What vehicle do you drive?

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
ziggyholiday

ziggyholiday

<Bronze Donator>
1,447
2,534
735356C8-33B1-4757-9568-FC7C40A278C0.jpeg

Just picked this boy up. Been waiting for 10 years hoping they would bring back the hatchback, then holding off to wait for the next gen to come out with the new engine…..

A few weeks after the news broke that there would not be a next gen STI to pair with the next gen WRX this car fell into my lap. It’s not much compared to a M or similar high end sports cars but it’s what I wanted. It’s awesome and I love it.
 
  • 8Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 8 users
brekk

brekk

Dancing Dino Superstar
<Bronze Donator>
2,195
1,755
Nice, too bad the most recent genstill uses the EJ25 motor. I would have leaned towards a non-sti with the 2.0
 
ziggyholiday

ziggyholiday

<Bronze Donator>
1,447
2,534
Yeah, that was a thought but I just “had” to have a STI. I mean, at least with the 50th anniversary edition there is that exclusivity of them only making 200. Plus I’ve got free reign to mod it up etc…./shrug.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
ziggyholiday

ziggyholiday

<Bronze Donator>
1,447
2,534
I don’t pretend to be an expert but from what I’ve seen it had a good bit to do with people just pushing it too far.

I will probably just go with a stage 2 and get it to make at least the listed 305 at the wheel…..maybe get it close to 400 at the wheel.
 
Burren

Burren

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,453
6,025
ziggyholiday said:
I don’t pretend to be an expert but from what I’ve seen it had a good bit to do with people just pushing it too far.

I will probably just go with a stage 2 and get it to make at least the listed 305 at the wheel…..maybe get it close to 400 at the wheel.
Click to expand...

Listed manufacturer power ratings are crank, not wheel. 305 is the engine which means around 245 wheel hp for AWD.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Springbok

Springbok

Karen
<Gold Donor>
9,559
14,204
ziggyholiday said:
View attachment 415060
Just picked this boy up. Been waiting for 10 years hoping they would bring back the hatchback, then holding off to wait for the next gen to come out with the new engine…..

A few weeks after the news broke that there would not be a next gen STI to pair with the next gen WRX this car fell into my lap. It’s not much compared to a M or similar high end sports cars but it’s what I wanted. It’s awesome and I love it.
Click to expand...
Big fan of those wheels
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Hekotat

Hekotat

FoH nuclear response team
12,414
12,238
Of course it rained the whole way home so it's filthy but oh so fun to drive.
 

Attachments

  • 20220603_174815.jpg
    20220603_174815.jpg
    5.5 MB · Views: 49
  • 8Like
Reactions: 7 users
Lanx

Lanx

<Prior Amod>
66,296
151,131
ziggyholiday said:
View attachment 415060
Just picked this boy up. Been waiting for 10 years hoping they would bring back the hatchback, then holding off to wait for the next gen to come out with the new engine…..

A few weeks after the news broke that there would not be a next gen STI to pair with the next gen WRX this car fell into my lap. It’s not much compared to a M or similar high end sports cars but it’s what I wanted. It’s awesome and I love it.
Click to expand...
g and g has been doing a 2020 sti (i think yours is 2019?) daily driver retrofit to now just of course balls turbo

(note ringland popped at the end)
 
Last edited:
ziggyholiday

ziggyholiday

<Bronze Donator>
1,447
2,534
Lanx said:
g and g has been doing a 2020 sti (i think yours is 2019?) daily driver retrofit to now just of course balls turbo

(note ringland popped at the end)
Click to expand...


Nice, I've been watching smeedia on YT. GaG detailed making a STI Forester......I should have bought one of those from I guy I work with.
 
brekk

brekk

Dancing Dino Superstar
<Bronze Donator>
2,195
1,755
I just cant get into the flat fours. It just feels like such an inefficient engine layout for normal work and maintenance. Normal inline 4 is so simple and logical.
 
Burren

Burren

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,453
6,025
brekk said:
I just cant get into the flat fours. It just feels like such an inefficient engine layout for normal work and maintenance. Normal inline 4 is so simple and logical.
Click to expand...

I4s are more efficient, less expensive, and can be modified more easily for more power. But, the flat four has much more character and if you aren't going crazy, is a good platform.

Flat 6s though....mana from heaven.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,916
51,071
Burren said:
I4s are more efficient, less expensive, and can be modified more easily for more power. But, the flat four has much more character and if you aren't going crazy, is a good platform.

Flat 6s though....mana from heaven.
Click to expand...
What changes about a flat-configuration engine having four cylinders to six other than Porsche makes flat-sixes? Same problems all exist.
 
Burren

Burren

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,453
6,025
Cad said:
What changes about a flat-configuration engine having four cylinders to six other than Porsche makes flat-sixes? Same problems all exist.
Click to expand...

The flat 6 revs to 9,000 rpm and screams. The bore and stroke are different from Subaru 4s, as are the cams, valving, and power curves. Larger displacement makes a big difference too.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,916
51,071
Burren said:
The flat 6 revs to 9,000 rpm and screams. The bore and stroke are different from Subaru 4s, as are the cams, valving, and power curves. Larger displacement makes a big difference too.
Click to expand...
No sir, you are referring to things that could be identical in the four cylinder version. 4 cylinders can rev to 9000, scream, have various bores and strokes, and have more or less displacement.

I'm asking what is different about the flat-6 that makes it acceptable *as an engine configuration* that the flat-4 doesn't have. You're just describing the quality of the build, not anything about the configuration.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
Burren

Burren

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,453
6,025
Cad said:
No sir, you are referring to things that could be identical in the four cylinder version. 4 cylinders can rev to 9000, scream, have various bores and strokes, and have more or less displacement.

I'm asking what is different about the flat-6 that makes it acceptable *as an engine configuration* that the flat-4 doesn't have. You're just describing the quality of the build, not anything about the configuration.
Click to expand...

Correct, I'm describing the differences in stock motors and the differences matter in this context. When mods come into the discussion, anything is possible.
 
Lightning Lord Rule

Il_Duce Lightning Lord Rule

Lightning Fast
<Charitable Administrator>
11,120
59,416
The main difference between a flat engine configuration and an inline configuration is complexity of manufacture and parts count.

In an inline 4 or 6, you have 1 valvetrain and cylinder head to manufacture per engine. In a flat 4 or 6, (or V 6 or 8, for that matter) you have 2 sets of heads and valves and cams to manufacture. This can also increase relative weight but only slightly. The main advantage of a flat layout that Porsche takes advantage of is center of gravity and packaging. If you tried to put an inline 6 in a rear mounted position, it's going to extend too far behind the axles. Alternatively if you mounted a rear inline 6 transversely (E to W vs N to S of the vehicle) you could likely fit in if it's not too big, but maybe not. It will also raise the CG relative to a flat configuration in either transverse or longitudinal layouts. A V8 would be a possibility, and there are several V8 911 swaps out there to prove the concept. Chevy LS series V8's work better for this relative to say the new Ford Coyote V8s because the OHC's in Fords make the engines wider and more top heavy relative to the OHV LS series engines. Maybe go OLD school kraut and make an inverted OHC V8 like the old DB601 aircraft engines? Heh.

Inline 6's really are about the best configuration when you look at them. Good vibration characteristics, easy to build, good power, can be built REALLY strong, etc etc. Why BMW ever went away from them for their small M cars is beyond me.

Alternatively, doing permutations of inline 4's would be interesting from a manufacturing perspective. Inline 4 > double that to Flat 8 > redo that to a V8 (see some of the 500HP double Suzuki Hayabusa engines out there, as in the Ariel Atom V8s) > inline 8 with center camdrive and gear drive for power to offset the torsional crankshaft vibration problems of the old pre-war inline 8s > Flat and V 16s for the crazy stuff. Start with a 1.5 Liter inline 4 with a turbo and then just add the previously mentioned permutations for various applications. The difference is just the block... other than the inline 8 and 16 cylinders.
 
Burren

Burren

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,453
6,025
Lightning Lord Rule said:
Inline 6's really are about the best configuration when you look at them. Good vibration characteristics, easy to build, good power, can be built REALLY strong, etc etc. Why BMW ever went away from them for their small M cars is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Taxes and regulations on engines in Europe over 2 liters. That's why that size motor - often with turbos - is so prevalent. Almost always comes down to politics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.