vr4-vs-sti

Who would win the race between a 93 rt tt with a 3 inch turbo back exhaust, k/n filter, and mbc set @14 psi's and a 05 STI with 3 inch downpipe, exhaust, hks intake, and mbc set @16 psi's????

I dunno dude, why dont you go run em and tell us how it goes?

Dunno, I'll go with the STi.

yea, i'll 2nd that. Similar power, AWD, Sti weighs less.

i would go for the sti as well.

theres a kid in my school with a nice sti, once i get my TT i'll race him and report back.

but i would go with the sti also b/c of the weight ratio

yeah they are light but if were to do this illegaly on the road with turns an what not... which u shouldnt do- i would guess the TT- cause it will positively out handle the sti cause of the wieght an transfer- trust me my friend went off the road racing me an its not cause the tires were bad - its cause the car got to light in the turns an had not enough wieght on all 4 wheels an he spun out/took a ride into the woods....
let us know how it goes at the drag if ur doing there - the sti should take it at the strip

its close but i would have to say the STi aswell.
similar power, less weight.

i don't like racing around turns and whatnot b/c of an incindent that happened to me when a shock strut(yes the strut broke from where it was mounted) broke and i lost control. that wasn't pretty.

yeah they are light but if were to do this illegaly on the road with turns an what not... which u shouldnt do- i would guess the TT- cause it will positively out handle the sti cause of the wieght an transfer- trust me my friend went off the road racing me an its not cause the tires were bad - its cause the car got to light in the turns an had not enough wieght on all 4 wheels an he spun out/took a ride into the woods....
let us know how it goes at the drag if ur doing there - the sti should take it at the strip
Um, no.

On a road course, the mid-corner speeds of the STi and 3000GT are about the same. The STi has better gearing and puts the power down better coming out of hte corners, and after about 2 laps, the brakes on the 3000 GT will be toast.

0-60 and 1/4 I think it would be pretty even, because the STi requires one more shift than the 3000GT does.

i second that

sti has gears best made for road course. the 3kgt has very long gears.

i'd say in the 1320 the sti will pull it out. though this is a very close race were talking not even a car length if you ask me.
i'm sure the 3kgt will reel it in up top soon after the the 1/4 mile

i second that

sti has gears best made for road course. the 3kgt has very long gears.

i'd say in the 1320 the sti will pull it out. though this is a very close race were talking not even a car length if you ask me.
i'm sure the 3kgt will reel it in up top soon after the the 1/4 mile

:iagree:

sti all the way

Just without knowing any better I'd say th STi. However, I don't know how much power the 3000gt would put out at 14psi. How much boost does it run stock? On a drag race, I can't see the 3000gt out-launching an STi, but, when you're talking about modified cars it's really hard to tell until you run 'em.

3000gt has 320hp
with 14psi about 350hp

a vr4 makes its peak power at 6000rpms
meaning your launching 320hp at 6000 rpm clutch dump.

there launches should be very similar

3000gt has 320hp
with 14psi about 350hp

a vr4 makes its peak power at 6000rpms
meaning your launching 320hp at 6000 rpm clutch dump.

there launches should be very similar

Yea I agree with that. Seeing as both cars are pretty well equiped in relatively the same manner, IMO its going to depend more on gearing in the 1320.

Anyways this is kinda off topic, but how well do those clutches hold up at launches around 6k?

3000gt has 320hp
with 14psi about 350hp

a vr4 makes its peak power at 6000rpms
meaning your launching 320hp at 6000 rpm clutch dump.

there launches should be very similar
Lauching an AWD at 6K with a clutch dump? :screwy:

lol, not something you wanna do all the time, but that is how you get your best launches in the vr4

clutch, tranny, transfer case, none will hold long with a bunch of 6k rpm dumps

when i first got my vr4, i think i did that around 20 times till the clutch finally went out and the transfer case

http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/tb_mitsubishi.jpg

Putting the power to the pavement is the name of the acceleration game. The Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4 has 320 hp, much less than the Jag and Lightning, and the same power rating as the Mustang Cobra. So what gives the Mitsubishi the advantage over them? Traction.

This is the only all-wheel-drive car in this test. That means no wheelspin. Launching the Mitsubishi is so simple, it's like flying into outer space - even a monkey can do it. Just tach up the DOHC twin-turbocharged V6 up near its 6000 rpm power peak and drop that clutch. Granted, this isn't the best thing for the car's durability, but it sure gets this 2+2 off the line like a slingshot. All four 18-in. tires dig in, the 3000GT squats like Mike Piazza, and you are gone.

Don't expect any rubber when you throw gears, either. Tire slip in this car is harder to come by than a date with Pamela Anderson. Shifter action and clutch takeup could be a bit smoother, so quick gear changes aren't easy. But the V6's surprising amount of low-end torque really gets the heavy Mitsubishi going. And the motor pulls right up to its 7000 rpm redline.



Test Summary:
Mitsubishi 3000GT

Base price: $44,600, Price as tested: $45,140
Engine: 3.0L/181.0 CID DOHC 24v twin turbo V6
HP: 320 @ 6000 rpm, Torque: 315 ft.-lb. @ 2500 rpm
Trans: 6M, Drivetrain: front engine/awd
Final drive: 3.87:1 w/center viscous coupling
Curb weight: 3737 lb, Weight/HP ratio: 11.7
Horsepower/liter: 106.7, Tires: 245/40ZR18
Acceleration: 0-30 mph: 1.70 sec. 0-60 mph: 5.00 sec.
1/4 mile: 13.44 sec. @ 101.79 mph

I think it'd be a toss up between a 99 VR4 and an STi....i'd probably pic the Subie if i could afford it....

lol, not something you wanna do all the time, but that is how you get your best launches in the vr4

clutch, tranny, transfer case, none will hold long with a bunch of 6k rpm dumps

when i first got my vr4, i think i did that around 20 times till the clutch finally went out and the transfer case

http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/tb_mitsubishi.jpg

Putting the power to the pavement is the name of the acceleration game. The Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4 has 320 hp, much less than the Jag and Lightning, and the same power rating as the Mustang Cobra. So what gives the Mitsubishi the advantage over them? Traction.

This is the only all-wheel-drive car in this test. That means no wheelspin. Launching the Mitsubishi is so simple, it's like flying into outer space - even a monkey can do it. Just tach up the DOHC twin-turbocharged V6 up near its 6000 rpm power peak and drop that clutch. Granted, this isn't the best thing for the car's durability, but it sure gets this 2+2 off the line like a slingshot. All four 18-in. tires dig in, the 3000GT squats like Mike Piazza, and you are gone.

Don't expect any rubber when you throw gears, either. Tire slip in this car is harder to come by than a date with Pamela Anderson. Shifter action and clutch takeup could be a bit smoother, so quick gear changes aren't easy. But the V6's surprising amount of low-end torque really gets the heavy Mitsubishi going. And the motor pulls right up to its 7000 rpm redline.



Test Summary:
Mitsubishi 3000GT

Base price: $44,600, Price as tested: $45,140
Engine: 3.0L/181.0 CID DOHC 24v twin turbo V6
HP: 320 @ 6000 rpm, Torque: 315 ft.-lb. @ 2500 rpm
Trans: 6M, Drivetrain: front engine/awd
Final drive: 3.87:1 w/center viscous coupling
Curb weight: 3737 lb, Weight/HP ratio: 11.7
Horsepower/liter: 106.7, Tires: 245/40ZR18
Acceleration: 0-30 mph: 1.70 sec. 0-60 mph: 5.00 sec.
1/4 mile: 13.44 sec. @ 101.79 mph
I'd take me one of those sced mustang cobras over a vr4
:naughty:
Btw they're rated at 390HP btw.
http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/svt_mustang.asp
But they serve different purposes and because of that I would never own a vr4 even I had the cash.
If I did I'd swap out that wussy visious coupling for something that doesn't take a bit of time to hook up, and results in violent behavor when you start pushing lots of power though it.
I've been in one before and wasn't all that impressed with it actually, but the person driving didn't do one of your drivetrain killing clutch drops...
That John Shep fella who drag races his DSM slips the clutch a bit btw.
I find AWD systems that don't vary the ammount of power to a waste at speed since most forms of racing don't only invole getting a super launch, and to that end there are RWD cars that launch harder because of their weight transfer.
A skyline R34 would be nice though since it continously varies the ammount of splity as you well know.

take time to hook up? what are you talking about? its instant.
the rest is opinionated and respected.

my dads C5 corvette doesnt launch harder than my vr4. of course theres cars with much more power that can take off in rwd faster than the vr4 in awd, but thats for any awd sti or evo or anything else.

take time to hook up? what are you talking about? its instant.
the rest is opinionated and respected.

my dads C5 corvette doesnt launch harder than my vr4. of course theres cars with much more power that can take off in rwd faster than the vr4 in awd, but thats for any awd sti or evo or anything else.
Do you know have a vicious diff works?
it's open untill the wheels(in your case since it's a center) start to slip and it takes time for it lock the wheels.
http://www.rallycars.com/Cars/4wd_turbo_cars.html
You're dad's C5 doesn't launch any harder because it's not set up for drag racing.
However I'd take the C5 over a VR4 in a heart beat.
In a road race I think we know who would win.


Strictly speaking drag racing, rwd cars(that transfer lots of weight to the back) with huge slicks are better are just as good or better than AWD cars.
When you launch an AWD car with lots of power weight obviously transfers to the rear.. you lose traction for the front wheels.

When you launch an AWD car with lots of power weight obviously transfers to the rear.. you lose traction for the front wheels.

hence most AWD system's rear biased split.

and though the VR4's AWD doesnt lock "instantly" it is quick enough where the driver would never be able to tell. it actually has one of the quicker reacting AWD systems available to date that is on a car costing under $50k.

i would give the 1320 race in this situation to the STI but the VR4 shouldnt be too far behind it. within a car length...i recently just drove my 2nd VR4 and i can tell you that it carries its weight very well but especially well in straight line performance. it didnt feel like a heavy car until a sharp turn came along but it was built for Grand Touring so it is respectable that its tight cornering ability isnt on par with a mazda miata.

hence most AWD system's rear biased split.

and though the VR4's AWD doesnt lock "instantly" it is quick enough where the driver would never be able to tell. it actually has one of the quicker reacting AWD systems available to date that is on a car costing under $50k.

i would give the 1320 race in this situation to the STI but the VR4 shouldnt be too far behind it. within a car length...i recently just drove my 2nd VR4 and i can tell you that it carries its weight very well but especially well in straight line performance. it didnt feel like a heavy car until a sharp turn came along but it was built for Grand Touring so it is respectable that its tight cornering ability isnt on par with a mazda miata.
But what I'm saying is that if you want to drag race, you dont want AWD.. it's a waste when you've transfers the better part of the front weight to the rear.
If he got Torsen diff or quafe I bet he'd never go back
:naughty:
Anyway..
I think the AWD system I'd like that is static (doesn't vary the split) is something that is way rear biased, like only 30-35% front.
That would be nice since you still could have RWD fun only with more stability.
IIRC the 3000GT has 45% goin to the front.

But what I'm saying is that if you want to drag race, you dont want AWD.. it's a waste when you've transfers the better part of the front weight to the rear.
If he got Torsen diff or quafe I bet he'd never go back
:naughty:
Anyway..
I think the AWD system I'd like that is static (doesn't vary the split) is something that is way rear biased, like only 30-35% front.
That would be nice since you still could have RWD fun only with more stability.
IIRC the 3000GT has 45% goin to the front.

i dont know...if you drag a street car, i havent seen many disappointing AWD cars. AWD can usually shave a good chunk of time off of a 1/4 mile time when compared to a RWD in a street car match-up. though in pure drag racing, RWD is obviously the clear cut choice as all dragsters use it.

yes and the torsen diff is nice but i have yet to drive a car with a quaife diff though quaife is in the process of desiging one for the 300zx. :naughty:

i dont know...if you drag a street car, i havent seen many disappointing AWD cars. AWD can usually shave a good chunk of time off of a 1/4 mile time when compared to a RWD in a street car match-up. though in pure drag racing, RWD is obviously the clear cut choice as all dragsters use it.

yes and the torsen diff is nice but i have yet to drive a car with a quaife diff though quaife is in the process of desiging one for the 300zx. :naughty:
Ya, im talkin a built drag car
:evillol:
AWD is good(even 50:50 split) for the amount of longitudinal traction they provide and their (like fwd) stabilising effect when you nail the gas.

altima i know all this, the fastest drag cars are rwd... this is baby talk

i'd probably take a c5 vette over the vr4 too lol, that wasnt the question

and yes i know what v/c is, but like k3 mentioned its basically instant.

can you name a car within a vr4's speed that can come off the line faster than a vr4? anything in the 13's? thats not awd?

the vr4 has a very good launch, comparible to the sti, end of story

altima i know all this, the fastest drag cars are rwd... this is baby talk

i'd probably take a c5 vette over the vr4 too lol, that wasnt the question

and yes i know what v/c is, but like k3 mentioned its basically instant.

can you name a car within a vr4's speed that can come off the line faster than a vr4? anything in the 13's? thats not awd?

the vr4 has a very good launch, comparible to the sti, end of story

hey young, have you dyno tuned with your Super AFC yet? is so, did you get a noticeable difference? do you like it? easy to use?

i have seen some pretty remarkable numbers from a dyno tuning session with it...just wanted to know what you thought of it.

altima i know all this, the fastest drag cars are rwd... this is baby talk

i'd probably take a c5 vette over the vr4 too lol, that wasnt the question

and yes i know what v/c is, but like k3 mentioned its basically instant.

can you name a car within a vr4's speed that can come off the line faster than a vr4? anything in the 13's? thats not awd?

the vr4 has a very good launch, comparible to the sti, end of story
Don't make the common mistake of assuming my name is for the shitty car :banghead:
Er not stock.. but the point is that that RWD cars can catch up with the vr4, the C5 has no problem posting a faster ET.
Launching isn't everything and I doubt very many 3000GTs drag race.
The Vr4 is a good touring car or whatever but it has nothing on true sport cars.
It is pointless to argue the performance the Vr4 it since it wasn't made for only performance and it's severely handicapped with it's weight disadvantage.

im picking STi over the mitsubishi all day long. better reliability anyways.....

Don't make the common mistake of assuming my name is for the shitty car :banghead:
Er not stock.. but the point is that that RWD cars can catch up with the vr4, the C5 has no problem posting a faster ET.
Launching isn't everything and I doubt very many 3000GTs drag race.
The Vr4 is a good touring car or whatever but it has nothing on true sport cars.
It is pointless to argue the performance the Vr4 it since it wasn't made for only performance and it's severely handicapped with it's weight disadvantage.

i suggest you go back and read what this thread is about.

did i ever say a rwd couldnt catch a vr4 in the long run?
did i say launching was everything in a race?
did i say you owned a altima, or that i even cared what car you owned?

this isnt about vr4 vs every car on earth, its vr4 vs sti and i have clearly stated that in the 1320 the sti has the edge and on a longer distance the vr4 has the edge, gearing is the key in this game, as the vr4's gears are setup for high top speeds, a 1st gen vr4's 3rd gear ends at 125mph.
dont turn a thread into something its not! end of story

k3 i actually havent installed it yet lol, i bought it and double checked my cash, so i'm gonna need to wait to pay someone to install it.

but i will get back to you when all is done

The cobra was not 390 hp at the time of the test, only the 03 04's had that hp. They were 320hp at the time the vr4 was compared.

C5 also has more power, and less drivetrain loss, thats why it gets a better ET. It loses off the line.

AWD for street cars is faster for launching unless they have a really high hp, where the front tires lift off the ground.

This seems kind of obvious

AWD for street cars is faster for launching unless they have a really high hp, where the front tires lift off the ground.

This seems kind of obvious

Wrong. AWD for street cars makes for a difficult launch because you have TOO MUCH traction. To keep the engine up in the powerband, you have to slip the clutch, and that's hard on the clutch and not particularly easy to do, at least to do it optinally.

On the other hand, with rear wheel drive, if you have enough power, the rear wheels will spin on the pavement, allowing a smooth launch without slipping the clutch. Much easier on the clutch and it keeps the revs up. With street tires, a normal production car will never be able to get its front wheels off the ground, no matter how much power it has. The tires will break traction first.

You guys are funny..

k3 i actually havent installed it yet lol, i bought it and double checked my cash, so i'm gonna need to wait to pay someone to install it.

but i will get back to you when all is done

sounds good...i still havent completed my swap. ran into some major mechanical problems with my JDM motor i ordered so now i have to go back and draw up a new game plan. :lol:

Wrong. AWD for street cars makes for a difficult launch because you have TOO MUCH traction. To keep the engine up in the powerband, you have to slip the clutch, and that's hard on the clutch and not particularly easy to do, at least to do it optinally.

On the other hand, with rear wheel drive, if you have enough power, the rear wheels will spin on the pavement, allowing a smooth launch without slipping the clutch. Much easier on the clutch and it keeps the revs up. With street tires, a normal production car will never be able to get its front wheels off the ground, no matter how much power it has. The tires will break traction first.

OK, but then look at where YoungVR4 is talking about 6k clutch dumps, sounds pretty easy to me. Obviously thats not the best for the car, but how is that a difficult launch?

And yes obviously a normal production car cannot get its front wheels off the ground. I never said they could. I mean drag cars that need wheelie bars

OK, but then look at where YoungVR4 is talking about 6k clutch dumps, sounds pretty easy to me. Obviously thats not the best for the car, but how is that a difficult launch?

And yes obviously a normal production car cannot get its front wheels off the ground. I never said they could. I mean drag cars that need wheelie bars
drivetrain shock++
and he said a Vr4 cannot break traction(i have a feeling the fronts would slip for a tiny bit then grab with the diff sending power to the rear).. so a 6K clutch dump would either make it fall on it's face or you'd make the clutch slip if the clutch isn't vert strong and I dont imagine that is poetically good for the clutch or the tranny/drivetrain.

i guess if you havnt been in the car you just wont understand. no tire spin, cant hear any tire spin, it wont fal on its face, it is bad for the tranny(though our trannys are very strong with people on there stock tranny pushing out more than 600awhp) stock clutch is strong, upgraded clutch will solve most the problem.
if you wanna save your clutch or the life on your tranny then you can slip it at 4500 - 5000rpms and still get a good run. igovert500 ran a 13.6 stock doing so.
dsm's vr4, evo-8, sti these cars have easy launches if your any good at driving and will win off the line, against its competitors.

example, when i beleive it was car and driver that had the supra vs vr4 run and both ran a 13.5, it was stated the vr4 won of the line, supra had a higher trap obviously.
but nobody in hear is stupid so we know there is drivetrain loss up top on awd.

i've drivin lots of cars, fast cars, nothing launches or comes off the line faster than sti evo or vr4 in its speed range, period.

show me a video of a stock vr4 doing one of your clutch drop launchs...

i'll do my best, let me ask around some of my guys might know of a video floating around.

Well I guess since it hit's it torque peak at 2500rpm it has a big powerband, but wouldn't bet quicker with a bit of a clutch slip?

why are we complaining about a 6K clutch dump? the STI has to do the same thing to get a decent launch!
Have you guys ever seen an STI take off without reving it up, they suck ass! My best friend has and STI, its fast but that thing makes no power till after 3000rpms. tinie winnie little turbo, and lets not talk about reliability, the STI has one of the pussiest engines out there.

I think in a 1/4 mile run the STI would edge out the VR-4.
However, all of you have neglected one very interesting point. the STI is relatively new. the VR-4 production was siezed 6 almost 7 years ago now.

Its like putting Jackie Chan to fight Tony Ja. the old man would hang in there but eventually the kid would edge him out.

Props to the VR-4 for still being able to compete.

Yeah just to add my .02.

Altimas, I think you are talking a bit more from opinion than experience. It is easy to bench race the vr4 and make assumptions, based on numbers, but consider this, you mention the weight...yes it weighs more than an sti, but about the same or within 200lbs of a supra, ws6, etc...3800lbs is heavy, but not a handicap like many make it out to be.

2ndly, I have dropped the clutch, slipped the clutch, and both at varied rpms from 3000-6000rpms, dumping it is obviously not great for our transfer cases which have proven to be a weak link in our application, however our cars can and have handled it, and if you really are deadset on finding videos there are hundreds over on www.3si.org/forum

On the street I do prefer slipping the clutch at mid-3ks and still rape pretty much everything out of the hole. Granted AWD may not be the best thing for 1/4 runs...we all know this. Parasitic drivetrain loss is something we are all familiar with, however, don't assume this means few drag race their vr4s. Many do, and shortly there will be at least one ia n the 9s trapping well over 140mph, fully streetable.

As far as viscous coupling being slow...absolutely not, the reaction is far faster than any driver could notice, and as far as front wheels breaking traction...nope. I've raced my car hundreds if not thousands of times in drags, or on the street, in any conditions. I've managed to CHIRP my tires once while racing a c5 on the 1-2nd shift. That is once. The only other ways to remotely break traction involve dumping the clutch with the steering wheel completely sideways, or snow. The traction on this car is sickening.
As far as matching up the AWD vs. RWD, I've raced countless LS1s, cobras (03-05s), if you 350 equipped Pontiacs, LS2s, etc. Granted with RWD they catch up fast and can walk a stock vr4 after 3rd, but stock I have beaten some on the streets, and EVERYTIME I have maintained the lead at least into 3rd gear...the gear I finish teh 1/4 in, stock. So yes, RWD is preferable in drag racing, but as my car is predominantly a street car, and now modded and hopefully running high 12s, I'm pretty damn satisfied.

Lastly, you are ignorant enough to say that the vr4 wasn't made for performance and isn't a sports car. Yes it is labeled a grand touring car, but would you please be so kind as to list how many cars were running mid 13s in 91, let alone out of a 6cylinder? Granted there were quite a few, but 15 years ago, it was DAMN respectible. It competes with the best of them, and while it may not come out on top, it handles it's own, and IMO is more fun to drive.
You are appearing biased and seem to be incapable of wrapping your head around that fact that sports cars can come in different forms. A true sports car doesn't necessarily have to be a RWD v8 from Detroit. So get off you high horse, as it seems you simply don't have significant enough 1st hand experience to have a worthwhile un-biased opinion. Here on AF we respect all decent cars and technology, while Young and I both own vr4s, we both have plenty of experiences with vettes/mustangs/trans ams, and can appreciate sports cars in many varieties, please try to do the same.

Now can we get off the RWD vs. AWD BS, because honestly, I couldn't care less about what car you would or wouldn't buy and return to the original question of the sti vs. the vr4.

The vr4 has a boost controller, intake, and turbo-back exhaust. That means that it has eliminated the stock restrictive pre-cats and downpipe, whereby taking full advantage of that 14.5psi. With those mods, 400hp at the crank/300AWHP and ~12.8s are possible. I don't know what the stock sti boost settings are, so I can't really guess how much the of a hp boost that grants it, but with the sti's shorter gearing, it will be shifting more, and does have a severe issue after 100mph IMO. I would say this will be a damn close race, and one which I would like to say would come down to drivers. Let us know how it turns out.

Yeah just to add my .02.

Altimas, I think you are talking a bit more from opinion than experience. It is easy to bench race the vr4 and make assumptions, based on numbers, but consider this, you mention the weight...yes it weighs more than an sti, but about the same or within 200lbs of a supra, ws6, etc...3800lbs is heavy, but not a handicap like many make it out to be.

2ndly, I have dropped the clutch, slipped the clutch, and both at varied rpms from 3000-6000rpms, dumping it is obviously not great for our transfer cases which have proven to be a weak link in our application, however our cars can and have handled it, and if you really are deadset on finding videos there are hundreds over on www.3si.org/forum

On the street I do prefer slipping the clutch at mid-3ks and still rape pretty much everything out of the hole. Granted AWD may not be the best thing for 1/4 runs...we all know this. Parasitic drivetrain loss is something we are all familiar with, however, don't assume this means few drag race their vr4s. Many do, and shortly there will be at least one ia n the 9s trapping well over 140mph, fully streetable.

As far as viscous coupling being slow...absolutely not, the reaction is far faster than any driver could notice, and as far as front wheels breaking traction...nope. I've raced my car hundreds if not thousands of times in drags, or on the street, in any conditions. I've managed to CHIRP my tires once while racing a c5 on the 1-2nd shift. That is once. The only other ways to remotely break traction involve dumping the clutch with the steering wheel completely sideways, or snow. The traction on this car is sickening.
As far as matching up the AWD vs. RWD, I've raced countless LS1s, cobras (03-05s), if you 350 equipped Pontiacs, LS2s, etc. Granted with RWD they catch up fast and can walk a stock vr4 after 3rd, but stock I have beaten some on the streets, and EVERYTIME I have maintained the lead at least into 3rd gear...the gear I finish teh 1/4 in, stock. So yes, RWD is preferable in drag racing, but as my car is predominantly a street car, and now modded and hopefully running high 12s, I'm pretty damn satisfied.

Lastly, you are ignorant enough to say that the vr4 wasn't made for performance and isn't a sports car. Yes it is labeled a grand touring car, but would you please be so kind as to list how many cars were running mid 13s in 91, let alone out of a 6cylinder? Granted there were quite a few, but 15 years ago, it was DAMN respectible. It competes with the best of them, and while it may not come out on top, it handles it's own, and IMO is more fun to drive.
You are appearing biased and seem to be incapable of wrapping your head around that fact that sports cars can come in different forms. A true sports car doesn't necessarily have to be a RWD v8 from Detroit. So get off you high horse, as it seems you simply don't have significant enough 1st hand experience to have a worthwhile un-biased opinion. Here on AF we respect all decent cars and technology, while Young and I both own vr4s, we both have plenty of experiences with vettes/mustangs/trans ams, and can appreciate sports cars in many varieties, please try to do the same.

Now can we get off the RWD vs. AWD BS, because honestly, I couldn't care less about what car you would or wouldn't buy and return to the original question of the sti vs. the vr4.

The vr4 has a boost controller, intake, and turbo-back exhaust. That means that it has eliminated the stock restrictive pre-cats and downpipe, whereby taking full advantage of that 14.5psi. With those mods, 400hp at the crank/300AWHP and ~12.8s are possible. I don't know what the stock sti boost settings are, so I can't really guess how much the of a hp boost that grants it, but with the sti's shorter gearing, it will be shifting more, and does have a severe issue after 100mph IMO. I would say this will be a damn close race, and one which I would like to say would come down to drivers. Let us know how it turns out.
There is no assumptions here.
The Vr4 is fast, and I've not stated otherwise, however there is no denying that less weight is always better in racing.
Neither a supra or a wr6 are light weights nor are they known for their handling charactorists
In 92 the corvette finally got a decent V8.. we all the Lt1.
Rated at 300HP and and 330 torque standard and the zr1 having the Lt5.. 375hp cammer :naughty:
So 91..not too many cars but 1 year later cheby got some nice v8s to choose from.
What does having a 6 banger have to do with running 13s?
You have a couple of turbos to help "make up" for the loss of 2.7 liters to the 350s.. and easily kills the 5.0 mustangs (stock obviously).
Oh and who said anything about a true sports car having a v8?
Can't get off the true sports car high horse if you're not on it :nono:
Oh and you outa be able to spin one of your front tires on a hard launch being it has an open differential.

Not to be a stickler over facts, but the LT1 came in the CAMARO in 93, the vette received it in '91.

Anyway, this arguement is getting dumb. Somebody with an STi race a vr4 and settle it. I'd take the STi personally, only cause it's newer and looks easier to work on, but what do I know?

You're wrong.
The way it workes is that the f-body got the Lt1 and ls1 a year after the vette got them.
Not sure where you got your info.
http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclecars/chevrolet-corvette/chevrolet-corvette-history-4.shtml
edit- oh I see I put 93.. typo.. meant 92.. fixed.

Oh and you outa be able to spin one of your front tires on a hard launch being it has an open differential.

Not without a hell of alot more hp than comes stock. Again you can speculate as much as you want, but the bottom line, is you don't have experience driving/owning/racing the car, so we are back to your pompous bench-racing based opinions.

He said he can spin the tires on a clutch drop :rolleyes:

Not without a hell of alot more hp than comes stock. Again you can speculate as much as you want, but the bottom line, is you don't have experience driving/owning/racing the car, so we are back to your pompous bench-racing based opinions.

:thumbsup:

Altimas, your really lacking a valid argument in your whole wheel spinning claim. For one, there are two active members who own the vehicle claiming otherwise. Igo also brought secondary evidence further claiming so. Not that you don't have any logical assertions, but they don't quite stack up in your favor. I haven't driven a VR-4, but I know an enthusiast who owns one that will without a doubt testify in the same manner. Maybe the occasional chirp is possible, but the difference between a chirp and spinning is as relative as mild to heavy understeer.

ok I give up whatever :D