2003 Cobra stock to slighty modified

[300rwhp]

Go here to see the dynosheets from tomas dyno. Baseline to exhaust cai and stuff its a nice set of curves
http://www.performance-shop.com/yabbse/index.php?board=33;action=display;threadid=7027

[5gluder]

I wish i could gain 16hp from a CAI :(

[RCBVtec]

30 HP from 2 mods... that's really impressive, wish that was the case for me.

[300rwhp]

Yeah no shit hey,
yeah the big mods for that car are
bigger throttle body 15hp 250$
long tube headers 40-50 hp 500$
exhaust 12-20hp depending on type 500-700$
removal of cats 5hp
cai 16hp
wms cai dynoed 22rwhp increase over stock 200-400$
bigger pullys off a lightning 50 + 200$
chip 10hp 140$

and most of these mods are cheap (kinda)

so power increase
172 hp for 2000 grandish

[RCBVtec]

I would be happy with just the headers, CAI, and exhaust... if they put out #'s like that!!!

[trendkill]

YEAP, gotta love the v8's so more easier to modify without wasting ya $$$. sweet car with some sweet power numbers

[rage2]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
so power increase 172 hp for 2000 grandish

Bench Racing 101 : Adding up mods/hp gains does not give an accurate final HP gain :D.

But yea, I saw the dyno sheets on that Stang... impressive for 2 simple mods.

[300rwhp]

i know its bench racing,

but i have seen dyno numbers for all of these mods on stangnet.

So it is bench racing but there are cars in the states that have gained much more hp and tq from these mods. People are seeing 550rwhp after these mods on pump gas. They are making larger pulleys than the lightning pulley that will allow up to 14 pounds of boost so this engine has a lot of potential. The exhaust they installed at the mustang shop is the run of the mil exhaust. The better types (bassani and borla) show much higher gains. Take a look at www.wmsracing.com at there install of their cai they gained 22rwhp.

[Ben]

Yeah, are Advertised HP gains not based on adding them onto a stock power plant, and not adding them to a vehicle with extensive modifications.

[300rwhp]

Yeah i think the major reason people are so impressed with the cobra motor is because ford underated its power outputs

[Maxt]

http://www.bonforums.com/mustang/
And which people would that be...probably not 99-01 owners...Maxt

[300rwhp]

Primarily the mustang community. Because A) what you posted Maxt the low hp of the 99 cobra and B) the fact that these cars are mainly dynoing around 420bhp

[Maxt]

I think people were mostly impressed that Ford actually rated a car truthfully this time around... 3 years of low horsepower cars kinda hurts sales...

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
Yeah i think the major reason people are so impressed with the cobra motor is because ford underated its power outputs It still can't turn worth shit and stopping is pathetic. Big power numbers are all well and good, but the overall performance of the car is very weak for something that costs so much.

[300rwhp]

Actually Maxt is was one year 1999 and ford rectified the problem in all the cars. The cobra for its dollar value is a very good buy. Name a car that is brand new and can do as much.

[rage2]

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
It still can't turn worth shit and stopping is pathetic. Big power numbers are all well and good, but the overall performance of the car is very weak for something that costs so much.

That's what I thought about Mustangs too, but they seem to do fairly well in Solo2? :dunno:

[Davan]

Originally posted by Maxt
I think people were mostly impressed that Ford actually rated a car truthfully this time around... 3 years of low horsepower cars kinda hurts sales...

Hardly. Ford is doing something right with the mustang. Sure it doesn't have huge numbers, but those things sell. By comparison look at the Camaro/Firebird. Much more power. But they just didn't sell.

[350hp_or_Bust]

um dollar for dollar the SVT cobra is NOT a good buy.... I've been shopping around for cars the past few months ... the MSRP on an SVT cobra: $47000 !!! wholly fuck! you can get a LOT of car for that much money ... the WRX for eg MSRP is around $35000, but handles waaaaay better than the stang and would probably beat it in an autocross/solo course. Granted the SVT has more power hands down. ... but for the extra $13000 you can get a lot of go fast goodies for a WRX.

Just my opinion though. I don't think there's any bargain in a Mustang anymore.

Don't get me wrong though, I love the mustang, and I've owned three of them, and my brother just bought his third one. But I think the mustang had its hay day in the early 90's or late '80s. .. you could get a new 5.0L LX for $10000!!! (for comparison, you could get a Plymouth Sundance for $9000 or so) now THAT was a good dollar for dollar bargain.... Mustangs owned the roads ... but admit it, Ford dropped the ball on the Stang and kept upping the price and marketing it towards non-performance enthusiasts who liked how it looked and didn't care if they only had the cheap ass base model V6 .. they had a Mustang so they must be cool is what they were thinking. And that's what Ford wanted. by the late '90s though, they were being (and still are) owned by the Camaros and TransAms. Sure they tried to bandaid the problem by reintroducing the Cobra, but too little to late I say. ... at least they're starting to head back in the right direction.

Sorry, I'd always been a Ford fan, but they pissed me off in the past decade. ... (they were going to replace the Stang with the Probe at one point). The good news is I think they're starting to head back in the right direction :dunno: maybe.... is the GT-40 ever going to hit production???

[300rwhp]

Actually 350hp or bust it pulls lower numbers in the skidpad than the cobra by far a inpreza pulls the same numbers as a gt. Yes the gt40 is going into production 4 have been made as full working models. The cobras closest competition comes from the zo6. Now once again show me a car that handles aswell and has as good an overall ppackage for the price.

[350hp_or_Bust]

yeah I was pulling shit outta my a$$ there, but I still can't swallow the price tag ... probably just cause I can't afford it right now.

There's gotta be something out there still? The Evo maybe ... if we ever see one here.

The Camaros/T-As walked all over the Stang didn't they? How about some BMWs or Audis? I guess the Z3 is a lot more $ than the Stang, ... S4 maybe? .. again, just pulling stuff outta you know where now. I just wish Ford kept the stang in the cheap muscle car bracket, rather than focussing so much on creature comforts.

[300rwhp]

The stang is the cheap way to go. If cheap is relative to other cars. For your best best i would buy a 99 cobra and just add some lowering springs new bushings and a supercharger pullied to about 400hp and then you buy a good set of r compounds and have fun. There is a white cobra for sale with a 400+hp motor that is brand new for sale for 27000 in calgary. The impreza is heralded as the ultimate in handling but it sucks. A gt mustang built for one thing (1/4) does just as well. The new cobra is supposed to much cheaper but the demand has forced the price up. Its supposed to be 43000

[T5_X]

Skidpad numbers aren't a measure of how well a car handles. I could put wide tires on my truck and it'd pull great numbers but it would still handle like shit.


The new cobra is supposed to handle much better, but apparently thier IRS behaves more like a solid rear axle because IRS is bad for drag racing. Many ppl wanted to keep the old rear suspension, but many ppl also wanted IRS. Its a compromise.

[300rwhp]

you couldnt put wide tires on your truck and expect it to handle well you have leaf springs. Secondly the cobra does outhandle the impreza by a huge margin. You know it does when was the last time an impreza won at scca

[rage2]

IMO the Cobra is a cheap way to have 400hp under warranty :D. Damn good deal.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by rage2


That's what I thought about Mustangs too, but they seem to do fairly well in Solo2? :dunno: They are VERY tough cars to drive well. The understeer like pigs until you get on the gas then its full on oversteer in the blink of an eye, and there's very little feedback. Nothing a good driver can't overcome, but not the most rewarding drive in the world.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
you couldnt put wide tires on your truck and expect it to handle well you have leaf springs. Secondly the cobra does outhandle the impreza by a huge margin. You know it does when was the last time an impreza won at scca Having driver a cobra and a impreza, I can tell you that the impreza is a much nicer handling car even if it doesn't pull the ultimate skid pad numbers a cobra can (I'd like to add that those skid pad numbers are ONLY because of wider tires than the impreza. The cobra comes with 245s stock as I recall, compared to 205s on the impreza. This makes a big difference). The cobra wallows in hard core understeer in any situation until you get on the gas, then you get way more oversteer than you know what to do with. But you have no way of knowing when its going to snap around, because the car has zero feel. The impreza is not the greatest handling car in the world, but its infinitely superior to the mustang in that it at least gives you feed back. In stock form, understeer is the order of the day in fast corners, low to medium speed corners the handling is very neutral, but the grip of all wheel drive lets you power out of the corners a lot earlier than a stang, which would like to swap ends if you get on the gas at any point other than with the wheels completely straight. And you can actually feel what the car is doing. Driving a mustang is like being encased in foam rubber, it dulls the feel of everything.

And as for the impreza not winning in the SCCA, lets see here.

We have an impreza as 2000 Production GT Champion on the canadian rally circuit and taking home the North American Rally Cup, 2001 group N champion and 2002 group N champion on both the US and canadian circuits, 2001 open class champion in the US and canada. The list goes on and on, and thats JUST for rally. At the SCCA Solo 2 nationals in 2002, WRX's were running close to 2 seconds faster than mustangs in combined times over both courses, and even a lowly 99 RS running faster than a mustang. Nope, definetly no one winning with imprezas. Guess I should trade mine in for a stang :rolleyes: What the hell was I thinking, bad Warren no cookie

[300rwhp]

umm handling specifically skid pads number and amount of g's through a corner dont really apply to rally racing. So we will just pass that off. Next point you made if you look at scca there isnt a team running an impreza there are teams running acuras and what nought but no imprezas in the states. Oh yeah mustang won its class this year and next year is being forced to run against the gt2 class which includes porsches 360 modena and the like . We all know the racing scene in the states is more demonstrative of what the cars are capable of. Its like saying in the european touring circuit the imprezas dnf cuz there not there just mustangs. Either way way for a good open track car i would way rather start with a mustang. You tell me the next time a impreza wins road atlanta. Over a mustang even a v6 mustang handed an impreza its ass there so.

4wheel you know that awd is not the best platform for racing the reason people use is to make up for driving ability. why do you think most supercars are awd. But the really good ones are rwd/. Example mercialago and vt vs the gt models
gt2 vs 911/tt

[THREE40SEVEN]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
The exhaust they installed at the mustang shop is the run of the mil exhaust. The better types (bassani and borla) show much higher gains. Take a look at www.wmsracing.com at there install of their cai they gained 22rwhp.
Hahahaha. Too funny. Run of the mill eh? Tell me what makes the bassani better???? Both are x pipes, and i'll put money on the magnaflow mufflers in regards to flow with their straight through design. I doubt either company makes their own cats, and to be honest, i think they're made by the same company. Im sure you'd find a 1-2% difference between the two systems.
Westerns dyno also read almost 11hp more STOCK, and you arent even taking into cnsideration the rich condition after the exhaust, as the cai was done LAST.
UPR got 27 rwhp on a dynojet with their cold air which is the brand i used on this car.
Go a little more in depth(read the dyno sheets/comments) before you type. Im sure i could have found at least another 10rw if the A/F remained constant after the mods.
I'll post up the future runs after more boost and some tuning.

quote off of svtperformance
"Houston Performance did tests with the magnaflow catted x-pipe and the bassani catted x-pipe. The results proved that the magnaflow catted x-pipe gave about 4 more horsepower through the enitire power band."

[300rwhp]

im taking cat back
and personally magnaflow sucks who wants a product that is stamped together and not welded. Secondly the borla and bassani a sound much nicer and make more power. DOnt tell me they dont look at all the dyno shootouts in the magazines that show borla and bassani making more power. What do you consider the magnaflow exhaust to be top of the line? I dont

The bassani x pipe is by far the best. As to gaining more power in relation to the a/f wouldnt that require reprogramming the computer or the addition of a chip.

The cats are made by the same company. Where did UPR dyno at sea level i am not sure if that makes a difference depending on tomas correction factors.

Either way the point i was making was the fact that the cobra motor has an awesome hp and tq curve. As to the houston performance quote thats bullshit 4 hp over the entire powerband is bs you know it so do I

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
umm handling specifically skid pads number and amount of g's through a corner dont really apply to rally racing. Grip wins, end of story. Hence, subaru drivers on the podium.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
So we will just pass that off. Next point you made if you look at scca there isnt a team running an impreza there are teams running acuras and what nought but no imprezas in the states You've apparently never heard of Gary Sheehan. You know, USTCC WRX, 2nd overall last year.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
Oh yeah mustang won its class this year and next year is being forced to run against the gt2 class which includes porsches 360 modena and the like . We all know the racing scene in the states is more demonstrative of what the cars are capable of.Seriously, you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. The more you talk the deeper the hole you dig yourself. If you want to use SCCA road race data, you should be familiar with the allowed modifications to the vehicles. NOT ONE of the mustangs in the SCCA road race series are running anything even remotely resembling the stock suspensions. Yeah, I can pull 1.2g on the skidpad in a mustang after dropping $5k into the suspension and slapping slicks on it. I haven't seen one mustang that is being road raced at any sort of professional level in the states that doesn't have a hard core racing suspension installed.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
4wheel you know that awd is not the best platform for racing the reason people use is to make up for driving ability. why do you think most supercars are awd. But the really good ones are rwd/. Example mercialago and vt vs the gt models
gt2 vs 911/ttFirst off, a good driver is a good driver in any car, regardless of drive train layout.

Second: The 911 TT and GT2 models are very similar performance wise. I don't know where this idea that the gap is so huge came from.

Third, all wheel drive not being an ideal layout for a race car: Lets see, the european touring car championships banned audi from competing in the 80s because all wheel drive was such a huge advantage. Almost overnight in rallying, AWD became the cars to have. An all wheel drive car was tried in F1, though it didn't recieve the development time to find out what it was really capable of. if you are trying to say that rear wheel drive is the best for racing, I feel obligated to point out that all the vehicles you are mention are mid engine vehicles, not front engine like the mustang. I also feel obligated to point out Audi's recent dominance of the series at Le Mans with...you guessed it an All Wheel Drive car.

[300rwhp]

Just one more thing eregardless of how much wms dyno is over reading hp there install produced 22rwhp more. they dynoed the car before and after. If it made 1000hp at stock and then 1022hp the cai improvement would still be 22rwhp. Toma's saying as long as you leave with more than you came in who cares how much your car makes

[300rwhp]

hence tires in rally once again
I am refering to scca
What is to stop the impreza from being modified in scca nothing people dont cuz rwd is better


Yes a good driver is a good driver regardless of drivetrain.
The porsche thing is strictly racing related no one races the awd version and beats the gt2

Once again stay away from rallying

Ok what about the panoz car or the corvette
Yes it is true the R8 dominates could it be becuase awd is easier to drive hence the drivers dont get as tired in the race

F1 cars will never go awd what r u talking about how would you do it. TO HEAVY how would you route the driveshaft to the front tires

AS F1 is the pinacle of motorsports how come awd hasnt taken the grasp ?

[T5_X]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
you couldnt put wide tires on your truck and expect it to handle well you have leaf springs. Secondly the cobra does outhandle the impreza by a huge margin. You know it does when was the last time an impreza won at scca

uhhh, that's exactly what I said, wide tires will give it a good skidpad number, but it still handles like shit. The ram SRT-10 is expected to get skidpad numbers of .92gs, but thats cause of its massive 24 inch rims and wide high performance tires. In terms of handling, you can't get around the fact that it weighs 5000 lbs and rides on leaf springs out back.


And we are talking about stock for stock here. Will a stock cobra outhandle a stock wrx? Well, I can't speak from personal experience, but I think i can safely assume that it won't.

For your point about the Rear dive GT2 vs AWD 911 turbo? Well dropping AWD saves a lot of weight, but I'm no pro driver, I'd feel much more safe in the all drive 911, not too many ppl could drive a rear engine rear drive GT2 to its limit.

[300rwhp]

hence why many supercars come in awd
for people like us

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
hence tires in rally once again Tire choice is a factor, but not the only factor. Put a subie and a mustang up against each other on rally tires and guess who wins? It isn't the mustang. Grip wins races, period. Rally, road or otherwise.



Originally posted by 300rwhp
I am refering to scca
What is to stop the impreza from being modified in scca nothing people dont cuz rwd is better You aren't proving anything with this statement. No, there isn't anyone racing an impreza in the states in the SCCA. That doesn't mean they are bad, just that no one is trying it yet. Subarus, both here, in europe and in japan have been proven to make excellent race vehicles due to their light weight, their power output and bullet proof all wheel drive systems. Just because you don't see any subies running where you are looking doesn't mean they don't exist.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
Yes a good driver is a good driver regardless of drivetrain.
The porsche thing is strictly racing related no one races the awd version and beats the gt2 Porsche put their development for a race vehicle into the GT2, not the turbo. The series they are running in for racing don't allow all wheel drive cars anyway, so why develop a vehicle you can't run? All of the top shelf teams are running GT2s because that is all thats available with factory backing.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
Once again stay away from rallying
No. Grip wins, all wheel drive wins. End of story.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
Ok what about the panoz car or the corvette
Yes it is true the R8 dominates could it be becuase awd is easier to drive hence the drivers dont get as tired in the race First off, the R8 regularly kicks the hell out of the Panoz, and they are in the same class. Second, the corvette is in a different class with different preparation allowed to the vehicle. And it isn't faster anyways. No, the R8 wins because its more reliable, its got more grip and its got good drivers. All wheel drive doesn't miraculously mean you are working any less hard inside the car. If All Wheel Drive made it so damn easy, why even bother switching drivers? Once again you prove you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Running a 24 hour race is an endurance marathon, regardless of what type of vehicle you are driving. Most all wheel drive vechiles are EASIER TO DRIVE than a rear wheel drive, but that doesn't mean they are less work. And easier to drive doesn't mean inferior. Sure, it may not be as rewarding or challenging to drive a 911 TT at 10/10ths as it is a GT2, but you are going just as fast.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
F1 cars will never go awd what r u talking about how would you do it. TO HEAVY how would you route the driveshaft to the front tires Same way you do it in most four by fours. The driveshaft is offset. But I won't bore you with technology you don't understand anyway. I suggest you go do some reading about the F1 car that was partially engineered by subaru in the early 90s. It is possible, and it was done.


Originally posted by 300rwhp
AS F1 is the pinacle of motorsports how come awd hasnt taken the grasp ? To date, only one team has tried and the car was deemed to need to much development to be worth the effort for the budget they had available. Yes, it came down to budget. Do you have any idea how much it costs to develope an F1 machine? That kind of scratch would have bankrupted subaru. no one else has felt like trying it to date, partially due to the huge resistance to new technology in F1. Do you want to spend $20mil developing a machine that is going to get banned in one season anyway if its successful?

[300rwhp]

first of all offset regardless. I know lots on the subject many people have experimented in f1 to get more grip the budget for a f1 teams is upwards of 250 million so 20 mil for a team is nothing if it would garantee winning. SO what if it is offset it would be outside of the body and therefore producing too much drag. If it was outside the body so would the diff hence even more drag. Second of all f1 cars produce way more grip than any other car out there. I refered to the panoz and corvette becuase you talked of le mans. I was simply pointing out that there were front engined cars in the higher races. So tell me how you could route the drive shaft in a f1 car in side the body remembering the driver sits in the bottom of the body so unless you have a magic power transfer system you have proved how you dont know what your talking about. Look at the british racing team that pioneered the 4 front wheel f1 car it dominated but was beat out by other cars so once again how would awd benefit F1 as i cant see how it provide higher speeds when in fact it would provide much slower speeds and it wouldnt improve grip. WOuld ruin braking for an F1 car and send them into a slide at every quick downshift in a corner remember these cars rev at 18000 can us say compression strip and blown clunches in the smaller front awd diff
i can

[THREE40SEVEN]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
im taking cat back
and personally magnaflow sucks who wants a product that is stamped together and not welded. Secondly the borla and bassani a sound much nicer and make more power. DOnt tell me they dont look at all the dyno shootouts in the magazines that show borla and bassani making more power. What do you consider the magnaflow exhaust to be top of the line? I dont


The x only is stamped, and i have yet to see any leaks to date. A staping would also offer a smoother transition between both sides of the x over a welded X. What is the problem if it works?? EVERYTHING is stainless as well. Tell me which magazines offered a dyno tests on the same car and dyno with a comparison between many different brands of exhaust systems on the car in question??(or any other).
How are you making your comparisons? Your reasoning for exhaust preference besides sound is completely empty of any facts at all.
Yes the magnaflow is excellent quality.

Originally posted by 300rwhp

The bassani x pipe is by far the best. As to gaining more power in relation to the a/f wouldnt that require reprogramming the computer or the addition of a chip.

Bassani is the best- LOL OK. Yes they do make good quality products, but once again, you cant back up this statement with anything.
In regards to the tuning, tell me something i dont know.


Originally posted by 300rwhp

As to the houston performance quote thats bullshit 4 hp over the entire powerband is bs you know it so do I

I believe it, why dont you and explain why? Because bassani is the best, but you dont know why?
Maybe think a little before you post about the "inferior" parts that i install on my customers cars
Once again, the difference between the two systems on the dyno will almost nothing, so buy the one YOU thinks sounds best.

[THREE40SEVEN]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
Toma's saying as long as you leave with more than you came in who cares how much your car makes
Dead on!
Back to comparison between the two CAI's, Imagine 2 03 cobras at the same wieght, same driver skills, and one fitted with the upr, and one with the wms cold air. Now imagine the car showing less power on the dyno's trapped a higher MPH in the 1/4. Just an example...
#'s mean shit, the tracks wheres its at. A dyno is a tuning tool.

[300rwhp]

Muscle Mustang and 5.0 did two shoot outs with 15 different exhaust systems in one of them I cant remember. How does it offer a smoother transition. It makes no difference the point im making is that it less strong. Show me dyno proof of your car or any other that makes more power with magnaflow over bassani. Not only that but show me 4 hp over the entire curve. Once again bullshit. I can back it up read the magazines you have lying all over your store. The a/f comment is about the fact that wms didnt tune the car they just added a chip so gaining hp from programming is unrelated. Yes i like bassani but its more exspensive not only becuase of better quality but also better reputation (hence no reason to increase price) so most choose to go with the cheaper maganflow. Isnt the difference in cat back prices like 200 bucks.

[300rwhp]

so what exactly di du install a filter a new pipe and perhaps a mass air sensor

if so what sensor i doubt it was a pro m

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
first of all offset regardless. I know lots on the subject many people have experimented in f1 to get more grip the budget for a f1 teams is upwards of 250 million so 20 mil for a team is nothing if it would garantee winning. SO what if it is offset it would be outside of the body and therefore producing too much drag. If it was outside the body so would the diff hence even more drag. Second of all f1 cars produce way more grip than any other car out there. I refered to the panoz and corvette becuase you talked of le mans. I was simply pointing out that there were front engined cars in the higher races. So tell me how you could route the drive shaft in a f1 car in side the body remembering the driver sits in the bottom of the body so unless you have a magic power transfer system you have proved how you dont know what your talking about. Look at the british racing team that pioneered the 4 front wheel f1 car it dominated but was beat out by other cars so once again how would awd benefit F1 as i cant see how it provide higher speeds when in fact it would provide much slower speeds and it wouldnt improve grip. WOuld ruin braking for an F1 car and send them into a slide at every quick downshift in a corner remember these cars rev at 18000 can us say compression strip and blown clunches in the smaller front awd diff
i can You have absolutely no understanding of why the tyrell was designed the way it was. They werent' trying 6 wheels for increased grip, they were using 6 wheels so they could get away with a smaller front wheel to fit it fully in behind the front spoiler, reducing drag. But because the wheels were smaller, the contact patch was reduced so to maintain the same size contact patch they added the two extra wheels. And for the record, it won ONE race (a 1-2 finish in Sweden in 76) before the team went back to a more conventional car (and not because it was banned). They found that the percieved advantage of this setup wasn't really an advantage at all, the car proved to be no faster or slower than a conventional 4 wheeler. Ferrari experimented with 6 wheelers, as did lotus and several other chassis builders and the result was the same. No gain, no loss either.

Next. I don't know where you get this idea that offseting the drive shaft means moving it outside the body. The body on an F1 machine is mostly ductwork and ground effects tunnels, with only a small portion reserved for the driver. With exotic materials, the drive shaft would not have to be very large, and with proper fairing design, the driveshaft and front diff would not have to be out in the windstream. Yes, the front axles would be but you can only reduce the drag coefficient so much without enclosing everything in the body which is against the rules. The amount of drag generated by the front suspension would not be increased by a great deal by adding in another piece that is mostly below the front wing anyways. So much for the drag argument. Subaru did it in the early 90s, and they proved that it could work. The car was dropped before it ever ran a race because the car was deemed to be too difficult to develop at the time and too heavy. However, we have 10 years between then and now, and the technology has changed a great deal. In a series where every car is running ballast to reach minimum weights anyways and you can make an entire vehicle out of carbon fibre, I doubt the same problem would exist if someone were to actually bother trying again.

Next, blowing up differentials. Do you honestly believe that a race series that is using carbon fibre everything (including transmissions) can't figure out how to make a small diff withstand big power and not lock under braking? They can put 1000 horse through race developed all wheel drive systems for hill climb vehicles, yet F1 can't figure out how to do it on pavement? :dunno: No one has felt like trying again yet.

And as for an F1 teams budget, try and justify spending 250 million to develop a car that has to be scrapped the next season after its banned. You're right back at the drawing board after that happens. I can't think of any company that can afford to flush $250mil down the toilet just to win one season (not even ferrari). And don't try and tell me ferrari does it every year, because they don't. They don't come even close to spending $250mil developing the car every year. Thats their total racing budget, not just development. Its small improvements over the year before gained by knowledge of what was happening last year. The car is not redesigned totally from scratch every year. How do you make a small fortune racing? Start with a large one.

[300rwhp]

you dont make any money racing. I couldnt find anything about your subiw awd f1 car could you post a link the one car i did find resembling a awd car a 4 wheel in the back car with two in the front. If it would mean beating micheal next season i can think of a few teams that would try it.

[300rwhp]

I also think neither of us especially me understand anything remotely close to how intricate an F1 car is.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
I also think neither of us especially me understand anything remotely close to how intricate an F1 car is. Speak for yourself. They aren't nearly as complicated as you think they are. This argument is moot anyways. According to current F1 regs, all wheel drive cars are banned (I did not know this. But then i don't keep up with F1 too much. Never been a big fan of "Michael Wins Again"). For a brief history on the 4wd and awd cars that did compete, check out this link:

http://www.4wdonline.com/ClassicCars/Racing.html

[THREE40SEVEN]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
Muscle Mustang and 5.0 did two shoot outs with 15 different exhaust systems in one of them I cant remember. How does it offer a smoother transition. It makes no difference the point im making is that it less strong. Show me dyno proof of your car or any other that makes more power with magnaflow over bassani. Not only that but show me 4 hp over the entire curve. Once again bullshit. I can back it up read the magazines you have lying all over your store. The a/f comment is about the fact that wms didnt tune the car they just added a chip so gaining hp from programming is unrelated. Yes i like bassani but its more exspensive not only becuase of better quality but also better reputation (hence no reason to increase price) so most choose to go with the cheaper maganflow. Isnt the difference in cat back prices like 200 bucks.
I saw a MUFFLER dyno comparison, not a system comparison.

If you saw both x's you would understand why there is a difference. I have seen both- fuck, i sell both.



Show me dyno proof of your car or any other that makes more power with magnaflow over bassani. Not only that but show me 4 hp over the entire curve.
WHERES YOUR PROOF!! Why not call houston performance?? Im not going to waste my money and time to compare 2 products where i KNOW the difference will be insignificant. You wanna front the money?? None of the mags ive seen have comparisons between the two SYSTEMS.


Isnt the difference in cat back prices like 200 bucks. Same basic product, same power increase, why spend the money?


so what exactly di du install a filter a new pipe and perhaps a mass air sensor
What are you asking? I installed a cold air- a bent pipe with a filter, no mass air.




The a/f comment is about the fact that wms didnt tune the car they just added a chip so gaining hp from programming is unrelated
I didnt say they did:nut: THE AF ON THE CAR I DYNOED WAS LOWER THAN STOCK BECAUSE OF THE EXHAUST. The exhaust wasn't done to the wms car.
IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE!!!! ID KNOW.

[4wheeldrift]

More history on 4WD F1 machines: http://8w.forix.com/4wd69.html

[Hollywood]

Originally posted by rage2


That's what I thought about Mustangs too, but they seem to do fairly well in Solo2? :dunno:

Why? Because readily available torque and RWD.

[HOK]

i just want to say that AWD DOES NOT MAKE YOU A BETTER DRIVER. your the same guy that is is sitting in the ditch on a snow storm with the 4X4 SUV... AWD is just 4 wheels get power doesn't mean its easier to drive or it will make you a Micheal. I don't think you;ve driven a AWD sports car... cause you wouldn't be saying that... all three systems can be driven quickly... well... maybe except FWD heheh **poke **poke

since the debate seems over i won't even talk about AWD vs RWD...

[300rwhp]

What do you consider a sports car a 911 tt perhaps as i have driven two one for 300miles of bliss.

[HOK]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
What do you consider a sports car a 911 tt perhaps as i have driven two one for 300miles of bliss.

WTF did you just say here??? is that a sentence of some kind??? I think i see a question in there... then maybe something about a porche that you have driven?:rofl:

[300rwhp]

WHat do you consider a sports car? a 911 perhaps, as i have driven two, one for 300 miles of bliss.

Thanks for insulting my grammer. It takes a special type of person to do that. Seeing as how you took the opportunity to criticize my reply, I will now do the same for you post.

"AWD is just 4 wheels get power doesn't mean its easier to drive or it will make you micheal. "

what is this a run on sentence, a fragment of a sentence a question or a statement of fact. I just dont know.

This is obviously retarded, and I find it is pointless. I am writing 2 finals on friday, and have just finished one. Please afford people some leeway, this is not high school english or even grade 2 english.

Thanks for the leeway

[HOK]

i really didn't understand the sentence so... anyways

so after driving the 911 for 300 miles what made you say it was making you a better driver or easier to drive?

I don't get it... were you racing it? did you push it to the limits? what would make you say that AWD makes you a better driver?

because the thing is i've always attributed this "feeling" as confidence not making a better driver...

[350hp_or_Bust]

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
Speak for yourself. They aren't nearly as complicated as you think they are. This argument is moot anyways. According to current F1 regs, all wheel drive cars are banned (I did not know this. But then i don't keep up with F1 too much. Never been a big fan of "Michael Wins Again"). For a brief history on the 4wd and awd cars that did compete, check out this link:

http://www.4wdonline.com/ClassicCars/Racing.html
^
|
|
This guy knows his shit!:thumbsup: ... I'd just like to throw into the AWD/RWD pot that from an engineering point of view, AWD, AWS (steering), and active suspension would make the ideal race car ... but with any engineering, you have to make compromises, and simplicity/reliability is often more important than the extra edge you'd get with AWD and AWS... But engineering is getting better and better and the simplicity/reliability of the systems is getting better as well. (I don't think truly active suspension will be seen for a long while .. if ever)

and I have to agree that F1 cars aren't nearly as complicated as people think ..

[300rwhp]

Ok sorry HOK i drove it hard and found it much more forgiveing than a rwd drive car. Your right I was wrong it just gave me confidence, i wasnt a better driver. It is a feeling. I really think 4wheeldrift does not know everything about making or maintaining an F1 car. What is un complicated about F1 cars. What do you consider a truly active suspension.

[300rwhp]

4wheeldrift where is the link to the subaru f1 car i still cant find anything on it. As to the other sites so them and discarded as the all stopped at 1969. Hence not anywhere close to todays standards.

[350hp_or_Bust]

active suspension (in my dreams) = direct drive linear motors suspending the car (replacing springs & shocks) with adaptive control logic :thumbsup:

and of course he doesn't know everything about making and maintaining an F1 car. Who does? I was just suggesting that he is knowledgable in this area and has paid attention to and knows a lot of the details (which I'll admit, I don't) .. obviously a true enthusiast.

And you say what is uncomplicated about it (an F1 car)? I say what is complicated about it? It still has an internal combustion engine. It has a very VERY simple A-Arm suspension with pushrods and remote shocks/springs. It has a transmission, differential, tires, brakes ...just like every other car. I suppose the materials are pretty complex, but not the actual mechanical and electrical systems I don't think are. I suppose when you add all the simple systems up, you get a pretty complex car though. I guess complexity is a relative word.

They are just an engineering marvel ... everything on the car has been engineered and well engineered to boot. Thats all.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
Ok sorry HOK i drove it hard and found it much more forgiveing than a rwd drive car. Your right I was wrong it just gave me confidence, i wasnt a better driver. It is a feeling. I really think 4wheeldrift does not know everything about making or maintaining an F1 car. What is un complicated about F1 cars. What do you consider a truly active suspension. An F1 machine is distilled automobile in its simplest form. You have nothing but an engine and gearbox surrounded by the most minimal of bodies and a suspension. Just because its got a fully active suspension, ground effects tunnels and wings doesn't make it any different from my car. The car is no more complicated than the most basic of vehicles. Its the individual systems of the car that are complicated. But most of the systems are not anything that someone with a basic understanding of automotive principles can't understand.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by 300rwhp
4wheeldrift where is the link to the subaru f1 car i still cant find anything on it. As to the other sites so them and discarded as the all stopped at 1969. Hence not anywhere close to todays standards. Hey, I don't have unlimited amounts of time. I've got a job and stuff, sorry for actually having to take time away from arguing with you to earn a paycheck.

[SmelltheRubber]

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
Hey, I don't have unlimited amounts of time. I've got a job and stuff, sorry for actually having to take time away from arguing with you to earn a paycheck.

But you should take the time (when arguing the way you have), to back up what you say with proof/facts. :confused:

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by SmelltheRubber


But you should take the time (when arguing the way you have), to back up what you say with proof/facts. :confused: I reformatted my machine recently and lost the bookmark I had to the link. It wasn't easy to find in the first place. Patience is a virtue. The only information I can find on subaru's F1 effort (and this is not the link I had before) is presented here: http://www.iwoc.co.uk/subf1.html. They had developed a flat 12 motor for us in an F1 machine, that ultimately proved to be a dog (both the motor which was too heavy and didn't put out enough power, the car itself and the Coloni team).

[HOK]

oh yea... i forgot... i can back up subarus F1 effort... its a fact... you won't find much on it because it proved to be a bad effort so subaru didn't want it plastered all over the place... btw the F1 cars are not that complicated... many of the Japanese touring cars use the same technology (suspension) at fractions of the cost... just that they don't need to make a car from sratch...

also CART vehicles are not a lot slower then F1 cars. They are heavier and are estimated to be only 4-6 seconds slower then F1 cars...