The mystical 13.00 second barrier has been broken. I did this tonight at Atco raceway.

R/T ... .847
60' ... 1.843
330 ... 5.362
1/8 ... 8.297
MPH ... 86.29
990 ... 10.841
1/4 ... 12.981
MPH ... 107.00

Before going to the track I removed the spare and all mats. Took everything out of the car but the seets and my laptop.

My first attemp went pretty badly so we won't talk about 14s :( I hit the rev limiter and messed up my shift to 4th gear (got me 2nd instead). My second attempt was much nicer and got me 13.131.

I had delta dash plugged in and running during the 1st two runs. Between my first and second run I upped my boost a little 14.5 to 16 psi. I normally can't run higher then this without getting knock correction. Using Unleaded racing gas, I was able to up my boost.

After the second run I checked the Delta Dash run and my timing was still good without any knock correction. So I upped my boost a little bit more. I'm not sure what it is but I think it went to 17.5-18 psi in 3rd at around 5000 rpm (only got to see it quickly during the run).

For my 3rd run a guy I hooked up with suggested we pull my backseet out. He had tools and helped me (pretty easy to do). He also suggested we take off the muffler. We let the car sit for a while until it cooled enough to pull it off. I wasn't sure about pulling the muffler off the car because it was "muffled car night". He said f*ck it and pointed to a couple of other cars without them so I agreed. I also removed the air filter for the 3rd run. I also put what was left of the 2 bags of ice I had brought (still in trunk getting free rides :( on the intercooler. I just shoved the ice in the hood scoop after removing from the bag.

I also adjusted the my tire pressure. I let a little out before the 3rd race and the pressure hot was 35 (f) and 32 (r).

Since I really wanted to break into 12s I did a bad thing. I let the cluth out very quickly, I dropped the clutch at 3500 rpm instead of slipping it at 3800 as usual. I know dropping it is bad but atleast it was only 3500 rpm.
Here is the shift points I used:

Drop Clutch Launch 3500 RPM
2nd Gear Shift @ 7000 RPM
3rd Gear Shift @ 6400 RPM
4th Gear Shift at 6400 RPM

List of Mod:
Turbo XS Stage 2 system with 94 octane map. The components of this system can be looked up at www.turboxs.com.

Other Mods:
TurboXS High Performance MBC
ATR uppipe
GFB pulley kit
Colder NGK Spark Plugs
Cat-less Mid Pipe
Samco IC Hose kit
Grounding Mod
Silencer Removal
Filter Removed from Airbox (racing only)
Knife Back & Porting of Throttle Body
Cleaned up (dremel) manifold & turbo inlet
IC elbow cleanup with Dremel
STI Short Shifter (edited 6/8)
"Special Gas"

The car has no N20. It has stock turbo (not FP), stock fuel system including injectors. Stock 16" Rims and tires.

Next goals:
12.75 with VF30 Turbo (being shipped),
12.50 with upgraded injectors
11.99 with N20 :)

Carlo

Sweet!! Thats a great time and a high trap speed too! It's interesting that you were shifting at 6,400rpms for 3rd and 4th gear, how come? Was the boost dropping alot after that?
Paul:D

Originally posted by PaulRex
Sweet!! Thats a great time and a high trap speed too! It's interesting that you were shifting at 6,400rpms for 3rd and 4th gear, how come? Was the boost dropping alot after that?
Paul:D

I've been doing a lot of homework with a device called the AP-22 Performance Meter. It's kind of like a G-Tech but on steroids. It has a comm port so you can download all your info into the computer. I then created a horse power plot similar to a dyno plot only it's real world with wind resistance and all.

Then based on my hp plots and knowing how much RPMs are lost at each shift point I calculated out the optimal shift points. They are actually:
1st to 2nd: 7000
2nd to 3rd: 6460
3rd to 4th: 6440

I don't know about you but I can't shift at 6460 so I rounded it down knowing the RPM will rise slightly if I shoot for slightly less then 6400. :)

If I was going all out and needed a 4th to 5th shift it would be at 6300 RPM.

I very analytical and like to figure out every little detail.

Carlo

Nice time on a stock induction system.

Pulling the air filter would not be my choice, but sounds like you avoided any FOD (Foreign Object Damage for you non-aircraft types)


Your ideal shift points match up very well with the shift points recommended some time back by a powertrain engineer on one of the threads where they got into that in detail.

Larry

good job!!! Those trap speeds (1/8 and 1/4) are insane!

I thought with my 1.83X sixty foots that my traps were pretty damn impressive... but 107!! Wow....

I should have been there myself (12.99X), but my new clutch proved more of a challenge to launch properly than I figured, oh well.

I am gonna go tonight... not sure if I'll run or not, but if I do perhaps I'll be joining you.... got less than a tenth to go.....

def

Wow...

I haven't seen 107's with anything less than N2O or a big turbo...

Amazing how you did it with a 1.84 60ft time. I'm cutting 1.75's with traps that never go over 101-102MPH... somehow your getting 6MPH higher than me... How much weight do you think you dumped. I also took out my spare tire but not back seat.

I would estimate your making what? 250-260 to the wheels?

We'll have to meet up so I can check for N2O ports hidden under your intercooler ;) great run!

-Jonathan

For comparison sakes:

Me You Diff
R/T 1.218 0.847 0.371
60' 1.836 1.843 -0.007
330' 5.364 5.362 0.002
1/8 8.340 8.297 0.043
1/8 mph 83.08 86.29 -3.210
1000ft 990ft
10.907 10.841 0.066
1/4 13.097 12.981 0.116
1/4 mph 103.11 107.0 -3.890


Also to note... when I ran at Atco, the 990ft mark was generally about 0.05- 0.10 seconds faster than Cecil's 1000ft mark.

def

i'd be more impressed with a 12 second stock turbo that has full interior w/air filter..and a muffler than this.

this is really a race only setup..you're making good power to hit 107 though

Originally posted by krave
i'd be more impressed with a 12 second stock turbo that has full interior w/air filter..and a muffler than this.

this is really a race only setup..you're making good power to hit 107 though

I have never been to the track but might be going soon? Who else has shifted at or around these shift points? This might be the reason for the great trap speed if the motor was in the sweet spot longer. Also the reduced weight definetely helped get there.

Good Run.

Nice runs. What race gas did you use?

Great Numbers!!!!

Here in PR I had run a 13.9 @96 with just a K&N drop in and an EVC set at 17psi, but the big trick I think that helped me was the bag of ice on the IC because I went the other that and something might be wrong with 2 of the cylynders (Getting huge ammount of blow-by but nothing else wrong) that with all my mods (Stage 2 plus pulleys, samco IC hoses, silencer mod, Completly cat-less) and did same times and MPH :mad: but no ice bag on IC. Humidity was arround 80-90%:eek:

Leo

Great run that that speed is outrageous!!!! Gud on ya ! Thanks Michael

HELL YA!!!

Good Job man.

Dug the bar is up!!

get to the track and show the power of stage 0


Eric,

Congratulations..awsome run! As far as stock turbo...is it factory stock or factory stock but ported? Eiether way..awsome to see the potential of a rather stock system.

Hmm,
has anyone else felt something is funny that he and Doug are both running freak times at the same track?

I don't hate either, if those times are accurate, then mad props. I just don't see someone with the same mods trapping 6mph higher.

Wow, nice times.

Hey dug-e-fresh, is there a list of your mods somewhere? I know you have the Stage0, what else?

Bill

Carlo,
What was the weight of your car with the backseat and spare removed?

Mine weigh in at 2970lbs without the spare tire, jack and fuel tank on E.

Originally posted by dazz1
Carlo,
What was the weight of your car with the backseat and spare removed?

Mine weigh in at 2970lbs without the spare tire, jack and fuel tank on E.

that's pretty light. Mine is always 3040 no matter how low the gas is (never totally on E). is yours wingless?

Originally posted by TypeC
I just don't see someone with the same mods trapping 6mph higher. I'd say any given wrx could have a 6mph difference in trap speeds on different days. The stock ecu is very fickle.

Originally posted by TypeC


that's pretty light. Mine is always 3040 no matter how low the gas is (never totally on E). is yours wingless?
Yeah, wingless with full interior.

Originally posted by Austin
I'd say any given wrx could have a 6mph difference in trap speeds on different days. The stock ecu is very fickle.

True but we have never seen a trap even close to this high without an aftermarket turbo or N20.. not even close. My traps and Dougs traps are VERY consistant. Always between 100-102.

-Jonathan

I'm the bitter Al of the thread :lol:

Originally posted by mynew02


True but we have never seen a trap even close to this high without an aftermarket turbo or N20.. not even close. My traps and Dougs traps are VERY consistant. Always between 100-102.

-Jonathan

yup, and NO ONE gains/loses 6mph day to day. That's rediculous. I go +/-2mph but that's it.

Originally posted by mynew02
My traps and Dougs traps are VERY consistant. Always between 100-102.
But were you running race gas? At least in my car, the stock ecu *loves* high octane...

Hey dug-e-fresh, is there a list of your mods somewhere? I know you have the Stage0, what else?

Power mods on the 13.097 run:

Vishnu Uppipe
Vishnu Unichip
Vishnu Crank Pulley
NGK 7 sparkplugs
(Stage 0)
SBC i-D EBC (16psi)
Removed Muffler
95ish Octane

Other Stuff on the 13.097 run:

STi Shifter Linkage
STi Tranny Mount
STi based intercooler sprayer (didnt really use)
Full Interior
1/4 tank of gas
225lbs driver, me:)

Currently have added the following:

K&N Panel Filter
Samco Hose
BPM Lightened Flywheel
STi Type RA Clutch
Replaced Muffler with bent pipe
w/tip

Soon to be added:

STi Engine Mounts

I think I will run tonight... but I have pre-turbo exhaust leak, so spool time has been hurting lately. I have all new gaskets ready to put on... just gotta get around to it. Hopefuly I will do alright... also, on the 13.097, I was running a 100% vent GFB BOV and my clutch was about done... slipping pretty good. I have been swtiching back and forth with stock/GFB BOV to see if it makes a big difference in 1/4 time... so far I have not noticed a difference, although my fastest time was with the GFB BOV.....

def

Originally posted by Austin
But were you running race gas? At least in my car, the stock ecu *loves* high octane...

Yes... I've run race gas with my standard and even a remapped Unichip... I didn't pick up much.

Where are you going Doug?

-Jonathan

Originally posted by mynew02


Yes... I've run race gas with my standard and even a remapped Unichip... I didn't pick up much.

Where are you going Doug?

-Jonathan

Actually, I run a bit slower in race gas. I guess i wasn't pinging on 93, so I don't need it to burn any slower.

Originally posted by krave
i'd be more impressed with a 12 second stock turbo that has full interior w/air filter..and a muffler than this.

this is really a race only setup..you're making good power to hit 107 though

Damn, I knew someone was going to say this :)
It's a race track. You equip the car for racing. The idea is to do what's needed to get across the line quicker. I did this while using stock fuel system and stock turbo. With the back seet, muffler and air filter I did a 13.131.

Originally posted by mynew02
I would estimate your making what? 250-260 to the wheels?

We'll have to meet up so I can check for N2O ports hidden under your intercooler great run!
[/B]

According to the AP-22 and from what I can determine from Delta Dash I'm doing 257 hp at the wheels.

You can take the intercooler a part and check all you want :)

Originally posted by Austin
Nice runs. What race gas did you use?


It was mostly Sunoco GT 104 Unleaded (3 gals)

Originally posted by fastnoypi
Congratulations..awsome run! As far as stock turbo...is it factory stock or factory stock but ported? Eiether way..awsome to see the potential of a rather stock system.
[/B]

It's the stock TD04. It's not a Forced Performance turbo.

Originally posted by dazz1

What was the weight of your car with the backseat and spare removed?

Mine weigh in at 2970lbs without the spare tire, jack and fuel tank on E.
[/B]

I didn't weigh the car but I know the rough weight of the items removed is 117 lbs: Carpets, covers and floor mats, Jack and Spare tire, back seat, amp. If you figure the curbo weight of the car is 3085 (full tank of gas). I was running with about 2-3 gals of gas. So figure 12.9 gals at 7 lbs each = 90.3 lbs of fuel removed. So 3085-90.3-117=2877.7 lbs. Fully clothed I weigh 153, so I was racing at about 3030 lbs. Again I'm guessing and haven't weighed the car. I'm also assuming the curb weight of the car is with a full tank of gas.

I understand that race gas will lower your EGT's and you need high EGT's to make good power. You would really need to crank the boost to compensate. If you have a conservative tune I think race gas may actually hurt your power (but you certainly won't det. with higher than normal boost and something like 116.)

-Jonathan

Hey def, could you comment on the flywheel. Do you think it has helped any (like trap speed)? I imagine it could be harder to launch but it seems once you have adjusted it will only help.

Greg

I really like the flywheel... the car feels more responsive and throttle blips are much easier to do for up and down shifting... launching right now isn't so much a function of my lightened flywheel as it is the extra grip of the new clutch. I was running a slipping clutch for over a month, maybe close to 2 months.... (drivable, but slipping alot!)

I have to relearn how to drive.... I have gotten better, but other thigns have come up, the exhaust leak, I got new tires... my old ones were bald... now I am running Falken 451s, and they have alot of grip.

BTW- my 13.097 was not run at Atco, where Carlo ran. I ran that and the 13.1 at Cecil County Dragway (www.cecilcountydragway.com)... and they are a very legit track. NHRA approved. Although, I beleive Atco is too.

Anyway.... I may try Carlo's tricks tonight, at least the air box one. My car weighed in with me @ 3300lbs...

One more thing- the WRX's curb weight of 3085 is with EVERY FLUID topped off... including the fuel, radiator and windshield washer resevoir.

def

What did you guys do, go to a weigh station or something? I've been wanting to get my car weighed somewhere...

Originally posted by annointed
What did you guys do, go to a weigh station or something? I've been wanting to get my car weighed somewhere...

My track has a digital scale right after the ticket booth. It rocks! :D

Nice job, Carlo. I guess all that Delta Dash tuning has helped!

Seems to me that the big difference between you and dug-e-fresh is that you have no cats, when combined with no air filter that seems like it'd be a big improvement over his stock down and mid pipes.

TRS

Good information and thanks to all for it. I'll be making my inaugural run at the 1/4 mile strip soon, and I'll try the shift points you note.

GoodFinder :)

sorry, i don't find what carlo said to be too legit. first off, dropping the clutch at 4000 rpm would give you a boggy launch. so if he really dropped the clutch at 4000 rpm, he should have about a 2.4 60ft time. unless he reved to 4 and punched it w/o knowing right before he dropped the clutch. also the trap speed seems to be real high for his mods. i find it hard to believe he even ran 13's with that kind of launch, from my experience a drop at 4k rpm yields a lot of bogging. someone correct me if im wrong

carlo,
do you have a turbo back or just 3rd cat removed? please post a time slip.

dennis

Originally posted by datdudedennis
sorry, i don't find what carlo said to be too legit. first off, dropping the clutch at 4000 rpm would give you a boggy launch. so if he really dropped the clutch at 4000 rpm, he should have about a 2.4 60ft time. unless he reved to 4 and punched it w/o knowing right before he dropped the clutch. also the trap speed seems to be real high for his mods. i find it hard to believe he even ran 13's with that kind of launch, from my experience a drop at 4k rpm yields a lot of bogging. someone correct me if im wrong

carlo,
do you have a turbo back or just 3rd cat removed? please post a time slip.

dennis

I'm sure he's pretty close to his torque peak, especially on the stock turbo. However, he could probably have done even better, 1.7xx at higher rpms.

Originally posted by mynew02
I understand that race gas will lower your EGT's and you need high EGT's to make good power. You would really need to crank the boost to compensate. If you have a conservative tune I think race gas may actually hurt your power (but you certainly won't det. with higher than normal boost and something like 116.)

-Jonathan

I think in the original post he said he was running 17.5-18 psi.

Carlos - I belive your're making this boost with a reasonable temp because you've made so many flow mods and iced the intercooler.

Kevin

Originally posted by datdudedennis
sorry, i don't find what carlo said to be too legit. first off, dropping the clutch at 4000 rpm would give you a boggy launch. so if he really dropped the clutch at 4000 rpm, he should have about a 2.4 60ft time. unless he reved to 4 and punched it w/o knowing right before he dropped the clutch. also the trap speed seems to be real high for his mods. i find it hard to believe he even ran 13's with that kind of launch, from my experience a drop at 4k rpm yields a lot of bogging. someone correct me if im wrong

carlo,
do you have a turbo back or just 3rd cat removed? please post a time slip.

dennis

yup, anyone who has drag raced and can pull a decent 60' knows dropping it at 4K will get you a 2.0 or worse 60 (maybe 1.99). You definatly need to be in boost, and IMO it's impossible to trap 107 with so few mods. If it were possible I'd be so happy, but it just isn't.

TypeC,

I'm heading to the 1/4 mile track this evening for my first time ever. On the WRX, what RPMs should I be at, and how aggressively should I let the clutch out?

GoodFinder :)

Nice times.

Even though everyone had the right to their opinion don't let this turn into the "New HP Record" thread. Just because no one else has done it doesn't mean it can't be done.

Troy

Originally posted by mynew02
I understand that race gas will lower your EGT's and you need high EGT's to make good power. You would really need to crank the boost to compensate. If you have a conservative tune I think race gas may actually hurt your power (but you certainly won't det. with higher than normal boost and something like 116.)

-Jonathan

The info I posted above is totally incorrect. I just wanted to say this for the record... :)

For good info on the subject read Shiv's post here:

http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=196941

-Jonathan

well, im pretty sure this wasn't achieved. first off, people w/upgraded turbos and more mods are running 12.8's and trapping less than 107 mph. at 17.5-18 psi, the turbo shouldn't be efficient if you look at the flow charts for the stock turbo, also the ecu doesn't like seeing this high boost. also the launch is totally bs in pulling off a 1.8 60 ft. everyone who drags a wrx knows you have to drop the clutch at like 6k or 7k to get a good launch or slip the clutch. no way dropping the clutch at 4k rpm would give a 2.0 launch even, you would bog like a mother. as for flow mods the only real major flow mod is the uppipe. so i have to call this bullshlt!

dennis

Originally posted by datdudedennis
well, im pretty sure this wasn't achieved. first off, people w/upgraded turbos and more mods are running 12.8's and trapping less than 107 mph. at 17.5-18 psi, the turbo shouldn't be efficient if you look at the flow charts for the stock turbo, also the ecu doesn't like seeing this high boost. also the launch is totally bs in pulling off a 1.8 60 ft. everyone who drags a wrx knows you have to drop the clutch at like 6k or 7k to get a good launch or slip the clutch. no way dropping the clutch at 4k rpm would give a 2.0 launch even, you would bog like a mother. as for flow mods the only real major flow mod is the uppipe. so i have to call this bullshlt!

dennis

OOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!HE CALL'N YOU OUT!!!!!!
:lol: :lol:

yes i'm calling him out. these have to be make up times. with 107 mph trap speed, that would have him putting out more whp than some wrx's with upgraded turbo, ecu, fuel system, and the works.

carlo, come justify your time. thank you

dennis

why don't u launch higher?
awd cars launch really nicely at 5k...with a gradual slip.
what kinda clutch were u using?

Admitedly running 107's on stock turbo and fuel with no N2O is the most amazing run ever posted on this board... I stop short of calling b/s. It's possible that everything fell perfectly into place (high boost and for some reason the ECU didn't pull back the timing) and he did try a combination that I'm not sure anyone else has tried (no filter, no muffler, no backseat, high boost, race gas, etc.)

Know this however... I think lightning did strike in your behalf and I would be very interested to see if you can do it again.

-Jonathan

I think it's possible, but 107 is a very high trap speed! Although only 2MPH off where i think he should be at at12.9-105MPH- But that two mph should put him around 12.7 or 12.6 IMO.
Maybe the with ras gas the computer doesn't pull the timing at all at higher boost levels since its possible to run without any detonation and that helped his times alot.. Either way I still believe him, why would someone make up a time? Carlo just post the slip for ****s and giggles..
Carlo, are you using the stock ECU, or an AFC??
Paul
edit: Your using the Delta Dash i just read.. So perhaps the race gas and great tuning by you lead to those great times(besides the benefit of your mods).

i don't care how freakish wrx's get but its not this good. the track must be a downhill track w ith a slight 1 degree slant. 107 mph trap should put him in mid 12's. but what really gives it off that you all are missing is the 3750 rpm clutch drop, no way in hates will this give you a good launch. the uppipe reduces spool time by what, 200 rpm? whoopy, still get a boggy launch. i've taken out my rear seats before and lets say both piece combined don't even weigh 30 lbs, as i can remember both pieces are real light and foamish. as for removal of muffler, gives a few hp but not as much as a turboback. spare tire and mats thats about 30 ish lbs. no filter doesn't seem to give much hp either.

dennis

Originally posted by datdudedennis
well, im pretty sure this wasn't achieved. first off, people w/upgraded turbos and more mods are running 12.8's and trapping less than 107 mph. at 17.5-18 psi, the turbo shouldn't be efficient if you look at the flow charts for the stock turbo, also the ecu doesn't like seeing this high boost. also the launch is totally bs in pulling off a 1.8 60 ft. everyone who drags a wrx knows you have to drop the clutch at like 6k or 7k to get a good launch or slip the clutch. no way dropping the clutch at 4k rpm would give a 2.0 launch even, you would bog like a mother. as for flow mods the only real major flow mod is the uppipe. so i have to call this bullshlt!

dennis

Well, I'm pretty sure this WAS achieved :). I agree with you, many people with upgraded turbos are running slower than 12.8s. However, many people with upgraded turbos are running much less than 12.8s too. I'm not sure I can agree with you about people running more mods per say. If you go back and re-read my first post you'll see I have most of the performance mods people are using to get good times.

I'm running a tuned Unichip and the ECU will only see 13.5 lbs of boost. Freezing/chilling your intercooler will help offset the efficientcy of the turbo a little and will let you run a little higher boost. The samco hoses, higher octane and colder plugs don't hurt either.

You can believe what you wish to about the launch but I'd suggest you check out the launch style of the "faster" WRX drivers and you'll see under 5K launches and no one is doing 6 or 7K launches.

Your comment about flow mods is way off. What more could/can I do? Let's see, Samco IC hoses (this is like getting 1 lb of "free boost"), Air-Intake mod, No air filter, Cat-less uppipe, catless downpipe, catless midpipe, no muffler, turbo, manifold (driver to passenger side), IC elbows, knife edge and throttle body mods.

BTW, I've tried no less then 4 different uppipes on my car before settling on the ATR uppipe.

Originally posted by datdudedennis
yes i'm calling him out. these have to be make up times. with 107 mph trap speed, that would have him putting out more whp than some wrx's with upgraded turbo, ecu, fuel system, and the works.

carlo, come justify your time. thank you

dennis

I'm not sure I'd agree 100% with this but, I'd say I was putting out more hp then some people with FP turbos and around the same hp as people with VF30 turbos without upgraded fuel systems.

I'll base this last statement on my own car. I've just upgraded as of Monday to a VF30 turbo and with 94 octane gas and no Unichip mapping adjustment my car is not putting out the hp it was before the turbo upgrade running on my racing gas. Of course the car isn't tuned yet (waiting for money for injectors). My hp does spike about 5hp higher then with the stock turbo but my power band is not what is was. I'm sure that a proper unichip mapping and injectors will help with this.

Originally posted by secretaznboy
why don't u launch higher?
awd cars launch really nicely at 5k...with a gradual slip.
what kinda clutch were u using?

Trial and error more than anything else. I read a lot about other's launching techniques. Nathan and Phil seem to be about the best (with commentary) so I tried to mimmick them as much as I could. At around 4500 RPM I got to much clutch burn while "slipping" the clutch. So I kept practicing with lower RPMs and letting the clutch out faster and faster. I finaly settled on the lower RPM launch with a quicker clutch let off. Since the run I've talked to Nathan on the phone and got him to describe his style to me. What I never fully gathered from the message base is what is a clutch slip. In my head it was letting the clutch out over a 2 second period of time. Of course this "burns" the clutch. Since talking to him and finding out what he calls slipping the clutch is really closer to "dropping the clutch" then to "slipping" it (in my head), I'd now classify my lauch style as slipping the clutch and not dropping it. The clutch is let out more like 1/2 second (if that) and not over 1 or 2 seconds. You also don't get that nasty burning smell.

When I upgraded to the light weight/underdriven pulley kit (GFB) and went from around 4000-4100 RPM lauch to 3500-3600 RPM lauch without bogging. For me the key was to find the LOWEST RPM lauch that I could pull off without bogging. This then gives me the rest of the RPM band to use in first gear. If I launched higher then I would have to shift into 2nd quicker. The lauch is by far the part of dragging that I STILL need much work on. I DO bog about 1 in 3 or 4 runs (practice with AP-22 or at track).

Originally posted by mynew02
Admitedly running 107's on stock turbo and fuel with no N2O is the most amazing run ever posted on this board... I stop short of calling b/s. It's possible that everything fell perfectly into place (high boost and for some reason the ECU didn't pull back the timing) and he did try a combination that I'm not sure anyone else has tried (no filter, no muffler, no backseat, high boost, race gas, etc.)

Know this however... I think lightning did strike in your behalf and I would be very interested to see if you can do it again.

-Jonathan

Originally posted by PaulRex

Maybe the with ras gas the computer doesn't pull the timing at all at higher boost levels since its possible to run without any detonation and that helped his times alot.. Either way I still believe him, why would someone make up a time? Carlo just post the slip for ****s and giggles..



Thanks, Jonathan & PaulRex, for having a little faith :) I'm not sure I'd say everything fell into place or everything was put in place but I'd agree the car was running awesome. The power of Delta Dash to monitor what your car is doing is nothing short of amazing. As you know, the stock ECU is pretty unbelievable as to how much it can correct and re-adjust things (with or without Unichip). I would almost bet that if I would have run 2 more times that night without any adjustments that my times would have been back up to 13.2s as the ECU re-adjusts things. The keys to the ECU seems to be to let it adjust with "lower" performance and then you can crank it up a little, for a run or two. The ECU then learns your new settings and starts adjusting things again.

Per your suggestion Paul, I'll post the timeslips next week when I get back to work and have use of a scanner. No one asked for them before. Damn, bunch of "Doubting Thomas's".

Carlo

where is the slip???


Now that you can't "re-create" this run because of your "new"
turbo. :confused:

Originally posted by Carlo

amazing. As you know, the stock ECU is pretty unbelievable as to how much it can correct and re-adjust things (with or without Unichip). I would almost bet that if I would have run 2 more times that night without any adjustments that my times would have been back up to 13.2s as the ECU re-adjusts things. The keys to the ECU seems to be to let it adjust with "lower" performance and then you can crank it up a little, for a run or two. The ECU then learns your new settings and starts adjusting things again.

Carlo

:) Yay, another person sees that the stock ECU is pretty good and if you learn how to use it, adjust your driving style, cruise around at like 13, let it advance the timing, then if you need a quick burst go up to 15 or so for a few wot runs then back down.

I think I wrote about this before....:p

Oh yeah, our ECU needs to be flogged for a while when you lower the boost, redline every gear, stick around in the 4k plus range, just have fun, and you'll see that you have some insane mid-range and part throttle pull with only 12 psi.

Another thing I found with my ProfecB is to let the boost climb slowly, but your throttle is the best boost controller. With a slow rate of boost build you'll see that you can roll on the throttle and get better response than just mashing it, at part throttle 5-8 psi can give you some excellent response. This is all highway/freeway driving, observed for the last 13,000 miles on a totally stock car.

You really can get some good performance from the WRX for a limited time. I kind of got it down to a science. Without removing weight I'm at the end of my rope with the stock turbo, fuel pump and injectors.

For my car, the limiting factor WAS NOT the turbo. It was/is the injectors. I was at max fuel injector limit. Now with the upgraded turbo I'm still at the limits of the injectors (only faster).

I thought about seeing how far I could push it without fuel and turbo upgrades but at the same time this is my daily driver and it's not a good idea to be pushing the injectors that much that hard.

I'll probably be ordering a set of injectors late this week and will be continueing the journey to lower times.

BTW, some of the other mods that I considered were header/manifold replacements, lightened flywheel (may hurt performance), cold air or short intake system. Smaller/lighter wheels (15 inch), lowering car more, for less frontal area. Chopping 1.5-3 inches from roof for same reason as above, removing more weight from car, getting the stock ECU customed tuned, fluid-to-air intercooler.

These are all options that I will probably do in the future, but it's hard to justify things like manifold upgrades for $800+ for a few horses (haven't seen dyno info yet), when you can get lucky and pick up a VF-30 for $800 and have the ability for 50+ horses. :)

For now I'm holding on to my stock turbo and will probably put it back on in the near future to see what the WRX can do with upgraded manifold & injectors. I'd bet that 12.8s could be done.

I've also been exploring alternate fuels with good results. I'm thinking I "might" be able to do 11s with the mods mentioned above and VF-30 before going to N20. Of course bang-for-the-buck a wet N2O system will shave mucho time of the 1/4 so I don't know how long it will be before I have that on my ride. I had it on my Vette and all I can say is "what-a-difference".

I actually think it's possible to get into the high 10s without touching the block.

With all this being said, I STILL think the best upgrade will be better ECU management. This could come from an ECU re-program (Yoshie or Ecutek) or from a complete replacement system like AEM. I'm leaning towards the latter but I'm just not sure. The ability to control your own maps in critical for really pushing it and the stock ECU is really difficult to manipulate CONSTANTLY. Maybe a reprogrammed ECU in combo with a Unichip (programmable preferred) will be the ticket.

I actually removed more weight from my car then I originally reported. I forgot about a few pieces of my car that are removed. They are all the height shields. My ride has none. This includes the manifold shields and the upper and lower turbo shields. I don't know what they weigh but they weigh more then the look :) I'll weigh them and report back.

In case anyone is wondering I originally took them off when I was cleaning up all the factory stuff. I left them off in case of any leaks and just never put them back on. I also don't have the black plastic shield on either. I probably should put that back on.

Carlo

ok carlo,
i still dont' see a time slip, also in your first post you never said you had a unichip or downpipe. and now you say you do? and don't use the word dump unless you really did it, dumping the clutch means just pulling your foot back and letting the clutch come back all on its own with no added resistance. well post a time slip and prove it. its kinda of fishy you would leave out the downpipe and unichip mod but mention little mods like knife edging.

dennis

dennis-

He stated in his first post that he had the TurboXs stage 2 kit. That includes a unichip and complete turbo back.

TRS

oops didn't see the stage II part, but carlo, we're still watiing for a time slip. now it seems believable, just post a time slip though.

dennis

If you take a look at the message I wrote earlier today at 06-08-2002 10:23 AM, you'll see I said:

"Per your suggestion Paul, I'll post the timeslips next week when I get back to work and have use of a scanner. No one asked for them before. Damn, bunch of "Doubting Thomas's". "

No one previously thought to ask for it earlier. Now, everyone wants to see it to "believe" it. Would you guys like notorized statements from the witnesses? How about we enter video tape as exibit "B"? :)

What I find really funny is that others have gotten really close to 12.99 I have the same or more mods and no one doubts them but does me. (The price for being first).

Example: Dug-e-fresh had a very close setup to mine during his 13.097 run. We're talking a difference of 13.097-12.981 or 0.116 seconds difference. He ran with full interior, 1/4 tank of gas and he weighs 225 lbs. I ran without back seat, heat covers, about 1 or 2 gallons less full and weigh 155 lbs. That's a difference in weight of atleast 125 lbs. The going "rule-of-weight" is that every pound costs you 0.01 in the quarter. With the weight reduction in his run, he would have been faster than I. I also had the samco IC hoses which DO help the turbo. It's almost like getting 1 psi increase in boost for "free" at the same turbo effeciency. I was also running cat-less and I don't think he was. I've also spent a lot of time cleaning and port matching things. All things said his car IS probably faster then mine.

I also remember reading that someone did a 13.00 at altitude. If memory is working (might not be) it was at 3600 feet. Guess what, if you take altitude into consideration then this car is just ran a 12.45 which is faster then mine or Deg-e-fresh's.

Stick Nathan in either car and with his 1.7s type launches and he'd toast both of us.

Point being this isn't as big a deal as it seems and others WILL no doubt be FASTER still.

Carlo

Carlo, what did you mean by chopping 1-3inches off the roof? Do you mean that that would be the effect of lowering the car, or that your actually going to chop 1.5-3inches off the roof? I hope thats not a stupid question i just never heard of doing that before..

Also, i must absolutly agree that weight can play a large role in 1/4mile times, I know that my car feels alot slower with a full tank of gas and a spare tire.
I wouldn't doubt that if your car was 100lbs heavier that you would have ran a 13.0

On another note, after replacing the OEM TB exhuast with a stromung DP and fabricated the rest in 2.5inch SS to an STI muffler(which weighs about 2lbs. less that stock), I'd bet my car is 15-20lbs. lighter at least. The OEM exhuast has sheilds all the way back over the piping, as well as one resonator, and two catalytic converters.
I have the GFB pulleys as well which weigh 4lbs. lighter than stock combined(crank/alt.) The spare tire weighs 25lbs. The jack and tools about 5lbs.

Ok, thats just some random info. for ya'
peace!
Paul

Originally posted by PaulRex
Carlo, what did you mean by chopping 1-3inches off the roof? Do you mean that that would be the effect of lowering the car, or that your actually going to chop 1.5-3inches off the roof? I hope thats not a stupid question i just never heard of doing that before..


There are two ways to make a car faster: One increase horse power and second to reduce drag.

Picture the roof line being lower but the top of the doors are the same height. In other words all the "glass" would become shorter. I'd also replace the glass with lighter lexan to further reduce weight. The idea of "lowering" the "glass/roof" is to reduce drag or frontal area :) I'm 6 foot and don't like when my head touches the roof but the WRX has lots of room up there.

I don't know of anyone who has done this on a WRX yet. The shop I used when I did this to my Vette is no longer in business and I wouldn't want any Minny, Moe, or Jack to do this to my car. This is one mod I wouldn't do myself (not yet any way).

Carlo

Carlo,

What would you say was your main contributer to the high (107) trap speed??

I have never heard of a stock turbo doing that. That's all!!

Great times.

You want to talk about someone who doesn't get belived? Search on "boostin1320". He claimed a 12.8 and has a MRT dogbox and nobody belived him.

Kevin

The title of this thread is kind of confusing. It almost sounds like you are claiming this run on pump gas, but after reading the whole thread it is clear you just mean stock fuel system (i.e. injectors, rails, etc.) on Race Fuel.

Maybe that is causing some of the confusion?

Maybe not though...lots of people just like to argue ;)

Regards,

Aaron
http://www.AzScooby.com
http://www.ScoobyMods.com

Well I got the timeslip scanned but it's to big to post. It's about 250K in size. The only graphic program I have is MS paint so I chopped and chopped until I got just under 50K. This is the file attached.

If anyone with a good graphic program wants to do a better job, I can email the scanned file and you can shrink it down for me. Either email it back to me or post it.

Otherwise, this will have to do for now.

Carlo

Originally posted by mynew02

Yes... I've run race gas with my standard and even a remapped Unichip... I didn't pick up much.


Race gas will allow you to run higher boost or I think leaner A/F ratio without knocking - but if you don't dial in higher boost or lean out the mixture - it won't do much of anything.

Good Luck.

Originally posted by Carlo


There are two ways to make a car faster: One increase horse power and second to reduce drag.

Picture the roof line being lower but the top of the doors are the same height. In other words all the "glass" would become shorter. I'd also replace the glass with lighter lexan to further reduce weight. The idea of "lowering" the "glass/roof" is to reduce drag or frontal area :) I'm 6 foot and don't like when my head touches the roof but the WRX has lots of room up there.

I don't know of anyone who has done this on a WRX yet. The shop I used when I did this to my Vette is no longer in business and I wouldn't want any Minny, Moe, or Jack to do this to my car. This is one mod I wouldn't do myself (not yet any way).

Carlo

What your talking about is called a Chop job.
Basically, you cut the A,B and C pillars near the middle, and "chop" out however much meterial you want.
Every person likes a different look, and has different needs, Usually 1.5 to 3 inches is all anyone does, with the exception of some trucks and old Truck like rooflined cars of the pre 60's.
After you cut the roof off, you then cut it in half fore and aft and side to side so you now have 4 pieces. You then rebuild the roof bigger than it was originally to match up to the wider angle of the a and c pillars with sheet metal bracing and bondo or fibreglass.
Once its as straigh as youd want it, you weld it up, grid it down, putty it up, and paint it.
Simple as that! :lol:
Trent
BTW, nice job on the run/tuning/luck ;)

Originally posted by Carlo


There are two ways to make a car faster: One increase horse power and second to reduce drag.

Carlo

Carlo,

You forgot one more thing. You can make the car lighter in weight.

Originally posted by Kevin Thomas


Carlo,

You forgot one more thing. You can make the car lighter in weight.

Actually I didn't forget. I just didn't explain it very well. Newton's Second Law "F=MA" or Force=Mass times Acceleration. Weight is given in figuring horse power. :)

Involved in too much theory,
Carlo

Originally posted by Carlo
MPH ... 107.00

http://www.walserrz.com/trffiles/smilies/headshake.gif
nope.

Originally posted by Carlo


Actually I didn't forget. I just didn't explain it very well. Newton's Second Law "F=MA" or Force=Mass times Acceleration. Weight is given in figuring horse power. :)

Not really. Horsepower is a measure of the force, not the mass. Body mass and force are not related, hoever, they are used to determine acceleration. For example, if you reduce the weight of a car it will accelerate at the same rate under less power. For instance the Lotus Elise has far less horsepower than most sports cars, but due to its low weight, it retains good acceleration.

Originally posted by Sokoban


Not really. Horsepower is a measure of the force, not the mass. Body mass and force are not related, hoever, they are used to determine acceleration. For example, if you reduce the weight of a car it will accelerate at the same rate under less power. For instance the Lotus Elise has far less horsepower than most sports cars, but due to its low weight, it retains good acceleration.

Umm, Horsepower = Force. Force can be expressed in different values and one of them is horsepower. If you have a 2000 lb car and a 3000 lb car with exactly the same acceleration they would have different horsepower (torque). The only difference is the mass of the car.

Force=Mass x Acceleration

So to say that mass and force are not related isn't true. I do agree that if you lighten the car it will accelerate quicker. So while it is true that hp would be different with two cars as above with the same acceleration we all know that lightening the same car will allow it to accelerate quicker. It just happens to change the horsepower too. With that said I'll revise what I said earlier to now be:

Three ways to make a car faster:
1) Reduce drag
2) Lighten Vehicle
3) Increase power (performance mods)

Is that better? :)

Carlo

Hey Carlo,

I just added your 1/4 mile time to the Subaru 1/4 Mile Registry. Could you be kind enough to give me your last name so I can post it up? If not, that's ok. If you want to be removed also, please let me know and I'll promptly remove the entry. Thanks and take care!

Kevin Thomas
Subaru 1/4 Mile Registry
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/thomasck/Registry.html

Originally posted by TypeC


http://www.walserrz.com/trffiles/smilies/headshake.gif
nope.

TypeC, from the beginning of this thread you keep coming back to the fact that the 107 trap speed isn't possible. In one of the first posts you say "I just don't see someone with the same mods trapping 6mpg higher". I believe this was in reference to the comparison of my run to that of dug-e-fresh. I see a 3.8 mph difference and not 6 mph. This of course is a different car, different track, different driver and different weather conditions.

In other post you say "NO ONE gains/loses 6mph day to day. That's rediculous. I go +/-2mph but that's it". Again, I'm not sure where the 6 mph comparison is from? I agree with you however, but I don't run 6 mph difference either unless you miss a gear or bog on the launch.

How about this run that Nathan did in the same car on the same night:
12.66@mph 109.25
12.61@mph 106.00
Those are pretty consistant times but the trap speed is 3.25 mph different.

In yet another "IMO it's impossible to trap 107 with so few mods. If it were possible I'd be so happy, but it just isn't". I'm not sure what you consider "so few mods" but you should re-look at my mod list. They aren't serious like engine internals but not any thing that most people would call light. They are probably about the most "heavy" mods anyone has used to break into the 12s, but of course I'm not sure and only speculating.

Here's a very recent post from WickedWRXWagon where he just set a new record on NOS. He also gives his best non-N20 run at 13.102@105.20 mph which is considerably higher then dug-e-fresh's time while still turning in a slower ET. What do you think his MPH would have ended up at had he broken 12.99? I bet it would be close to 107 mph too.

Up until this last post I haven't even commented on the trap speed. This post I guess got under my skin a little. You've made it pretty clear and have all but called my a liar (benefit of doubt for last post) about the 107mph. I can't change history but I would like to know if you would say "nope" or have problems with any of these series of numbers? Please explain:

12.8@108
12.715@104.13
12.80@106.99
12.8@104
12.647@109.56
12.739@106.14
12.83@104.38
12.883@104.92
12.982@106.02
12.989@101.77
13.032@100.78
13.083@104.48
13.20@105.12
13.102@105.20 mph

Just because YOU can't comprehend it does not mean it did not happen. Fast Car + Bad Driver can equal High Trap with lower ET. Ideally when I improve, the time will be lower and the speed SHOULD also be lower.

Carlo

Dude your doing great...
you can not please all the people all the time so don't
even worry. The progress your making proves the guy wrong.
So why even worry about someone that can not back his remarks with supporting information.

great job..:p