Special Stage Forums banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As more and more facts become available about the STi it is looking like the better "buy" between the two discount super cars for street use.


So considering what is needed for rallying which car would you say is better out of the box? (I am thinking in terms of PGT, but we can discuss Open and GN too.)

Shell prep should be equal.
Suspension will cost about the same.
Both would require running 17" rally tires or a brake conversion and new wheels.

-- What is the difference between the restrictors needed?
-- How about engine management systems (to manage the restricor deficit and not kill the engine)?
-- Will Subies new 6-speed be more reliable (I consider the Evo's 5 speed to be proven reliable)?
-- Sounds like the STi has a better center diff.
-- Is there a weight or weight distribution issue to consider?
-- Is there a torque advantage to consider? (Sube has more horses and I assume more torque and might be a better platform to maintain some torque after harnessing the its breath with the restrictor).
-- Maintenance Costs (more Evo stuff available)?


Love to hear your thoughts. I am not quite in the buying market but an STi for $31,000 has me awfully itchy. And I just love the EVO (and have rally wheels that will fit it).

Let the opinions fly,
Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,443 Posts
I believe the cars are close enough to equal that the driver is the deciding factor - in terms of stage times. I would think that life of parts and cost of replacements would drive my choice (assuming I am paying the bills). Either car would win with Dougie driving. Niether would with @#$&x! driving.

Joe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
789 Posts
IMO, there will probably be more STI(s) available (plus consider the existing WRX)for parts and spares for the near term...

Just a thought! (I like either).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
660 Posts
Edited to fix math:

Mike,

No doubt both cars are excellent. However, I'd have some concern for future rally use of an STi due to the legality of the engine displacement.

Displacement is 2457cc.

If running PGT, now add multipliers for turbo, AWD, and 4-valve and you get:

2457 * 1.3 * 1.7 * 1.2 = 6516 cc = No running an STi in PGT, unless rules are drastically altered to allow this car.

(Note: Seems to me there used to be a variable valve timing multiplier also, but I don't see that in the 2003 rules?)

If running Open, then the STi looks okay based on 2003 rules, since the only multiplier is for the turbo:
2457 * 1.7 = 4177 cc
(Note: Didn't Open used to include more multipliers than this, such as multi-valve etc.?)
At 4177 cc, you would be bumped down to the smaller 36 mm restrictor. That begs the question: Would an STi with a 36 mm be much better that a base 2.0 WRX with a 40 mm? I'll assume there is not a huge engine development budget to make the STi work well with the 36mm restrictor for Mike's case.

Group N will probably always be much more expensive to build than the SCCA classes, so folks like Mike and I probably need not worry about if the US spec will be homologated.

So Mike, if you needed to decide today, and you're shooting to stay in PGT, seems like the EVO would be a safer bet? Another question that would come to mind at this point would be: Will PGT (as we know it) still be a class by the time you were ready to build the STi into a rally car?

Jim Cox
#558



>As more and more facts become available about the STi it is
>looking like the better "buy" between the two discount super
>cars for street use.
>
>
>So considering what is needed for rallying which car would
>you say is better out of the box? (I am thinking in terms
>of PGT, but we can discuss Open and GN too.)
>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
The Mustang thought keeps clouding my mind. (And a much better fit for my budget...)

I was thinking a test drive at Headwaters would be appropriate, but you might not be there...


Mike;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,027 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I read the rules differently (from the on-line rules):

(The upper limit of 5100 is applied to Open & G5, G2 and P are defined within their rules).

10.1.A

Indicates PGT is for 2650 cc and up
(And requires a restrictor of 32mm x 3 mm)


>If running PGT, now add multipliers for turbo, AWD, and
>4-valve and you get:
>
>2457 * 1.3 * 1.7 * 1.2 = 6516 cc = No running an STi in PGT,
>unless rules are drastically altered to allow this car.

10.1.C.

"All other vehicles meeting the eligibility requirements of this section but with larger displacement than 2650cc adjusted will run in Production GT class."

So if the adjusted displacemet is larger than 2650 == PGT

A 2.0L car with all the same tricks multiples out to 5304, and there is nothing to stop it from running.

>(Note: Seems to me there used to be a variable valve timing
>multiplier also, but I don't see that in the 2003 rules?)

Is this the same as a variable cam timing? Multiplier is 1.1 so numbers would change to:
2.5 L = 7167.6
2.0 L = 5834.4

A 908 cc vehicle with all the same tricks would multiple out to less than 2650 and be eligible for Production Class:

908 * 1.3 * 1.7 * 1.2 * 1.1 = 2648.9



So Jim: I think you can run any production vehicle in PGT meeting the other requirements. I have my eye on one of them $95,000 Porsche SUV thingies.

Please let me know if I am missing something -- I initially thought the 2.5 Sti would not fit the rules, but after checking them I think it does meet the rules.

Mike
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
Neither car would be PGT legal unless you run stock diameter 17" wheels or get dispensation from the SCCA Gods to downsize the brakes. I've never seen a 17" gravel tire, and would never run one even if I could. One grey area in the P class rules: you may be able to swap in the brakes from the wussy chick version 2wd Lancer, although they probably won't be adequate to stop the car. I'll have to reread the rules on that one.

Chances are neither would be homologated for GrN either. Both cars are specific US varients that are not sold anywhere else, thus they would need separate homologations. The cost of doing that so that realistically a dozen of us could run the cars in GrN is just way to prohibitive. I certainly hope Mitsu and Subaru prove me wrong on this, but I'm not holding my breath.

Open is the best place for either of these cars, but plan on spending 100k to make a competitive Pro Open car, but only $40-$50 for Club.

Mike, if you really wanna an Evo, I'll sell ya mine. Talk to me at Headwaters.

Dennis Martin
[email protected]
920-432-4845
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
660 Posts
>I read the rules differently (from the on-line rules):
>
>(The upper limit of 5100 is applied to Open & G5, G2 and P
>are defined within their rules).
>
>10.1.A
>
>Indicates PGT is for 2650 cc and up
>(And requires a restrictor of 32mm x 3 mm)

Wow. I re-read the online book, and it looks like you are correct. Do you remember this language allowing unlimited displacement in PGT was in previous rule books (I don't have my 2002 book handy)? I thought I remembered PGT being displacement limited in the past. Maybe I'll have to convert my crappy old Rallytruck into a Syclone... 4.3 liters, two turbos, AWD t-case, no weight limit in PGT, and that "great" P/PGT loophole allowing unlimited fuel and boost mods,... }>


>

>
>>(Note: Seems to me there used to be a variable valve timing
>>multiplier also, but I don't see that in the 2003 rules?)
>
>Is this the same as a variable cam timing? Multiplier is 1.1
>so numbers would change to:

Oops, I see the variable valve timnig multiplier is stiil there, just not in the table, but instead spelled out in the text below the table...


>2.5 L = 7167.6
>2.0 L = 5834.4

Okay, adding back the VVT multiplier changes things, now that both the base WRX and EVO would be running the small 32mm restrictors, the STi now looks like the way to go.

I'd still have concerns about rules stability though. Given the recent past, and the appearent long tern goals to morph P/PGT into N1-4, reduce the number of classes, and simplifiy the class structure for public consumption, it seems like PGT may see more changes in the near future?

Jim


>
>Please let me know if I am missing something -- I initially
>thought the 2.5 Sti would not fit the rules, but after
>checking them I think it does meet the rules.
>
>Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
Mitsu, of course!

- Ramada FIA rally; EVO won't run. Crew pushes the car over starting line - car never finishes the stage - still gets 2nd overall and price $$. Try that in a SubaRat....(Didn't work for AV Sport a year earlier)
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top