[EvoWrxSti]

Evo

Dude, whats up with the STi being a 2.5 L, I think Subaru really dropped the ball on this one.

Let me make my point. All these cars (EVo, Sti) have a rally heritage, and they should live up to that heritage. WRC rules state that the displacement of the engine can be no more than 2.0L. Ok, so Subaru came out with the WRX, it was 2.0L, sounds good. True rally heritage

Mitsubishi came out with an EVO VIII that is also 2.0L, sounds good. It puts out 271 hp, 281 lb/ft torque.

Now this how I think it happened. Subaru simply could NOT achieve the numbers they wanted with a 2.0L, this probably meant that they could not match the numbers of the new EVO. (FMIC as opposed to hood scoop intercooler works much better). So they were in a bit of a hole. I mean, there was the Mitsu EVO with good numbers, and Subaru couldn't get that. Subaru didn't want to be outdone, so it upped the displacement to 2.5L; result? 300 HP/ 300 Torque, impressive yes, rally heritage DOWN THE TOILET.

My argument is this, any car company can make huge HP/toruque numbers by having large displacements. Just look at American cars, 5.7 liters etc. A car company shines when they can make lots of hp/torque with small engines.

You can compare the WRX to the EVO (both 2.0L engines, both turbocharged, intercooled).

You can compare a JDM Sti( 2.0L) to a JDM Evo (2.0L)

You CANNONT compare the USDM Sti (2.5L) to a USDM Evo VIII(2.0L)

 

[dcgray2]

If you are really offended by this then you should probably buy the EVO.

However, if you don't want me to blow by you in your EVO, then you should buy the STI.

Seriously, I understand your argument it just doesn't matter even a litle bit to me personally.

 

[YBnormal07]

If your yardstick is rallying, then yes, they did drop the ball since they are now DQd for that specific class of vehicles. However, there are other rally classes to which the 2.5 L would be allowed to compete. It just so happens that the WRC high end has a spec for 2.0.

I for one am pleased to see the semi-closed deck 2.5. More grunt at the bottom end (if any 4 cylinder can truly be said to have "low-end grunt :wink: ) and likely increased longevity. Not that the 2.0 has demonstrated a short lifespan, but take into account the other 2.5 upgrades and I see some serious engineering for handling additional mods and increasing the engine life span.

Personally, the only thing I'm truly a little miffed about is that SOA kept the tranny design in house and didn't farm it out to Getrag or someone with a proven history of providing stout trannys. Subaru's history with the transmission is not the best....if you truly wish for all out performance without the cringe of wondering if the tranny will truly stand up to your needs. Although I haven't had problems with my WRX tranny, I have seen others trash a gear, but these have all been track issues, and not road, so maybe I'm just holding over a fear-factor from my SVX days.

But back to your point. Granted the 2.0 has a precedence in rallying, and granted the 2.5 will keep it out of that specific class. I just can't argue with forged aluminum alloy pistons , forged high-carbon steel conn rods, a larger intercooler, a resin composite intake manifold with AVCS and finally, sodium filled exhaust valves. I won't even go into the suspension mods as thats apples to oranges. The only HP part crossing over are the cast iron sleeves. Heck...even the compression is a bit higher. Yeah, SOA could have done the same upgrades for the 2.0, and I suspect with a larger top mounted intercooler they could have equaled the EVO numbers, but why bother when they can spank them outright. If you do the math, I'm willing to believe the figures SOA are providing are even a little low.

I truly can't argue your point, as it is your perspective and measuring point, one which I fully respect. I'll just close by saying my measuring point is who sees who's tailight at the end of the slolom, the 1/4 mile, the rally end gate, or the next stoplight. And for that I'm ready to say "Thanks Subaru....now can I talk to your tranny guys? :lol: "

Cheers,
Scott

 

[Soopafly]

few problems

Subaru didn't drop the ball, they just know what sells to Americans...bigger and better....SOA knows the closet that most people come to rallying is watching it on tv and that most people wont care if their staying with tradition, but that they will care about weather or not their smoking that guy to the next stoplight and if they arn't smoking that guy to the next stoplight, that at least they have .5ltr better displacement to help the cause. 8) 8) 8)

 

[MYSTi]

If you really care about "rally heritage" that much then buy a WRX or the EVO - that would make one more STi available to people who don't give a damn about WRC 2.0L's. The rest of us just want a car with more torque and more get-go off the line.

I think the only person to "drop the ball" is the author of this thread - Subaru pulled a rabbit out of the hat with the introduction of this new more powerful engine to a maket like ours which is going through a muscle car Rennaisance. They also managed to give their main competition (the EVO VIII) a kick in the teeth at the same time. Sounds smart to me.

 

[yxan2]

I care and then I dont care because the car will be so much nicer to drive before the Turbo kicks in now, I drive a RS now and like to be able to lump around and have good driveability down low and having almost double the power is good news to me but then its not the pure rally cary but ahh we will survive wont we

Would you guys think that the car has 300 HP just for insurance sakes or some other strange reason? I know in brittain the 218 HP WRX has been dubbed by Motor journalists to be more than that.

 

[SnowbordrWRX]

SOA is marketing to Americans who believe bigger is better...they could have EASILY matched EVO's numbers with a 280 hp 2.0L with twin-scroll...so how would that have been different from the EVO in the largely rally-ignorant American market which responds more to NASCAR? I, for one, don't really care. If you're really concerned about the rally heritage, couldn't you just de-stroke the NA STi to 2.0L? I'm not that car-smart but I'd assume that could be done, and then add a twin-scroll turbo...

Subaru's history with the transmission is not the best....

Really? I haven't heard this. I've heard the opposite, that the 6-speed is a very strong tranny and even the supposed "weak" 5-speed on the WRX is quite tough as well. But then if you're dropping the clutch at 6000+ rpm or granny-downshifting that's a different story.

 

[CloNeGTS]

Yeah, this post is pretty ghey. If you think they dropped some ball...go buy a car that you feel will hold it. I'll take the ass-kicker. Heritage this, heritage that. We have a car that has been built based on rally knowledge, yes. Now think about why they gave us a different engine. Now why would the US be different from anyone else....

EMISSIONS!!!

Plain and simple my friend. 2.0 went out the window because the 2.0 they had didn't want to run on our gasoline and throw out the numbers they wanted. Could they have gotten your EVOs 271hp...maybe, we'll never know. Case and point...they gave us an engine that kicks the EVOs ass.

And Subaru trannys not being the best....WTH. Once again, where are people pulling this from? Find me ANYONE with any kind of knowledge of Subarus and have them tell us just how any Subaru tranny is crap! And if you want to start complaining about the 5-speed, wise up and read.

http://www.spdusa.com/5-speed_options.htm

And once again, show me someone that feels the 6-speed isn't one of the best transmissions out there. It has been held by WRX owners as the 'holy grail' swap of transmissions.

Bottom line....don't like the car? Don't buy it and don't come trying to tell people around here their car doesn't follow heritage.

 

[miked801]

well without *very* inside knowledge it's impossible to really say what made them up the displacement. it's also impossible to say why mitsu left theirs at 2.0l. but, what we do know _for_a_fact is that soa is more than capable of building a 2.0l that puts out more than 271hp, considering that the current wrc car does 300hp *with* a restrictor.
another thing i know is that another .5l makes a big difference for some of us who plan on tuning and upgrading. you know the old saying...

 

[CloNeGTS]

Release Post

Oh yeah, and forgot to address something else in your post....

FMICs do not work "much better" than top mounts. Actually, when looked at from a fluid dynamics standpoint, the head loss of the miles of extra piping drops your pressure significantly with the length itself and each extra bend. A top mount, while often perceived that have 'heat soak' issues, does not have this problem. Head loss is slight, keeping the pressure and intake flow moving rapidly. Heat soak is a problem when air flow through the scoop is stopped for a period of time. Once air flow has been restored, the issue is eliminated.

FMICs typically give high RPM gains while sacrificing low end power. So if you are building a drag car, go for a FMIC. For a street car, a properly shrouded and better designed top mount will give better overall results.

But then I suppose you thought FMICs worked better because that's what the rally heritage upholding EVO has.....

 

[SnowbordrWRX]

CloNeGTS - is it just me or have we been going through these topics over and over again? :-?

Seriously, people...I have to agree with what CloNeGTS said, and also with that article. Seems people think that the 5-speed is "weak" because they abuse it. Ohhh I'm so sorry your tranny broke b/c you beat the crap out of it. The problem is not the tranny, it's actually PEBSWAC...Problem Exists Between Steering Wheel And Chair!

 

[CloNeGTS]

I apologize for being a little harsh in my tone in my post, but man.....talk about coming into the lion's den waiving a piece of meat. Not an educated decision if you are wanting to be a contributing member to the site.

I don't know what constructive comments may yet come from this post....but we should all be civil about it. Otherwise, I see this baby being closed pretty quick.

 

[darwood]

Re: More site support?

I agree, lets be civil and not turn this into every other message board out there. It's rare to come across a board that has intelligence.

As for the original poster, I agree that SOA "dropped the ball". I'm not saying I don't like what they came up with, but the STi has a 2.0 liter every where else in the world. Ours most likely has a 2.5 liter due to emission problems and HP numbers. It does seem like they cheated a bit to get the numbers they wanted.

Of course after having said that, I bet the rest of the world will wish they have our STi. Now there's a change for ya. :wink:

 

[VV]

I'm sorry, but the WRC is not the epitomy of rallying. Just because they restrict their cars to 2.0L and 300 hp, doesn't mean that the SCCA ProRally circuit can't use the 2.5L. I think the new engine is the future of "Rally Heritage" and not wallowing in the past. The cars in the SCCA have over 400 hp. I personally find that more exciting than the WRC. It just isn't spoon fed to the masses as well as the WRC (thanks SpeedTV :evil: ).

This is not the only forum where the insanely loyal EVO crowd is screaming "FOUL". And yet I keep reading that the Mitsu dealers are marking up EVOs left and right. If you ask me, no corporation deserves that kind of blind loyalty. From this site it's clear that Subaru will never get that blind following.

Come on people, it is exciting, but it is still just a machine. Even I have to remind myself of that fairly often. And if my dealer calls and wants more money, it will be a machine I can live without for a couple of years. My Dad may still tell the story of the Shelby Cobra he didn't buy for $3,000, but his life isn't any worse because he never bought it.

 

[91TB78]

CloneGTS is absolutely correct. The 2.5L came about b/c of emissions and beating the competition. PERIOD.

I personally don't care. I would bet most people who cry foul b/c of WRC rules have never seen (in person) a rally. Its just people yelling their emotion about their car being beaten by its competitor and them thinking its not fair. Like VV said..its a machine, a car. If you don't think its fair, get on the boat that feel fair..the STi. The 2.5L was the best thing that SOA unveiled in the new STi IMHO.

As far as the 6-spd being weak...WHAT?!! Who says and where is there experience? I bet this rumor came from the myriad of owners who trashed their WRX's 5spd and then of course the Evo camp propogating this. Prove it... :x

 

[miked801]

well, first off, for all intents and purposes i have no experience with subaru trannies. but, i thought i'd jump in a point out a couple of things i've observed.
first off, the original comment about the transmission was:

"Subaru's history with the transmission is not the best....if you truly wish for all out performance without the cringe of wondering if the tranny will truly stand up to your needs."

that doesn't say "six-speed," it says "transmission." seriously guys, how many transmissions do you think subaru produced *before* the six-speed? i have no idea how long the six-speed has been around, but if it's less than, say, 7-8yrs then it's really not possible to tell exactly how reliable it'll be.

secondly, i read a lot of car magazines, and i think part of this theory that subaru makes weak trannies came from mags like sport compact car that were doing upgrades. i don't recall ever seeing any mention of tranny issues with stock subarus, but my understanding (from multiple sources) is that the tranny they used on the 2.5rs wouldn't handle more than ~275hp. for some of us thinking of buying it (before the wrx came out), that was a deal-killer, since we didn't feel like we could do forced-induction on it and not be going through five-speeds every three months.

i just feel like some people are freaking out about the six-speed (a touchy subject, i know) when that wasn't the intent of the original post...

 

[91TB78]

i just feel like some people are freaking out about the six-speed (a touchy subject, i know) when that wasn't the intent of the original post...

To me it seems a bit silly to get on an STi forum and talk about a potential weak 5spd. I understand where you could possibly look at the person's original intent, but a reasonable person can infer that the "weak transmission" could mean "weak 6 spd." The only thing I am touchy about is when people make assumptions on a car that is so new and has no history. The 5 speed is one transmission and the 6 speed is another. Even if the 5spd is weak (I don't think it is) the 6spd is an all together different piece.

 

[EvoWrxSti]

Ok, thanks for the members who replied without throwing a fit.

I'm not a fan of the Evo, I also think Mitsubishi dropped the ball. They didn't bring some of the goodies that are present on the STi over to the states. (ACD, AYC) But the STi has DCCD, good. So unlike some people on here I look at the subject objectively without blind loyalty.

Plain and simple, Subaru dropped the ball. They could NOT produce the numbers they wanted which would be competive with the EVO. You call it emissions? SO how did Mitsu qualify with the EVO.

In short, it was a very good marketing move by Subaru, nonetheless it was a shot below the belt.

And to the guy who said a TMIC is better than a FMIC, is that why Subaru uses a FMIC on their WRC car??

 

[91TB78]

EvoWRXSTi,

The TMIC is better suited for a quicker response and is cheaper to produce. The FMIC does make it possible to run higher power with a less chance of detonation b/c of boost and temps running too high. The FMIC does indeed lose some low end "spool up." The SWRT uses the FMIC b/c they need more power used in extreme conditions. The TMIC wouldn't cut it at the boost pressures they run and the temps they run the engines. I will keep the TMIC, but I do think for all-out performance the FMIC is the only way to go.

I believe that in order to produce the targeted power either company would need an intercooling solution that would work in a variety of conditions. Both of these cars run at higher than normal boost levels and to do so safely the car either needs higher octane or a cooling solution so that a lower octane will work. There are many cars out there that are forced induction without an intercooler. Most supercharged vehicles are not ICed, but they run at lower boost pressures and they all require premium octane so to make the numbers they promised and to not destroy the engine. Subaru probably couldn't safely match the Evo's numbers with the 2L and TMIC with US gas, so they "cheated" and used a bigger engine making power levels much more attainable without the use of a FMIC or race gas.

This is just a theory, but my guess is that if Subaru introduced the STi with the 2.0L and a FMIC everyone would still cry murder b/c it is not according to the original 2L, TMIC design.

I think the car is amazing. You are 100% correct in your assertion that neither the Evo nor the STi is perfect. That's ok, b/c they are finally here and now its time to decide which is right for each potential buyer.

Oh yeah, welcome to the forum..try not to let your first post (albeit a somewhat brash one) discolor your experience on the site.

 

[miked801]

"To me it seems a bit silly to get on an STi forum and talk about a potential weak 5spd."

true, i didn't look at it that way. i just try to give people the benifit of the doubt.

as for evowrxsti, i have a suggestion. if you look around a bit, it's not hard to find rally cars. you can get your hands on an evo v / vi / vii or an STi in the states if you really want to and, although they're expensive, they're not much more than you'd be paying for the new STi anyway. there are some trade-offs, for instance licensing can be a hassle (but not impossible without some creativity), but obviously you're only interested in true rally cars, which means this is your only option. if you decide not to exercise this option, you really have no room to complain.
i think at this point we're all aware of your knowledge of the wrc (how could we not be?), but what you fail to realize is that most of the people on this board are here because they want the STi, compromises and all. we don't have an inferior grasp of wrc regulations, european and jdm model specs, or rally heritage... we're just happy that we're getting what we're getting. i'm sure anyone on this board with a 2003 wrx would be happy to trade you for your new STi engine, if it would make you feel any better...