MY '94 B4C Vs. MY '05 STi
Login  | |
|
MY '94 B4C Vs. MY '05 STi - 11/26/2005 7:49:47 AM
|
|
|
RatedZ
Posts: 278
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
I just got the transmission rebuilt in my Camaro for the THIRD time, and have wondered for quite some time which car was faster; my Camaro, or my STi.
So, last weekend I talk my wife into driving the Camaro (automatic), and I'd drive the STi. We took the cars down a pretty empty straight highway, and at about 45mph, both gassed it. She hit the gas first, and then I did. I started off in 4th, which is one of my strong-pulling gears, because I really wanted to see what the Camaro was made of. I thought for sure that the STi was going to embarass it. Not the case. The Camaro was up to the game. My wife floored the gas, and all I heard was the LT1 screaming. We were side by side. I wasn't pulling, and she wasn't gaining. It was a dead heat. Not bad for a 12 year old car with over 167,000 miles on it.
Anyway, I'm going to have to re-do this comparo again. She's not the best driver, and she just doesn't understand the "3-honk rule." I wanted to run them again, but she just "wasn't gettin' it."
Reasons being that I thought the STi would win by a substantial amount was because of its lower weight of between 3200-3280 lbs, and its 3.91 gears. Not to mention, I had an ECU tune done to it, so it's making about 325hp/340ftlbs tq at the crank, according to the ECU tuner. I have no reason to deny their claims, as the tune really did wake the STi up. WITHOUT the tune, I think the Camaro might have edged out the STi. The Camaro, on the other hand, weighs probably between 3400-3500lbs, and I'd estimate about 320hp/350 ftlbs tq with the mods that it has. Add it all up, and the Camaro surprises, especially with the 3.23 gears and automatic transmission.
In all honesty, I was disappointed that the Camaro DIDN'T win, because it IS "my baby." I said this same thing on another forum, but I'll repeat it here. Watching the Camaro tie was like being the soccermom on the sidelines jumping up and down as Junior charges an empty net, only to kick it wide.....
_____________________________
-Dan
1994 Chevrolet B4C Camaro
2005 Subaru Impreza WRX STi
www.topspeedautogroup.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MY '94 B4C Vs. MY '05 STi - 11/26/2005 4:20:52 PM
|
|
|
RatedZ
Posts: 278
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Hisss04Cobra
Well, what did you really expect, it's an awd car so it's most impressive race would be from a dig. Go rev that thing up to 5k and drop the clutch and get ready to be impressed.
Well, I'm very well aware that off the launch, the STi would own the Camaro, but I just wanted to see how they would measure up with no advantages going either direction.
As for the 5000 rpm launch, thanks, but no thanks. I'd prefer to keep the drivetrain intact. If I decide to get on it in the STi, I normally launch at about 2500-3000 rpm and just roll into the throttle. I'm not overly hard on my vehicles.
_____________________________
-Dan
1994 Chevrolet B4C Camaro
2005 Subaru Impreza WRX STi
www.topspeedautogroup.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MY '94 B4C Vs. MY '05 STi - 11/26/2005 5:25:48 PM
|
|
|
RatedZ
Posts: 278
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lee Willis
I am not surprised that modded STI and LT1 would be even. I've seen STIs and EVos give LS1 F-bodies ast run for it at the strip: stock to stock, or lightly modified to lightly modified, while they can't pull as hard from about 75 on up as the F-body, they jump off the line so fast and accelerate up to 60 so quickly that the 1/4 mile is just a toss up: sometimes the F can catch up, sometimes it can't. It makes for some very exciting races.
The thing about it is, is the STi doesn't make a lot of power at the wheels. They have 300hp, and only make about 220-240 whp, depending on what type of dyno you get'em on. Their power has to transfer through THREE differentials.
_____________________________
-Dan
1994 Chevrolet B4C Camaro
2005 Subaru Impreza WRX STi
www.topspeedautogroup.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MY '94 B4C Vs. MY '05 STi - 11/26/2005 7:35:04 PM
|
|
|
Lee Willis
Posts: 533
Joined: 11/22/2005
Status: online
|
That is a good point. I had an Audi S4 sedan prior to the Porsche (4.2 liter, 340 Hp, 6 speed, 4-wheel drive, 3750 lbs). I liked the 4-wheel drive and the HP but not the weight, or the view (it was hard to see out of to the rear) and never felt comfortable in it, but the 4-wheel drive was great. Best 1/4 mile it did was 13.95 at 100 - it felt faster than that, but . . . . Liked it so much I thought about an STI, but I just sort of wanted the Porsche once I drove it.
It is hard to find 4-wheel drive dynos but I found one up in Virginia. Quite an effort to set up a car compared to 2-wheel drive. I expected the Audi to do about 300-305 HP but it did only 273. Reason: THREE differentials and a whole bunch of u- or constant-speed joints (don't forget them, they each take about 3% of the power that goes through them).
_____________________________
Aston Martin Vantage V8
Lincoln MKZ daily driver
1998 Camaro w. 408/AFR heads, etc.,+NOS street/strip
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MY '94 B4C Vs. MY '05 STi - 11/26/2005 10:24:42 PM
|
|
|
Dan Oldham
Posts: 2
Joined: 11/22/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lee Willis
That is a good point. I had an Audi S4 sedan prior to the Porsche (4.2 liter, 340 Hp, 6 speed, 4-wheel drive, 3750 lbs). I liked the 4-wheel drive and the HP but not the weight, or the view (it was hard to see out of to the rear) and never felt comfortable in it, but the 4-wheel drive was great. Best 1/4 mile it did was 13.95 at 100 - it felt faster than that, but . . . . Liked it so much I thought about an STI, but I just sort of wanted the Porsche once I drove it.
It is hard to find 4-wheel drive dynos but I found one up in Virginia. Quite an effort to set up a car compared to 2-wheel drive. I expected the Audi to do about 300-305 HP but it did only 273. Reason: THREE differentials and a whole bunch of u- or constant-speed joints (don't forget them, they each take about 3% of the power that goes through them).
Yeah, unfortunately, that's the way it goes. It sucks.
_____________________________
1994 Chevrolet B4C Camaro
2005 Subaru WRX STi
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RE: MY '94 B4C Vs. MY '05 STi - 11/27/2005 8:50:54 PM
|
|
|
Lee Willis
Posts: 533
Joined: 11/22/2005
Status: online
|
That's what I hear, although come to think about it, that is for two joints - one on each end of an IRS axle. I think this is for the both and everything around them. I saw a breakdown of the typical 15% losses flywheel to rear wheels once and it went something like: trans: 5% (manual) or 8% (auto), differential, 5%, u-joints and axle bearings, etc, 3%, tires, 2%.
_____________________________
Aston Martin Vantage V8
Lincoln MKZ daily driver
1998 Camaro w. 408/AFR heads, etc.,+NOS street/strip
|
|
|
|
 Today's Posts
Most Active Topics
Make A Donation
Forum Rules & FAQ
RSS Feeds
Camaro Prices
Chevy Camaro
Camaro concept car
1969 Camaro
Advertising Info
|
Contact Us |
Advertising |
CamaroForums.com Partners |
Camaro Links |
Archive |
About Us |
Link To Us |
Legal |
Privacy Policy |
© Camaro Forums
Camaro Forums .com is not affiliated with or endorsed by Chevrolet Motors Division or General Motors.
|
Printable Version
