!

Since people normally refer to fastest stock engine sti's in 1/4 mile referance and not specifically refering to a local track(which the original poster and person who agreed did not)...i took it as a 1/4 referance. It was obviously a misconception that i had to clear up. Who knows how many people search through these pages and come out with incorrect info and facts...its best there is someone to set the topic straight. I wasnt even talking to you directly, i was just trying to help SVT and rac1000 out with a slight mis-step in understanding how much hp the fastest of the fastest stock turbo sti's have. That is all...

Some further info to add into the furry(just for fyi...not to cause any fuss or arguement). I made 265whp and 274wtq untuned stg 2 93 octane. Lets assume that Ben has this amount of hp and tq. I am not sure the exact wieght of Bens car is...but we will call it 3000lbs(feel free to correct me if wrong). That put him at 11.3lbs per hp. My car protuned ended up makeing 297whp and 355wtq after the tune. Im not sure of the exact wieght of the sti...is it fair to assume 3300lbs? That puts me at 11.1 lbs per hp...that and the power band of a tuned car is much more broad with power coming on sooner and holding more power to red line as well as alot more tq alot sooner. NOWWW....... if Ben were to get tuned...... .

Now no more to this conversation.

AND...your car looks much better outside in dail light!

[Pitcherman]

^^^ I think there may be a flaw in that logic. I'm not sure but I don't think you accounted for the lightweight rotational parts such as the drive shaft and rotors.....correct me if I'm wrong but loosing weight with these parts has a much greater effect than just loosing random bits of weight off the car. If that is the case the the HP to weight ratio you used tshould take that into account, because effectively those parts a taking away some of the drivetrain loss. Now with that being said will your protuned stage 2 93ot consistantly pull a Porsche GT3 on a road course?

[Ben]

I understand what you're saying, and your previous comment makes a lot more sense now .

Anyway, as for your comparison, my car weighs approximately 2900 lbs (10.9 lbs per whp, assuming the 265 whp figure you mentioned), and it will be in the 2800's (10.5) once the bumper beams and air conditioning are removed. But, even assuming it was 3000 pounds, if my car had aprox. the same power to weight ratio (like you were saying) and was lighter, it would accelerate at approximately the same rate, but it would decelerate (brake) much faster and handle much better. It also has the advantage of wearing less quickly (tires, brake pads, etc.) and it works the engine less.

Other things that also need to be taken in to consideration:

I have the CF driveshaft which reduces drivetrain loss by aprox. 5% (12-13 whp across the entire curve). It also dropped 13 lbs or rotational mass, which is not the same as 13 lbs of static weight.

Not all of the weight saved is sprung or static. The front rotors drop 20 pounds of unsprung weight and depending on which calculations you believe (4x, 10x, 12x multiplier) that's the equivalent of 80, 200, or 240 lbs of weight in terms of acceleration. I can tell you from experience, I believe it's somewhere around that 10x multiplier because putting 200 lbs of dead weight (passenger) in my car felt identical to the stock rotors.

You can then also calculate the reduction of drag, etc etc. Basically, my point is you can't really talk about the "fastest" car in this case in terms of horsepower. My car is "fast" for several reasons, many of which cannot even be measured, so it's pretty much impossible to try to compare from one car to another.

And now that I got the final word in like a complete post whore...I agree 100% that a pro-tune is in order. Thanks for letting me bust your balls a little. I think we're even now right?

[Swine]

Interesting...i forgot about the rotational mass stuff....hmmmm.

[Ben]

Originally Posted by Pitcherman

correct me if I'm wrong but loosing weight with these parts has a much greater effect than just loosing random bits of weight off the car. If that is the case the the HP to weight ratio you used tshould take that into account, because effectively those parts a taking away some of the drivetrain loss.

You are correct, and if you use the rotational / unsprung multipliers (rough estimate) my car weighs more like 2600 lbs for purposes of calculating the ratio, and once again, assuming that 265 figure, it would come out to 9.8.

In reality, all these numbers are useless and don't really mean anything though . There is a whole lot more to calculate than a power to weight ration to see if a car is "fast" or not (suspension, stiffening, brakes, tires, etc, etc). It was definitely a fun conversation though.

Thanks swine.

P.S. I too think the car looks much better in daylight! I saw those pics from last night and was tempted not to post them because they looked pretty trashy. haha

[AndrewSS]

Originally Posted by Ben

Bad news . The video didn't come out. The camera was too shaky and the exposure was all screwed up so you basically couldn't see the track out the window.

Better luck next time I guess. Sorry .

P.S. Thanks for the kind comments everyone . It's much appreciated.

awwww, thats too bad... oh well hopefully next time we get to see a really cool video

[Ben]

I'm doing another track event on the 22nd or 23rd at Buttonwillow and I should have the roll cage mount and everything by then.

Until then, just watch the s204 video over and over...

Speaking of which, I am going to be working on getting some Tokyo Auto Salon videos done tomorrow.