audi a4 vs. wrx
10-08-2004, 11:36 AM
#46
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 198
Car Info: 99 subaru impreza 2.2L coupe
Dang, 535 at the wheels? That, my friend, is insane. I'm not a big mustang fan, at least not regular mustangs, but with over 500 hp I think I could make an exception. How does he keep himself from ending up in the back seat every time he floors it? O, Kwilson, whats the advantage of FMIC over TM and is a nice FMIC that much more expensive than say a spearco TM?
Bpang, if I could've, I would've. Switching seats may have been hazardous at this point. LOL.
Bpang, if I could've, I would've. Switching seats may have been hazardous at this point. LOL.
10-08-2004, 09:25 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 211
Car Info: 2003 WRX (Black)
Depends on who you talk to... some people say TM is a more cost effective way to go and really doesnt make all that much difference. The fact is you could run the stock IC with an upgraded turbo and get away with it. The big difference is that a FMIC, although adding a little more lag avoids heat rising off of the motor and makes it less suceptable to heat soak.... especially on those warmer days. Its pure size and direct exposure to direct forced air are obvious advantages as well. Overall its a better design. The trick is protecting it from fender benders and other "objects" that could damage it and also picking the right turbo that can make up for the added low end lag that a FMIC adds.
But thats all samantics...
-K
But thats all samantics...
-K
Last edited by Kwilson21; 10-08-2004 at 09:28 PM.
10-10-2004, 01:04 PM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 211
Car Info: 2003 WRX (Black)
Engine managment has alot to do with it though. Lag on a stock WRX with basic bolt on's and then someone puts a FMIC on with no engine managment or tuning well lets just say that lag can be noticable. But with the right setup and tune its not that bad. Especially whan your putting down over 300+ at the wheels.
-K
-K
10-12-2004, 12:10 AM
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 26
Originally Posted by ArmyAndy
Hmm.....just today i smoked an A4 3.0 on queensway today. Going going 100km/h on 5th gear, then dropped to 4th gear and gunned it all the way to 160km/h, he was no where close.
10-12-2004, 12:20 AM
#52
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 26
Originally Posted by cabe
Hmm, more lag than there already is? I dunno if I would like that. Does look pretty cool though. How much more is a good FM than a TM?
-. less lag due to shorter piping,
-. but risk of heat soak from engine and turbo
-. Generally less expensive than FMIC
FMIC
-. more lag due to longer piping
-. no heat soak (more effective cooling)
-. generally more expensive
-. more difficult to take care of (its hard to keep road debris on hitting the IC)
That's just the basic principal. What matter is the material used for the IC and Engine Management.
If you have FMIC and a big big turbo better drive your suby above 4K rpm... or else you'll be driving a camry
TBE, Uppipe, Engine Management (say cobb stage 2), silicone IC hose and pulley will bring you to the 300HP range... I eat RSX type-S for breakfast a few cobra's wannabes and those 350Z and G35... Audi? no question here..
10-12-2004, 07:07 AM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 211
Car Info: 2003 WRX (Black)
Originally Posted by feiron
TMIC
-. less lag due to shorter piping,
-. but risk of heat soak from engine and turbo
-. Generally less expensive than FMIC
FMIC
-. more lag due to longer piping
-. no heat soak (more effective cooling)
-. generally more expensive
-. more difficult to take care of (its hard to keep road debris on hitting the IC)
That's just the basic principal. What matter is the material used for the IC and Engine Management.
If you have FMIC and a big big turbo better drive your suby above 4K rpm... or else you'll be driving a camry
TBE, Uppipe, Engine Management (say cobb stage 2), silicone IC hose and pulley will bring you to the 300HP range... I eat RSX type-S for breakfast a few cobra's wannabes and those 350Z and G35... Audi? no question here..
-. less lag due to shorter piping,
-. but risk of heat soak from engine and turbo
-. Generally less expensive than FMIC
FMIC
-. more lag due to longer piping
-. no heat soak (more effective cooling)
-. generally more expensive
-. more difficult to take care of (its hard to keep road debris on hitting the IC)
That's just the basic principal. What matter is the material used for the IC and Engine Management.
If you have FMIC and a big big turbo better drive your suby above 4K rpm... or else you'll be driving a camry
TBE, Uppipe, Engine Management (say cobb stage 2), silicone IC hose and pulley will bring you to the 300HP range... I eat RSX type-S for breakfast a few cobra's wannabes and those 350Z and G35... Audi? no question here..
300 at the flywheel.... not the wheels.
10-12-2004, 12:01 PM
#55
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 198
Car Info: 99 subaru impreza 2.2L coupe
Dang Armyandy, do you know if the audi was awd or not? That's pretty awesome. I've come to the conclusion that either my buddy doesn't know how to drive my car or that audi had some mods. Whatever.
10-12-2004, 12:19 PM
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
My understanding is that a turbo charged car with 227 horsepower vs a car with n/a 227 horsepower the n/a car will win all day long. The 2.8l A4 have 225 horsepower, assuming a newer body style B5 or B6. Also, if only had fwd, then I could definately see this car winning. The driver has such a huge impact on how the car does in a race that it can be very hard to tell. my 2 cents
10-12-2004, 01:14 PM
#57
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 26
Originally Posted by IMPRZV1
My understanding is that a turbo charged car with 227 horsepower vs a car with n/a 227 horsepower the n/a car will win all day long. The 2.8l A4 have 225 horsepower, assuming a newer body style B5 or B6. Also, if only had fwd, then I could definately see this car winning. The driver has such a huge impact on how the car does in a race that it can be very hard to tell. my 2 cents
in a 227hp-turboed car you need to consider the lag... in 227-hp-n/a car... no lag
I watched a video of a wrx owned by an RS on a track (no long straight ways, lots or curves), and on a drag strip the RS lost for about 1-2 car length... both bone stock
10-12-2004, 05:45 PM
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, here is the story and you decide if he was trying or not:
I was cruising 100km/h on the freeway, right lane. Then an A4 3.0 came up really fast behind me and started to tail-gated me, which I still don't understand why coz I didn't do anything wrong. After about 5 seconds of tail-gating, he cut to middle and start pulling on me. So I dropped to 4th, cut to middle and tail-gated him back at around 140km/h. Then i flash my high-beam and cut all the way left and step all the way down on gas. At that time he was right beside me and we both looked at each other. I keep on pulling on him and by the time i hit 160km/h, almost 170km/h, he was no where close behind me. In fact, his car was really small in my mirror. My understanding of A4 3.0 is only 220hp, not 225hp.
I am kinda suprised by his performance too. Because one time I raced a BMW 330ci, he had 4 people in the car including himself. That time, he was dead even with me, it was a good race.
I was cruising 100km/h on the freeway, right lane. Then an A4 3.0 came up really fast behind me and started to tail-gated me, which I still don't understand why coz I didn't do anything wrong. After about 5 seconds of tail-gating, he cut to middle and start pulling on me. So I dropped to 4th, cut to middle and tail-gated him back at around 140km/h. Then i flash my high-beam and cut all the way left and step all the way down on gas. At that time he was right beside me and we both looked at each other. I keep on pulling on him and by the time i hit 160km/h, almost 170km/h, he was no where close behind me. In fact, his car was really small in my mirror. My understanding of A4 3.0 is only 220hp, not 225hp.
I am kinda suprised by his performance too. Because one time I raced a BMW 330ci, he had 4 people in the car including himself. That time, he was dead even with me, it was a good race.
10-14-2004, 09:50 AM
#59
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 198
Car Info: 99 subaru impreza 2.2L coupe
IMPRZV1, I don't think the 2.8s have 225 hp, at least not according to cars.com. Also, quattro means awd, right? I'm not quite sure if it said quattro on the badge on the trunk under the 2.8, but if it did, theres no way a 190 hp, awd car would have beat a 227hp awd car.
ArmyAndy, how much hp do the 330s have? LOL, last night I had a run in with an m3, bad news... bad news. They are freaking awesome cars.
ArmyAndy, how much hp do the 330s have? LOL, last night I had a run in with an m3, bad news... bad news. They are freaking awesome cars.
10-14-2004, 11:36 AM
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
330ci has 225hp i believe. What surprised me was that he had 4 ppl in the car while I was by myself. When I saw he had 4 ppl, i tried to even it up by shifting at 6000rpm instead of going all the way, but still he was very impressive.
M3.....don't mess with them man, those cars can smoke STi on freeway without a sweat.
M3.....don't mess with them man, those cars can smoke STi on freeway without a sweat.