FTO AUSTRALIA

I drove a turbo Civic 2 weeks ago putting out 200kw through the fronts...was wicked to drive.

Lets face it the 6a12 has sh*t low down response no matter how hard you try and convince yourself its an all round package.

Its a great looking car, feels nice to drive. In stock form, nothing that special but goes better than other cars in its class.

In a lancer it has enough low end power

By the way, how was the civic?
Traction?
Quick?
Damn I love civics!

spetz wrote:By the way, how was the civic?
Traction?
Quick?
Damn I love civics!

yeah was really cool....was so impressed, Made me want big power in the FTO

Traction wasn't as bad as I thought. Just set the boost contoller to low boost in 1st...launch it and whap...V8 killer.

I raced a new SS...hehe in 2nds and 3rd he had no chnace...power to weight was amazing...feels like there is no car.

spetz wrote:In a lancer it has enough low end power

might be the case...andother hundred or so less kilos yeah? helps out a fir bit I guess.

Delvance wrote:1st and 2nd gear, he pulled ahead by a panel or so, 3rd gear i cleared him.

I don't exactly understand the difference between torque and power, but what you said above is, from what I do understand, the big difference between torque and power in a real world situation.

The 1st and 2nd acceleration is the turbo's torque being more than the GPX. The 3rd gear reel in and pass is the higher power reading of the GPX.

And thanks Khunjeng, what you posted cleared a lot up for me.

FTEvolution wrote:

Delvance wrote:1st and 2nd gear, he pulled ahead by a panel or so, 3rd gear i cleared him.

I don't exactly understand the difference between torque and power, but what you said above is, from what I do understand, the big difference between torque and power in a real world situation.

The 1st and 2nd acceleration is the turbo's torque being more than the GPX. The 3rd gear reel in and pass is the higher power reading of the GPX.

And thanks Khunjeng, what you posted cleared a lot up for me.

I'm not gonna comment again on some car which i know nothing about, however in general with the WRX he would have better launch due to the 4wd and once he hits boost hard..3000rpm his torque is so much higher ...I estimate just over 110nm at 3000rpm based on some stock dyno results. When they both hit redline the WRX would still be accelertaing faster as max torque is around 80nm more than the GPX

You say 100nm is not much...the total output of the GPX is around 200..so thats a fair bit considering this as a percentage...

If you think u get good performance form 200nm...well wouldn't 300 be 50% better? yes it would...weigth difference...say 200kg expressed as a percentage of the total weight is ~16%. So lets assume we add 200kg to the FTO but add 50% more power..which is gonna go faster? Power to weight is still better.

If we talk Tip GPX...the drivetrain losses make it even worse in the real world..

No way that a GPX would be a stock WRX if both same (AT/MT) and similar drivers. He would be a full car length in front at least.

4wd launch only if the driver is not worried about butchering his clutch. With a stock drivetrain, it's not going to take many high rpm launches to break something, so some don't tend to launch their car full ball. FTO otoh, doesn't matter as much as energy can escape in the form of wheelspin (fwd, no lsd).

The meat of the power in a stockish 02 wrx is mid range, high end the engine actually runs out of puff a bit. I'm pretty sure the max torque of the wrx engine for 02 drops off at around redline, so the car would not actually accelerate as hard as if it were in the meat of the power band.

Looking at 6a12 mivec dynos, torque doesn't really drop off much all the way to redline and this creates a constant acceleration all the way till a bit just before redline. Lots of torque late in the rpm band also plays with the gearing.

So around redline, we can't exactly say one car is accelerating faster than the other just because one's peak torque is higher than the other. Gearing of the box would also come in effect.

I thought manny and auto fto's are around the same power. Got a article somewhere that dynos a stock manny and auto fto. Difference was only 5kw or less in the auto.

I'm no expert though so may (or quite possibly) be wrong lol. Hey, we're all here to discuss and learn right

As a bit of info, the wrx in question got 6.14s best time for 0-60mph with a gtech pro setup properly/aligned/flat rd etc.

Best i've gotten on my manny gpx is 6.67s.

And to show it seems fairly accurate
a mates VW auto bora got 10.67
accord euro 8.48.

KJ,
The cars in question are both manny, drivers are fairly similar (with the WRX driver a bit better...he did teach me manaul after all )

Edit - The wrx in question had replaced the stock airbox with a K&N pod cold air intake system and now it's 3rd gear seems to be a fair bit faster than mine. Less choked engine by the sounds of it.

Launch style is assumed the same. pointless arguement for a comparision.

I would rather low-mid range torque. As indicated runs at least half a seoncd faster 0-100. Qmile its better also by your calcs..Constant acceleration, dunno why you care seems like wank factor to me.

Even though the wrx might drop off up high...its still more than the FTO..which ws the point.

5kw atw is a lot of a FTO..its about 5% more loss through the tip. After driving a few manuals here, manual is def. better and faster, launching it is so much better.

look what I found..

http://www.ftoaustralia.com/modules.php ... c&start=20

I can tell you my last dyno saw 107kw atw and when i used a gtech I got ~7.0. Which matches what you said in this tread...an extra ~5kw dropped 0.2 s. By that logic...u need to gain another .3s or 8kw atw..or around 115atw.

You could do that with the following mods:
Full cat back incl. Extractors
New intake pipe
SAFC
Good 98 fuel.

That would get you about there I rekcon. Not just and HKS pod and shield...lol.

Wank factor ? Hahaha, nah not really. Thanks for the discussion.
Edit - sorry to have taken this thread OT