tc vs ___ [Archive] - Scionlife.com

killerxromances

06-13-2006, 06:12 AM

06SuperWhite_SoCal_tC

06-13-2006, 08:22 AM

just to clarify

rsx type S... NO
celica gts... NO
integra gsr... NO youd be suprised
tiburon v6... NO
99-00 civic SI... NO it's not that far off, either way
h22 prelude... NO

00+ eclipse 4cyl... yes
00+ eclipse 6cyl... probably not
integra gs... drivers race kill
celica gt... probably not
01+ civic SI... drivers race friend has one, it's a slight tC advantage
rsx base... drivers race
all other civics... yes
*-99 eclipse gs/rs... yes
mazda3 2.3L... drivers race

and if you drive an auto, change every one of those to NO

:doh:

I can somewhat agree with the rest.

rhythmnsmoke

06-13-2006, 01:13 PM

2redgerm6

06-13-2006, 11:10 PM

i would like to chime in here. i had a 5 spd toyota corolla not the xrs and beat an auto rsx and a auto celica gt and just so you guys know those sweet celica gtss with the factory body kits weigh like 3800 pounds. i sold my corolla to get a tc because it was faster (i race one and it be me pretty bad) and i havn't been able to race much cause i broke my leg (only 3800 miles on tc) but i beat a acura tl and yes it was the 240 hp one and i launched like an idiot with rediculous wheel spin. my point here is i know i can't beat a tl 98% of but that time i did. whether the guy was a puzzy or not i don't know but i know he followed me around some twisty roads at over 85 mph and took off hard when he saw me do the same so it was a race. ps i beat a zo6 in my corolla hahahaha

killerxromances

06-17-2006, 07:14 PM

just to clarify

rsx type S... NO
celica gts... NO
integra gsr... NO
tiburon v6... NO
99-00 civic SI... NO
h22 prelude... NO

00+ eclipse 4cyl... yes
00+ eclipse 6cyl... probably not
integra gs... drivers race
celica gt... probably not
01+ civic SI... drivers race
rsx base... drivers race
all other civics... yes
*-99 eclipse gs/rs... yes
mazda3 2.3L... drivers race

and if you drive an auto, change every one of those to NO

:doh:

dude i totally whomped a v6 tiburon, maybe u should try racing one, and before you say no i didnt and it wasnt a v6, i checked it out and it was.

And it probably came down to the fact you were a better driver. Rythmnsmoke has shown a video or two of him smoking a ep3, yet almost every things else i have seen, in person, video, so on proves the ep3 vs tC in both stock forums are equal. Including a few other tC owners here with videos.

I cant believe some of the crap you guys are saying on here. You look like a bunch of a*sholes claiming the tC can smoke everything and anything. Just because you have a 2.4l and is the most expensive scion (big wow there) doesn't mean anything.

ajnast4r has it pretty much right if you are talking stock vs stock. Although the integra gs i'd change to a yes. Give it up and quit acting like its the end of the world because you can't beat _____, tC is not fast, is top heavy, and the 2az isn't some great performance motor either.

Sorry Killer, I have to disagree with you. ajnast4r is not right. And I don't think anyone is saying the tC is ALMIGHTY. It's just that with the right driver, this list is misconstrued. I don't feel like correcting it either.

Yeah, right driver as in you being the right driver and oh lets take your ep3 videos for example. Crappy ep3 driver, you a better driver, bam you win. Proves pretty much nothing when you look at it that way. Hey, i beat a viper today in my box. He was stopped, but he was in his car and the motor was running so it was a race, he just sucked at driving. :rofl:

ISmokeGuys

06-18-2006, 06:35 PM

killerxromances

06-18-2006, 10:58 PM

legionscion

06-18-2006, 11:48 PM

killerxromances

06-18-2006, 11:54 PM

legionscion

06-19-2006, 12:45 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-19-2006, 03:45 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-19-2006, 03:49 PM

killerxromances

06-20-2006, 02:26 AM

With the other driver a horrible driver, anything is possible. Kind of how rythmnsmoke runs.

:rofl: :rofl: Are you Serious dude? You think I'm a professional going against a bunch of noobs...thanks for the compliment I guess. But not the case dude.

ps....I'll smoke you like a cuban cigar. Maybe I should put on a pair of roller blades to make it fair. :yawn:

No, i never said your a professional. But what i am saying is the ep3 driver wasn't as good as you. Sure, that is a compliment. I'm not saying that you didn't beat any civic, what i am saying is its easy to beat someone that isn't as good of a driver. Thats my point and i stand by that. I didn't know your tc had 300whp? I was looking at the profile all it had was i/h/e and a few other things.

killerxromances

06-20-2006, 02:30 AM

I beat a 96 GS-T runinng 16psi it was so sweet but he didnt want to stop and go so we were on a 30mph roll
i was like :relief: i won hahaa

my vids link

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=66275518

Either your lying or he was a horrible driver, or lied about the psi. At 16psi, i've seen most dyno's hit between 290-340whp depending on set up and conditions obviously. But lets just say 290whp, with your n/a set up assuming thats still the set up, your pushing maybe 155whp?

With the other driver a horrible driver, anything is possible. Kind of how rythmnsmoke runs.

why will i be lying 30mph roll, and if you want me to tell the guy who i raced and tell's you on the camera will i be lying i have like 185-190-hp i know how to use my car and take good care of it i stad side by side with a cobalt i race my friend 92 240sx SR20 turbo he was running 8psi w/intake, and full exhaust and a fule pump from a 300zxtt he beat me by 1 1/2 cars and the 2nd race by 2 cars and dont tell me 240sx is slow then the a gt-s ( be side ppl are stupid cuz they think they could run high boost w/out tunning it so he boost it up to 16psi and he told us and he didnt say any thing when i beat him he just told me that my car was fast and did you also look at my 15-70mph run ya i thout so and that run is QwiK :P :loser:

:rofl: "DC Sport Header, CAI K&N Pips with Secret Weapon Filter, Nology Coil-on-plug Ignition Wires, ZPI Pulley, Megan Full Cat-Back Exhaust, Megan S-pipe, NonStopTuning Alternator & WP-Lite KIT" are those all your mods? If so you are no where near 190whp. I've seen i/h/e, pulley, pistons and a few minor things only hit 179whp. The 2az i have never seen n/a much beyond that, or heard of one. It falls on its face n/a so far. With those mods you are more than likely around 155-160whp tops.

Oh, and from a 30mph roll doesn't make up over 150whp give or take difference between the two cars. Now if you were saying 60mph+ then i could see your point. He is not running 16psi and if he thinks your car is fast than wow. :loser: :rofl:

TimmyT

06-20-2006, 08:38 AM

legionscion

06-20-2006, 12:24 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-20-2006, 03:44 PM

With the other driver a horrible driver, anything is possible. Kind of how rythmnsmoke runs.

:rofl: :rofl: Are you Serious dude? You think I'm a professional going against a bunch of noobs...thanks for the compliment I guess. But not the case dude.

ps....I'll smoke you like a cuban cigar. Maybe I should put on a pair of roller blades to make it fair. :yawn:

No, i never said your a professional. But what i am saying is the ep3 driver wasn't as good as you. Sure, that is a compliment. I'm not saying that you didn't beat any civic, what i am saying is its easy to beat someone that isn't as good of a driver. Thats my point and i stand by that.

:question: And you come to this conclusion based on what factors, seeing as how you wasn't there or how you didn't know the guy and all?

I didn't know your tc had 300whp? I was looking at the profile all it had was i/h/e and a few other things.

I never update it :P

rhythmnsmoke

06-20-2006, 03:50 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-20-2006, 04:01 PM

DouBLeJ16

06-20-2006, 04:06 PM

This thread sucks.

trdtcpr

06-20-2006, 04:30 PM

Seriously Killer, You are going to have to start coming up with factual evidence, otherwise I'm just going to have to keep dosing you with some good EDUMACATION!

9 sec. 2az ALL MOTOR!

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c25/nick120580/SE/DragtC3.jpg

The first pass I made in Dinwiddie VA was the first pass ever in this brand new car. It was a 20 somthing second pass & the car launched hard to the left , so i made the decision to let off . I did not want to endanger myself or the car in the other lane. My second pass was a 10.50 ...I know ....I know, not a nine but we didn't think it was too shabby, it was only the second pass we had made as a team. Since then the car has been in 9s twice, and low tens quite a few times. I hope to continuing improving our performance over the next few months. I'm looking forward to meeting everyone at the upcoming SCION VIP events at the rest of our races this season.

and they still think it's not posible !!! thats what I call low faith people!!!!

any engine with the right tuning and enough money can be pushed to unbeleivable numbers!!!

This is one case and the other could be the ZPI turbo xB which is giving incredible numbers!!

anyways the tC vs ___ threads are everywhere and since I don't see them ending why don't any of the mods do a sticky thread so that everyone post it there and evryone who does not want to read about the tC vs ___ just don't go there!! :lalala:

killerxromances

06-20-2006, 06:58 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-20-2006, 07:15 PM

Killer you are seriously mis-informed about the tC

I/H/E, P&P, Valve work, Pully, 11.1 Pistons...

Just because you haven't seen a tC at 225+ whp doesn't mean its in capable.

I have yet to see anyone with 11.1 piston heads in a tC, but I know the P&P alone adds like 25 hp and 27 ftlb.

That is already 165 on lets say a 140 whp stock tC. when some dyno at 144 whp. Add I/H/E thats a good 25 or so whp.. Thats 180 right there.. and not even including a 11.1 piston instal....

Okay, i'm open on this. Show me a n/a tC here or anywhere above 200whp. Show me and i will gladly shut up. Show me a n/a tC with over 200whp with only i/h/e, port and polish and maybe 1 or 2 other small things. Show me a 180whp n/a tC with only i/h/e. I mean seriously, if you can prove it more power to you but i have yet to see that. Almost all i/h/e set ups i have seen yeild no more than 160whp with mmw's header. Some dyno 144whp, truth but majority dyno in the 130's not 140's, especially mid 140's that means the dyno is off. Only 15hp drivetrain loss is pretty minimal for 160 crank. Maybe if conditions are literally perfect i could see 140's, but you would never see that in real life. Again, you want to prove me wrong show me a real dyno run of a tC with minimal n/a mods pulling 180whp. Otherwise, don't try to prove me wrong.

Hey rythmn, nice try but that 9sec tC isn't hardly a tC. Light weight body, professional drag racing specs and, i also might add that all professional drag tC's i've read about and seen videos of, 2-3 of them, have been 2jz powered or one of the v8's toyota has. Show me that is a n/a 2az, wheres the specs? You have a picture, that proves nothing and even if it is a 2az, and even if it is n/a, it weighs much less than a tC and it isn't even a tC body, and i seriously, seriously doubt its a 2az chasis.

Dude, the topic of debate is the capability of the 2aZ. What the rest of the car has, is just a by-product of it being able to get down the 1320 faster. They are not power producing mods. You wanted a 2az that was N/A. I gave it to you. Then you complain about it being lighter. SO! If you took that motor and slapped it into a full equipped tC, you think it's going to run anything LESS than a 13? I think Not.

How about you show me a N/A Civic WITHOUT a motor swap above 200whp. Show me a n/a Civic with over 150whp with only i/h/e, port and polish and maybe 1 or 2 other small things. AGAIN NO ENGINE SWAP. Show me a 180whp n/a Civic with only i/h/e. I mean seriously, if you can prove it more power to you, but that dosen't change the fact that....

HONDA'S SUCK...

Yeah majority dyno's in the 130's not 140's.....YEAH FOR AUTOMATICS! Dude, we dynoed 140 on a Dyno Dynamics when we were just exhaust and s-pipe. On a Dyno jet, that would be like 150whp +.

Do your home work first before making claims. Everytime I see your post, you say "this, and that", but you never post links, evidence, vids, pics, NOTHING....nadda. Everything I ever say to dispute you, I come back with dyno's, pics, vids, HARD evidence, and all you can ever do is say...."well that car is lighter, he just couldn't drive, you must be the betterr driver".... :blah:

Give it up already dude....The tC is NOT slower than a crap Civic.

killerxromances

06-20-2006, 08:05 PM

killerxromances

06-20-2006, 08:13 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-20-2006, 08:15 PM

^
Go to any ep3 forum and you will see a ton of civics with 160whp+ with just basic mods. The new si with just i/h/e puts it around 195-200whp, what does honda have to do with anything on this thread? Nothing.

Yeah, this is about the 2az and the tC. Not about a professionally set up drag car. Show me an actual tC (i do not count that tC you showed me a tC, theres nothing about it thats tC and i doubt that chasis is even original, or the motor but i'll give you the motor for sake of arguing)

Show me ONE automatic that dyno'd in the mid 130s!!! All autos dyno in the 120's :loser:, you being a tC owner should know this.

tC is equal to a ep3, period. I'm sorry you hate hondas that much, but the tC is not fast and you are giving way off numbers. I've seen two stock autos dyno at 120-122whp, i've seen a i/h/e auto dyno at 137whp.

You brought up the ep3, and yeah the 06 Si will put down that, but they come from the factory with 195 @ the crank dude. You cry about so much info, and yet you don't even own a tC. I will muscle through my countless vids to find you a dyno of a tc. But it wouldn't shut you up, cause all you would do is say the dyno was off. :loser: :blah:

PS...funny how I'm sure everyone in this thread will agree with me, and yet I'm the one who's OFF with his #'s.

TimmyT

06-20-2006, 08:28 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-20-2006, 08:29 PM

I don't post dyno runs majority of the time because believe it or not, i am busy and i'm in the process of getting things ready to move out. I'm also about to get ready for work.

Everything i have said can easily be looked up on your own, if you want evidence later tonight or tomorrow i will do it just for you, just to show you with "hard evidence". Ironically, the few times i have shown you things you still argue with me and still try to prove me wrong. And if all else fails you bring up torque. Which as we all know except apparent tC owners, torque doesn't win races. If it did, it would be impossible for a honda motor to beat any domestic v6 or v8 since they have crap loads of torque.

Argue all you want, but 150whp with just a s-pipe and exhaust is bs, an auto dynoing in the 130's is bs, that "tC" you showed me is bs since its hardly a tc, and i seriously doubt that motor in that tc is a 2az. Show me where it is. Wheres that evidence? You claim you have shown me evidence, all you have done is picked up a professional picture of a drag car. How is THAT evidence? Hmm? Not only is that car much lighter, its not even a real freaking tC.

You can say i'm just making up excuses, but in the end all i've said is valid, true, and you know it. You just can't face the fact someone that drove a xb, someone that perfers hondas, can be right. After all, you drive the all effing mighty tC. You can smoke anything with all that torque, all that motor, and lets not forget the most expensive scion. I mean s hit, i wish i could own a tC just to be a jackass like yourself.

Correction, I have NEVER seen you post hard evidence. There is a little thing called PWR (Power to Weight Ratio) besides TQ you have to worry about when racing imports against the heavy V6/V8's.

Name: Leslie Durst-Armendariz
Team: Horizon Motorsports
Class: All Motor
Hometown: Long Beach, Calif.
Birthdate: November 12, 1975
Car: 2006 Scion tC
Engine: 2AZ-FE
Crew chief: Arthur Armendariz
Sponsors: Scion, AEM, AEBS, Royal Purple, CP Pistons, Cunningham Rods, Web Cam, Goodyear Racing, Vance & Hines, TWM Induction, SCE Gaskets, Drive Shaft Shop, NGK Spark Plugs, Mechanics Wear
Career NHRA wins: 3
Best e.t.: 9.96
Best speed: 133 mph
Website: www.horizonmotorsports.com

You were saying? :yawn:

Oh, guess I'm just making up dyno runs too of dynoing 150whp with S-pipe and exhaust.

rhythmnsmoke

06-20-2006, 08:35 PM

TempleOwl

06-20-2006, 08:36 PM

It's not necessarily the car that makes the winner, it's the driver. You can tune a top performance vehicle to be the best performance wise, but that doesn't guarantee a W. Plus you can mod the TC to make it lighter by taking out the unnecessary stuff like radio and AC.

killerxromances

06-20-2006, 08:48 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-20-2006, 08:55 PM

Funny how you start to break down and get all upset when I start laying down the facts for you. Here how about you try this on for size:

Done on a Dyno Dynamics

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/yamaha16bw/P1010962.jpg

left is me tC with s-pipe, ZPI mid pipe and trd axel back, right is 5 mins later with the ZPI crank pulley V.2.

The tq. was 145 on the left and 163.0 on the right

BUT WAIT, the dyno must be off so, forget about the fact he dynoed on a Dyno Dynamics with just an exhaust and v2. crank pulley. :rofl: I can do this all day. We dynoed on the same dyno at 140whp with just ZPI exhaust/ZPI S-pipe/Blitz Nur Spec Muffler. Each tC is going to be slightly different of course.

Open Mouth...Insert Foot...

Okay, lets say the dyno is accurate. 146whp with crank, and full exhaust. Okay, this sort of proves my point that with an addition of a intake and header it would be around 155-160whp. Why do i say this would only yeild 10-15whp more? Because the entire system works together, you can add seperate gains all you want but thats not how a motor accurately works. So lets just break it down to 146, add i/h and you'd probably be right at or right under 160whp. So lets see, what did i say earlier? Most i/h/e yeilds what? Oh yeah, thats right 155-160whp.

Now lets go further and say port and polish, in order to get the best gains who ever is doing the head job has to do it perfectly. I've seen head jobs where the dyno's show less whp than the dyno runs prior to the port and polish, also lets all remember all motors respond differently to the same mods.

So rythmn, you really proved my point. Thanks.

I'm going to work, so you can argue back and Timmy can argue with me too. The funny thing is, the people that agree with you rythmn are the ones that obviously dislike me and thats an automatic point loss for me. Plus, no one wants to hear some valid information from a non tC owner, i mean common its not like i know anything anyway. :blah:

HMMM....What planet are you living on. It does not prove your point, because I told you another tC the SAME DAY, THE SAME DYNO, put down 169whp and like 170+ tq with I/H/E. I think he had a crank can't remember. Also, this is a DYNO DYNAMIC, or did you forget that. That would mean, this dyno pictured is reading at least 15% lower than normal dyno's. On a Dyno Jet this dyno would be like 155-160+whp. Add a Header to this setup, and your looking at 165-170whp. Add an Injen Intake....WELL, I GUESS YOU GET THE POINT! :loser:

Again, do your home work man.

No one said you didn't know anything. I'm just saying you don't know crap about the tC.

TimmyT

06-20-2006, 09:12 PM

What ever killer. ep3s are teh suck. I have almost no power mods and I beat I/H/E ep3s all the time.

But i am not exactly stock either.

2redgerm6

06-20-2006, 09:48 PM

i just wanted to say the new civic si is nothing more or less than a rsx-s. i blew the doors off a brand new civic not si when my car was bone stock on the highway from 65 mph where hp rules not torque lol. and i mean blew him away.

dp-_-

06-20-2006, 10:25 PM

i beat a new civic si last week. i have to admit it was definately a close race, but i beat him.....too bad he was bone stock :\

killerxromances

06-21-2006, 04:12 AM

killerxromances

06-21-2006, 04:15 AM

i beat a new civic si last week. i have to admit it was definately a close race, but i beat him.....too bad he was bone stock :\

Yeah, too bad it wasn't rythmnsmoke driving your car, he would have "smoked the crap out of him" because civics and hondas suck, they are slow, and he owns everything. Also, apparently with your mods you must be pushing 185whp. :rofl: :rofl:

2redgerm6

06-21-2006, 05:06 AM

blitch i got 215 don't dis me. did you ever see my i beat a box last night quote it was great lol.

your post:
I might want to also bring up, although most tC owners will disagree with this. The Ep3 Si is dead equal to a tC. It has been proven more times than disproved. With i/h/e and a light weight crank pulley, i have seen a few ep3's hit high 14's to low 15's. The point of this is to say that taken that much time off with just a few mods is fairly easy on hondas due to their design. They respond much better to mods than the 2az does. N/a of course. I know your going to disagree with me and thats fine, but i'm not bais and i don't care really what you guys think of my comments. Why not? Because half the community easily thinks their tCs are much faster than what they are, making far fetched claims as to "I smoked _____ last night" and stuff like that.

my post:

i smoked an xb last night.

2redgerm6

06-21-2006, 05:16 AM

killerxromances

06-21-2006, 05:29 AM

btw killer why aren't you on the hondafitclub website talking all this crap about how honda is so superior to toyota.

this is from a previous post. this saying honda engines are all crazy and the best to mod are people forgeting about the 4age 3sgte and the 2jz these are all very buildable along with crazy amounts of nissan motors. rite now toyota is busy taking over the car world they don't have time to fiddle with motors that accept the aftermarket. but if you look into autosports you will see toyota makes race motors for race applications and daily driver cars for daily driven applications. i'm not saying honda sucks or anything but saying they're the BEST to modify i disagree. i'll take a sr20det powered silvia or a vq powered 350z to modify any day over any honda on the market.

And those 4age, 3sg, 2jz really aren't produced anymore. Especially the 4 and 3, i never said honda motors were best in the world, but compared to toyota they are much better designed for performance in mind than toyota. Sure, everyone has cracked vtec jokes and a lot of people do tend to take vtec way overboard, but vtec does have an advantage especially over vvt-i or vvtl-i.

You can also look into autosports and you will see that spoon and mugen both have tons of race, daily, track, road course environment parts.. Not to mention all the other aftermarket companies. I get what your saying, i really do and at least you are respectable in your posts.

And i do have accounts on honda forums, most are old accounts from my 97 gsr days but yeah. I have never said Toyota was a bad company, i drive one. But with raw performance in mind, Honda does it best in the sport compact world. At least thats my opinion. Of course, Honda has slacked a little bit in the usdm market compared to what other countries get. They need to bring back a type r, possibly the civic type r and bring back another coupe. Maybe a del sol oriented car.

Anyway, Honda doesn't own the world neither does Toyota, neither does any car manufacture. We all have opinions, but facts are facts and i get a lot of heat for speaking the truth.

If anyone can show me some dyno sheets or runs of the following that rythmnsmoke so loves to argue about, i will give the n/a tC a little more respect.
- i/h/e tC with 180whp
- i/h/e, port polish head or 11:1 pistons with 180whp+
- i/h/e crank pulley with 175whp+
- Any n/a tC with over 175whp
- A stock manual dynoing in the 140's
- A stock automatic dynoing in the 130's

The reason why i don't believe any of this, is because of all the n/a sheets, runs, and in person views i have seen, i have yet to see any of this. I want to see proof of this, not some guy talking all this crap and pulling up files that doesn't prove much of anything and then claiming "later that day...".

2redgerm6

06-21-2006, 07:05 AM

good responce. when i start working again and get the money flowing again (broken leg for 3 1/2 months yea) i'll dyno and post (with pic and type of dyno and conditions and... lol) as you see i only have cai and header back so i'm sure everyone will be interested what that nets.

legionscion

06-21-2006, 09:48 AM

okay i talk to the guy with the GT-S and from the looks from it he has more things i think he is going to boost more and i got a race like in 2-3weeks (we set rules here ) so in 2-3 weeks im going to take my camera and interviwe him and tell us what he has and how much boost was he running so now no more fighting :no: alright if i lose by a car then i know he did to his car i sa a bigger intercooler so yes more lag for him better for me this time 1/4mile no on rolls ( no more rolls stop and go :lalala: )

rhythmnsmoke

06-21-2006, 03:38 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-21-2006, 04:01 PM

i get a lot of heat for speaking the truth.

If anyone can show me some dyno sheets or runs of the following that rythmnsmoke so loves to argue about, i will give the n/a tC a little more respect.
- i/h/e tC with 180whp
- i/h/e, port polish head or 11:1 pistons with 180whp+
- i/h/e crank pulley with 175whp+
- Any n/a tC with over 175whp
- A stock manual dynoing in the 140's
- A stock automatic dynoing in the 130's

The reason why i don't believe any of this, is because of all the n/a sheets, runs, and in person views i have seen, i have yet to see any of this. I want to see proof of this, not some guy talking all this crap and pulling up files that doesn't prove much of anything and then claiming "later that day...".

Speaking the truth..... :rofl: Dude are you serious? I can't believe the stuff that comes out of your mouth. I pull up files, vids, and everything else, and you pull up JACK SQUAT! and Jack left town. Your so called facts are nothing but mere opinions. LET ME GUESS, Honda is still producing H22 powered Preludes right? Yeah, just as much as Toyota is producing 3sgte Powered Celicas and MR2's.

You try to down play saying Toyota don't make those anymore, yet, if you said anything about the H22, then you would make an excuse to justify why it's fair game.

I might want to also bring up, although most tC owners will disagree with this. The Ep3 Si is dead equal to a tC. It has been proven more times than disproved. With i/h/e and a light weight crank pulley, i have seen a few ep3's hit high 14's to low 15's.

Dude, I did that with just S-pipe and Exhaust. With I/H/E and a crank pulley, Constant 14's are done in a tC. Seen it, video taped it, get over it.

Here is the secret to why no one ever takes what you say seriously, (not because you don't have a tC), but because YOU DON'T BACK IT UP!

Any and everything I say, I can prove it one way or the other with Hard Evidence. You keep beating around the bush and dodging me everytime I say POST IT UP BRO! You still don't. You make an excuse. I show you a 2az with some kick a$$ power, and you say it's not good enough, because the car surrounding it isn't a stock tC.....AND! Your point being? It's the motor we are talking about, not the rest of the car. If we took the motor out, and strapped it to an engine dyno, what would the excuse be then? OH, well THERE IS NO CAR TO GO WITH IT... It's one excuse after another. :blah:

killerxromances

06-21-2006, 05:01 PM

^ Constant 14's with i/h/e my ___.

You showed me A dyno graph of A tC under 150whp, how did you show me proof to back up your claims of 180whp with i/h/e? Because you claim this would be a 15% increase? If you seriously think this, this should be common and i'm sure you can find a dyno jet of a n/a tc with i/h/e dynoing in the 180's. I mean seriously, if your going to talk all this stuff about how the tC does 180's, bring a dyno sheet here that shows it.

I don't need to post anything on here because all you or anyone else has to do is search here or search anywhere and you won't find a i/h/e 2az tc in the 180's, you won't find a tc period n/a any where near 200whp. Why wont you? Because there would be a huge thread about it because they would be the first person to achieve this.

But wait! All the dynos must show an additional 15% loss because its not done on dyno jet therefore its throwing false numbers. I guess everyone that dynos never uses dyno jet although its 100% accurate since no one has pushed any of the claimed numbers n/a. :doh: :loser:

killerxromances

06-21-2006, 05:04 PM

Dude, you haven't proved ANYTHING! you showed us a dyno of a tc under 150whp, what the hell does that prove? If you think i/h/e yeilds 180whp find a graph that proves 180whp. You haven't given any proof of this because it doesn't exist.

Quit talking down to me and pull your head out of your as s and find a dyno of this 180whp, 200whp n/a tc.

rhythmnsmoke

06-21-2006, 05:13 PM

^ Constant 14's with i/h/e my butt.

You showed me A dyno graph of A tC under 150whp, how did you show me proof to back up your claims of 180whp with i/h/e? Because you claim this would be a 15% increase? If you seriously think this, this should be common and i'm sure you can find a dyno jet of a n/a tc with i/h/e dynoing in the 180's. I mean seriously, if your going to talk all this stuff about how the tC does 180's, bring a dyno sheet here that shows it.

I don't need to post anything on here because all you or anyone else has to do is search here or search anywhere and you won't find a i/h/e 2az tc in the 180's, you won't find a tc period n/a any where near 200whp. Why wont you? Because there would be a huge thread about it because they would be the first person to achieve this.

But wait! All the dynos must show an additional 15% loss because its not done on dyno jet therefore its throwing false numbers. I guess everyone that dynos never uses dyno jet although its 100% accurate since no one has pushed any of the claimed numbers n/a. :doh: :loser:

Dude, you haven't proved ANYTHING! you showed us a dyno of a tc under 150whp, what the hell does that prove? If you think i/h/e yeilds 180whp find a graph that proves 180whp. You haven't given any proof of this because it doesn't exist.

Quit talking down to me and pull your head out of your as s and find a dyno of this 180whp, 200whp n/a tc.

MORE LAME ATTEMPTS TO DODGE THE FACTS..... :blah:

I got vids of our tC doing constant 15.1 with just S-pipe and exhaust. I got vids of MikeScion with I/H/E/ZPI Crank pulley doing constant 14.8/14.9. It's in his sig if you want to look it up too. Get off your HIGH HORSE, and stop trying to dodge me. You tell me to search to look for anything you say. But tell me to keep posting dyno's and vids to back up anything I say....WOW, gotta love the Double Standard.

I proved you wrong because the dyno pictured was...

1) Without an Intake

2) Without a Header

TRANSLATION FOR YOU......add the other two mods and pick up at least 8-10 more hp. TRANSLATION FOR YOU......150whp on a dyno dynamics reads at min 15% lower than a dyno jet. Do your homework dude.

What a Joke.. :loser:

killerxromances

06-22-2006, 04:10 AM

rhythmnsmoke

06-22-2006, 04:13 PM

Correction, you keep dodging me. Proof was never given, i have never seen a dyno jet n/a tC above 160whp with just i/h/e. You say i'm wrong, yet if its that simple show me a dyno jet reading then. Show me ANY dyno run that proves your 180whp-200whp n/a point. You won't do it because you cant, doesn't exist.

Show me any base line of an auto doing 130's and a manual doing 140's. Show me anything other then "oh well i saw another dyno but no sheet of this" and "this sheet reads 15% lower than another dyno", thats just making excuses to prove your point. You say i keep dodging the truth? You have yet to prove anything.

You keep saying how i dont prove anything to you, well guess what. Any search and you will find your answers, i don't need to prove anything because i'm not the one making huge claims. You say you have evidence, prove it. Show me a dyno of a n/a tc any where NEAR 200whp. Show me a i/h/e tC in the 180's. Hell, show me one in the 170's.

I know what OTHERS have posted, i know what I've seen personally, i don't need to defend the tC like you do you. I don't need to win respect with tC owners because i don't own one, you do. You have a lot to own up to and you have yet to live up to anything.

Show it or stfu, thats it. If you think i/h/e yeilds 180whp, then it should be easy to find an axle back or any non full exhaust set up in the 170's shouldn't it? If it was true it would be, tons of people have more mods and no one has seen it. Your coming out of no where with this and yeah i've been in the dark for a while, but the tC didn't jump from 150-160's to 180's with the same mods. And Timmy is on your side because hes ALWAYS on your side, any thread thats pulled up with us three posting hes always there with you. Why? We dislike each other apparently, and we disagree always which is why hes going to disagree with me. Not to mention, "I dont drive a tC so i don't know what i'm talking about" crap. Please, knowledge and common sense about motors, cars, and gains doesn't stop where what you drive.

Like i said, actually own up to what your saying or shut up because this is getting quite ridiculous and you are talking down to me on every post yet you have shown nothing. Only claims based on a under 150whp tC. Good for you. :clap:

MORE LAME BS of you dodging me. HOW ABOUT THIS, you show me a N/A tC dyno that has the said mods that's under 160+ whp, and I will show you one on a Dyno Dynamics that pulled 170whp with the said mods and a crank pulley.

I have noticed several references to Dyno Dynamics dynos being "lossy". I was wondering what this was based on? Perhaps you are trying to compare it to the over-rated Dyno Jet whose power numbers are consistently high compared to every other dyno on the market? The superb Mustang Dyno with its 50-inch drum usually shows a power "loss" of 10-12% over the DynoJet, as do the Land and Sea models, as do the AutoDyn from Superflow. As far as Dyno Dynamics, I have been told they read about 12% lower then the DynoJet as well (By Paul Fisher of the Dyno Shop who owns both a Dyno Dynamics dyno and a Dyno Jet), but I have also only read that this is consistent with the DynaPak, which cannot have any tyre losses.

Found HERE: http://autospeed.drive.com.au/cms/A_1334/article.html

Didn't think I would have to actaully get information for someone who seems to think they know everything...:loser:

rhythmnsmoke

06-22-2006, 04:17 PM

This one is even better at explaining it.

True, rear wheel horsepower is the standard of measuring the power that is actually delivered to the rear wheels. It is honest, true, fair and duplicable. It is the ONLY standard that can be duplicated by the entire industry - regardless of the dyno manufacturer. From my experience and that of many others, when comparing True, rear wheel horsepower to DJHP you must apply a factor. It appears that this is a sliding scale based on horsepower but the best estimate is 1.05 to 1.21 (maybe higher). What this means is that for those of you trying to calculate what your crankshaft horsepower is based on DJHP, and are adding 15%, the most common number I hear, you are actually doubling (at least) the factor. Why? Because DJHP already has a puff number added into their DJHP. Lets say DJHP shows 200 hp and you add 15%, you get 230 hp crankshaft horsepower. In reality DJ has already added in 15 or 20% to their 200 DJHP number. How does this help us.? It does not, and is fact harmful to the many dynamometer test facilities that report only what the dyno actually measured. I can not tell you of the many discussions that we have had as to why the horsepower numbers we recorded lower than that of DJ. For those manufacturers that use DJHP as proof of their claims, can you imagine the shock your customers get when the horsepower number of a vehicle tested on a load bearing dyno do not come close to their claim.

But wait, the 15% Higher reading on a DJ/DJHP (dyno jet horsepower), according to you, is JUST AN EXCUSE, when it's a KNOW FACT!... :loser:

Your only making yourself look even more like a Noob by keep asking me to post the hard evidence. So, do yourself a favor and run off and play with your matchbox now.

PS...no hard feelings, just you are a little mis-informed. don't mean to sound like an a$$. I apologize.

rhythmnsmoke

06-22-2006, 04:27 PM

This discussion revolves around chassis dynamometer's and is intended to be informative and thought provoking. There are two types of chassis dynamometers on the market, inertia and loading. An inertia dynamometer (such as DynoJet) does not measure torque, but measures acceleration. A loading dynamometer applies resistance that is measured (using some type of strain gauge.)

The most often heard discussion is that what factor can be applied to rear wheel horsepower to reflect crankshaft horsepower. This is where we need to understand how the rear wheel horsepower number was derived. Since the DynoJet seems to be widely used and numbers quoted are those from a DynoJet, we are going to use them as our inertia dynamometer example.

First it is important to have an understanding of how DynoJet gets their horsepower numbers. Power in mechanical terms is the ability to accomplish a specified amount of work in a given amount of time. By definition, one horsepower is equal to applying a 550 pound force through a distance of 1 foot in one second. In real terms, it would take 1 HP to raise a 550 pound weight up 1 foot in 1 second. So to measure horsepower, we need to know force (in pounds) and velocity (in feet per second). Dynojet's inertial dynamometer measures power according to the terms just described. It measures velocity directly by measuring the time it takes to rotate two heavy steel drums one turn. It measures force at the surface of the drum by indirectly measuring it's acceleration. Acceleration is simply the difference in velocity at the surface of the drums from one revolution to the next. The force applied to the drums is calculated from acceleration using Newton's 2nd law, Force = Mass * Acceleration. Since the mass of the drums is know and acceleration has been measured, Power (horsepower) can now be calculated. Torque is then calculated using the horsepower number: Torque = Horsepower * 5252 / RPM.

Once they have these numbers a series of correction factors are applied, some made public, some hidden as proprietary secrets. The public correction factor is the SAE correction factor. This formula assumes a mechanical efficiency of 85%. The formula used is: Where: CF= 1.18 * (29.22/Bdo) * ((Square Root(To+460)/537)) – 0.18. To = Intake air temperature in degrees F, Bdo = Dry ambient absolute barometric pressure. This correction factor is meant to predict output in varying atmospheric conditions and is a +/- 7%. The proprietary correction factor is supposed to reflect the loss of power from the crankshaft to the rear wheels.

A Loading Dynamometer applies resistance to the dyne's roller(s) , typically using either a water brake or a current eddy brake. In either case, the amount of force is measure using a strain gauge. The measured force is torque which is a real, indisputable measurement of the actual output at the wheel. Horsepower than can be calculated: Hp = Trq * 5252 / RPM.

You can read the rest of the long a$$ article here:

http://www.germanmotorcars.com/Dyno_load%20vs%20inertia_1.htm

rhythmnsmoke

06-22-2006, 05:07 PM

Wow, another interesting observation

Taken from the 350z forum that I'm on. Take note of the Bold part.

As you might know, I dynoed at 399whp on the stock tune w/ cats. I replaced my cats with test pipes about a month ago. Well when Richard did the first dyno pull as is, he made it all the way up to about 450whp, with more rpms to go, and had to let off as he was afraid to harm the engine (to put it lighty). So that means I was sitting a little over 450 for about a month, which translates to about 480+whp on a dynojet. I am thinking I got lucky because I have done a few good runs since I put the test pipes on. Oh, and the 450 was at 11psi, thank god I was still pig rich

killerxromances

06-23-2006, 02:53 AM

I never denied that dyno dynamics reads less than dyno jet, mustang dynos typically read 15-30% higher than just about any other dyno. Whats your point? Your dodging everything i'm saying by talking about dynos. Show ME, as i have said on every single post now talking to you, with a dyno run with ANY, dyno of a n/a tC reading the numbers you claim.

Seriously, instead of wasting your time with crap we all know, you could invest your time on trying to find a dyno run of a tC to prove your point. Instead you keep talking about dynos rather than runs with a tC. Enough talk, more do.

killerxromances

06-23-2006, 03:07 AM

Now for some real info.

Dyno sheet: http://www.alphawerks.com/dyno/Scion_TC_web.jpg

Info: "Alpha Werks has done a dyno with an intake, exhaust, header, throttle body combo.. they got 24whp and 19 ft/tq .. Unsure on the intake and exhaust they used.. but you can expect to make around that with any intake/header/exhaust combo...http://www.RacingSolution.com for the parts and PM or email me if you have any questions at all."

Baseline would be: 139.35.. Fairly high baseline dyno, but it happens.

Dyno sheet: http://gscdownloads.com/scion/exhaustdyno/tcstockvsevo2.jpg

Info: "Stock motor, only mod used was greddy axle back. Blue represents base run, Green represents greddy axle back."

Baseline: 136.84 (ON A DYNO JET)

killerxromances

06-23-2006, 03:12 AM

killerxromances

06-23-2006, 03:34 AM

According to you, all three of these tCs must have just had an intake.

Words from srtforums.com/net:

"I was at the last dyno day the RSX club brought togeather and well, Alot of cars didnt show up. off the top of my head only 21 cars went. 3 Scion TC, 1 3rd gen Rx7, 1 s2000, 4 SRT's, and an accord who didn want to dyno. the rest was RSX.. they averaged about 150WHP. 1 RSX got 350WHP and another got 450WHP and that car didnt want to even idle.

i remember the s2000 got 200WHP, the Modded 3rdGen Rx7 only got 175WHP (He was having secondary igintion issues as i recall). all 3 Scion got 150ish WHP. my Srt got 238WHP. another got 310WHP on 75Shot He got 233 WHP without the shot. another guy got 230WHP, and the navy Srt owners dyno'd 250WHP when in reality it should of been 300WHP (He has Dyno'd 300+ before though. just happen that he swap to stage 0 to test out what it feels like). his A/f were Below the 9's all the way till redline."

Read about the tC's.. All three dyno'd in the 150's.

My advice? Stop looking at companies dynos, and start looking at real life dyno's. Companies are going to stretch it and make conditions absolutely perfect to sell their products. Obviously, they want their numbers to be as high as possible, and beyond. Also, stop talking me down but i know your going to come back with some ridiculous post about how your still right and i'm of course wrong, after all i drive a xb and not a tc. :loser: How about you do your homework.

Heres another dyno sheet: http://forums.evolutionm.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=54429

Info: Magnaflow exhaust, low 141-143whp

2redgerm6

06-23-2006, 06:01 AM

killerxromances

06-23-2006, 06:09 AM

i'm not trying to get in the middle of this or anything and this will be my only post on the subject. but i have recently seen (in the past 10 days) someone posted dyno results of 172whp and i believe they posted the dyno sheet as well. this was with intake, header,exhaust, and 3 pulley kit. i looked for it but couldn't find it to post a link. i don't know what kinda dyno it was and i thought it was kinda high myself but it is fresh in my memory. i will continue to look for and will post it if i find it.

Do you know which dyno was used? That number sounds pretty damn high, and this isn't a rythmnsmoke vs myself thread, so feel free to chip in. 3 pulley kit meaning stage 3 or what? 172whp i have never seen with just those three mods.

Infact, i keep hoping a friend of mine will show online because his shop has done a port and polish job on this guys tC with i/h/e, crank, performance belts, and i think but not sure unichip. I'd like to get the dyno sheet from him if possible. I don't know what that tC dyno'd at or anything, but i'd like to get the info on it to post on here.

2redgerm6

06-23-2006, 06:14 AM

like i said i don't know what kinda dyno and the 3 pulley kit is the nst crank water pump and alt. pulleys also i,ve got a few dynos for you to look at.

2redgerm6

06-23-2006, 06:14 AM

let me try this again with pics

2redgerm6

06-23-2006, 06:18 AM

Well after the success of the Header test we have decided to go ahead and do the intake test as well. First off i want to thank a couple of companies for getting us out their intakes: Injen, F5Air, K&N and Scion, oh wait we had to buy the K&N's and Scion charged for the stock air box. Bastards.

I also wanted to thank Leh for staying late with me to see what is what on the Intakes for the tC, and taking the pics. (for those who were waiting for the out come it was Leh's fault but don't get too mad at him)

Any way on to the Test. Our tC is pretty much stock with the addition of the Alfaworks Header that is in place and a B&M short shifter which does nothing for horse power.

Sooo here we go.

http://www.gscdownloads.com/tcintake/intaketest3.jpg

First up the stock airbox
Notice the did in Air Fuel on the top end so there is some more power to be had with the stock box using an emanage or even a S-AFC

http://www.gscdownloads.com/tcintake/STOCK.jpg

Second up Stock Air Box with Drop In K&N filter. We left the charcoal thing in as well
This one was an absolute bummer IMO. It lost HP but the air fuel was good.

http://www.gscdownloads.com/tcintake/STOCKKNDI.jpg

third K&N Typoon intake
The air Fuel got a little funny on this one. could be the cause for less HP than the others. With the cost of the intake I think your money would be better spent else where.

http://www.gscdownloads.com/tcintake/KNCAI.jpg

Forth Injen Cold Air
What can I say about this one it made the most horsepower the Air Fuel line was very clean in fact with an SAFC or ported T-Body could see somewhere in the 165 Range. Over all I am very impressed with this intake.

http://www.gscdownloads.com/tcintake/INJENCAI.jpg

Fifth Injen Short Ram
We also tryed the short ram Injen Intake. but the hood was open so im sure under street conditions it would be lower do to heat soak. and the Air fuel went nuts around 5300. sense you can't buy just the Short Ram it is totally pointless to not install the Cold Air Section.

http://www.gscdownloads.com/tcintake/INJENSHORT.jpg

Sixth the F5Air Intake
The air fuel did the same thing as the injen short ram so im not sure the R&D was done on this kit as far as fuel tuning. the numbers are good and with a little tuning im sure it could be improved.

http://www.gscdownloads.com/tcintake/F5AIR.jpg

Now as far as the install goes i must say that the F5 was the easiest to install but after 3 intakes i think it was just practice.

So the overall winner was Injen and if anyone would like me to lay a graph over a different competitor please just let me know which two you would like to see.

http://www.gscdownloads.com/tcintake/intaketest1.jpg

http://www.gscdownloads.com/tcintake/intaketest2.jpg

hope that worked

killerxromances

06-23-2006, 06:32 AM

rhythmnsmoke

06-23-2006, 03:16 PM

Yep, i know nothing. And yep, those dynos can't be right although one was used on your argument of dyno jet.

So lets see, you said base line was in the low-mid 140s right? And you said auto was in the 130s? Lets see what i can pull on the auto.

And unlike you, rythmnsmoke, i am showing a dyno of a i/h/e combo, NOT some exhaust dyno sheet then claiming the rest. And these numbers are still slightly higher than what i've been seeing, but guess what. I choose the HIGHEST numbers i could find just to make even more of a point.

Wow, you posted ONE, that's right ONE dyno. Yeah, that one dyno and ONE car is suppose to speak for all I/H/E combinations.....Give me a break dude. :blah:

I'll give you a vid when I get home.

PS....Dyno #'s are overrated, said it once before, I'll say it again. It's about how you put it down on the track. To which sir, I have yet to loose to an Ep3 that you so said was equal to the tC. It might be equal on the track, but on the street, it's not the case.

Like I said, I'll dig through my archives and find some dyno vids for you. In the mean time, you can PM MikeScion and he will confirm everything I have said thus far.

rhythmnsmoke

06-23-2006, 03:23 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-23-2006, 03:27 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-23-2006, 03:43 PM

^Good input. I think one or two of those seem high, but either way complete that with a exhaust, non of those would come close to 180whp.

Header's usually add the most whp between i-h-e set ups, so i can see why some of those numbers are fairly high i suppose. I'm still waiting for rythmnsmoke to post a n/a tC beyond 180whp with just three mods.

With a full exhaust system, not some crummy axel back like you probably are thinking, would put the combination of the Full Injen intake + that header into the 170whp easily. Add a ZPI vr2 crank pulley(dynoed to produce 11.5 whp and 18wtq) and your at 180whp.

"so I can see why some of those numbers are fairly high".....OH GIVE ME A FREAKIN BREAK... :loser:

If you read back in my post, and copy and paste where I said i/h/e will give you 180whp be my guess. But you won't find it, wanna know why.....BECAUSE I DIDN'T SAY IT... :loser: I told you if you pay attention...I/H/E/crank pulley would put you in the 175-180whp range.

This whole debate started because you strated rasing the BS flag on people who have beat those said cars on the list. If they can beat them, then they beat them. All you could say is theories about how I, or those other dirvers were better than the drivers in the other car. That's a bunch of hog wash. You don't know how good of a driver the other guy is, nor do you know how good of a driver I am. And to be quite frank, I don't even think I'm that good. I just have victories and losses. And you know what, hate to quote a movie, but "Winning is Winning". If we had remote controls on our cars and raced them, then some of these victories would be different. But you know what, it's a stupid a$$ excuse about "Drivers were not as good as the other". SO WHAT! Driver is apart of the race. If you can't drive, then hand your sh!t over to someone who can, and I'll race them again. Don't matter if I win or loose. I just like freakin racing.

I can go dig vids for you all day, all you would say is those #'s are fairly high, which would just make my time and effort worthless.

I race, and on the ground and driving is how you get the job done. Not some crummy argument over how much power a tC would put down to the ground with the said mods, to which I disagreed with you, and felt the proof was in the pudding, and I spoon feed it to you. Have a good day, and keep trying to down play the tC all you want. At the end of the day, it's exhaust gases they smell from me anyway... :rofl:

killerxromances

06-23-2006, 04:19 PM

killerxromances

06-23-2006, 04:30 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-23-2006, 04:38 PM

I posted one dyno of a i/h/e set up, a baseline run, and one or two with just an exhaust. Dude, your never pleased and now you just can't face defeat. I saw a ton of dynos i just choose one of the highest to please you.

If you want i can re-search and try to find the full exhaust, cat, s-pipe, i/h full you that was dyno'd at 165whp, that magnaflow exhaust was a cat back btw.

Doesn't matter what i do here, your going to believe your over me. I showed you one with i/h/e, but you have shown me NONE with that set up to prove your point. I showed you baseline numbers in the 130's but i guess those must of been autos. :loser:

And yes this start with the BS flag i put up because even with 180whp (still call bs untill i see it, which apparently you can't find anything your just going by assumptions) the tC is still over 3,000lbs with a driver. Most of these cars you guys claim to beat are lighter with better power to weight ratios, some have better gearing ratios, and no i'm not just talking about the honda's. I'm talking in general. And i'd like to see any sense with a good driver how a tc beats a 16psi eclipse gst.

I post on SL when I'm at work, just a little FYI for you. All my archives are at home on my computer. You just going to have to wait till I get a chance when I'm at home. It's the weekend on top of that. And I have posted vids. It's not theoretics when someone dyno's a header and Intake, and get 160whp. Do you think they are going to get a drop in hp if they add a full exhaust, NO. When I say FULL EXHAUST, I mean just that. HEADER ALL THE WAY BACK. S-pipe and all. Not just some bent up exhaust that stops at the Cat. or worse than that, at the axel back.

But i guess with people like you, anything is possible. Since you have 300whp now give or take, i guess you'll be beating ferrari's, lotus's, definitely STI's, Evo's, definitely would be "smoking" noble's.

Raced a Subie who has raced STI's and beat them. and I beat the Subie. If you know an STI willing to race, I'll race him too. I know EVO's that won't race, but I'm waiting for one of them to get froggy. But hey, as you so eagerly IMPLY, I'm a pro driver, doing battle against noobs, so I can look good when I post my vids on SL......I confess, you got me. I've been apart of the Nascar cup series of STFU for about 11 years now. I'm also a member of the NHRA :loser:

rhythmnsmoke

06-23-2006, 04:43 PM

killerxromances

06-23-2006, 06:06 PM

By the way, i found information after emailing a friend of mine that co-owns a performance shop on that tC i was talking about earlier. He said if i want the actual dyno's to ask.

Heres the info on it: Port polished head, s-pipe, high flow cat and cat back, i/h, stage 2 clutch, crank pulley, and greddy e-manage ulti.

The dyno numbers: Before the head and e-manage 168whp. Thats i/h/e/crank, after the head and e-manage install he dyno'd three numbers at 180, 186, 183whp.

He didn't tell me the conditions in the email but i know they use dyno jet. So, these are by far the highest n/a tc numbers i have even heard of. But, it takes i/h/e/crank/p&p, and a light tune with e-manage to get there.

Sorry, I have to disagree. You take out the cat, and you will pick up more power than that. And I've seen MikeScion dyno at 170whp with I/H/E and crank pulley only. So, a P&P and light tune with e-manage only adds 10whp? For the price of what $500-$1k dollars. That's a load of BS. Dude don't know how to tune or P&P as far as I know.... :rofl: See how easy it is to shoot holes in another persons argument... :yawn:

Your also going by mikescion's numbers, which i haven't seen yet. Yep, easy to shoot holes in another persons argument.

As far as how good he is, i honestly don't know. I've heard from others that he does good work, but i haven't actually seen his work nor do i know how well he is at tuning. I would think hes pretty good, but then again i haven't seen it so i can't defend it. But what i do know is, you have yet to show me any dyno proving anything that your saying. I've shown you dyno's, i've showed you quotes from a srt site which i consider a neutral party since none of us know the person i quoted, and is on a totally different site all together.

However, as i've said before. Port a polish if not done to a near perfection won't gain as much, or can actually take away performance. As i've also said before, not all motors respond to mods the same as others. It can very well be the 2az doesn't respond well to head upgrades and mods, do you have any evidence to prove otherwise? If so i'd love to see it.

But back to the topic of tC vs. the world...

rhythmnsmoke

06-23-2006, 07:09 PM

cmndrjamesbond

06-24-2006, 07:16 AM

Killerx, we liked you better when you had left the community, any chance we could pay you to go back into retirement?

killerxromances

06-24-2006, 07:28 AM

Killerx, we liked you better when you had left the community, any chance we could pay you to go back into retirement?

Whos we? Because i constantly recieved IM's for questions reguarding installs, parts, comparisons, and for my input on threads. Thats why i came back, the only people that dislike me and want me to go are mostly tC owners. I guess because no one likes to be told something if they don't drive it.

"I have done all the same, all with the result of a continuous circle." Again, you have shown no dyno run of a tC between 180-200whp. Yes, the guy i know told me about that one tC but you seem to think majority of tC's are in the 180's, yet you've shown no sheet to prove just that. I've provided sheets to back my statements up on the i/h/e issue, baseline issue. Wheres yours? Or is the "this one guy has ___" and "later that day i saw ____" the proof? Yes, you provided a dyno sheet but thats no where near 180, much less 200whp.

Cmn, if your not going to show anything, or provide any legit information why bother trying to start drama. Because its not like i take you seriously or anything.

cmndrjamesbond

06-24-2006, 07:39 AM

Well, I think rhythmn would include himself in "we." If you want me to go around polling everyone else, I'm sure the list will grow.

djrza786

06-24-2006, 07:49 AM

Do you think a Scionlife sticker will make my car faster?

cmndrjamesbond

06-24-2006, 07:50 AM

No, but it will help you pick up chicks.

rhythmnsmoke

06-24-2006, 03:38 PM

killerxromances

06-24-2006, 06:47 PM

Cmn, if your not going to show anything, or provide any legit information why bother trying to start drama. Because its not like i take you seriously or anything.

I thought we already been through this.... :yawn: You have your sheets, I have mine. You posted, so did I.

Doesn't mean someone else can chip in, especially if they are going to post something like he did, i would think something could be offered rather than just trying to start something retarded.

djrza786; Speed stickers is the way to go. 4x8 stickers add 8whp, larger ones can add around 15whp and don't get me started on body wraps. Whew, 100-200whp depending on what the body wrap is of. :rofl:

2redgerm6

06-24-2006, 08:08 PM

killerxromances

06-24-2006, 08:24 PM

2redgerm6

06-25-2006, 02:10 AM

it was a b16. i know the guy and all he does is race all the time so he is a pretty good shifter. i'll try and get him a couple more times.

killerxromances

06-25-2006, 02:41 AM

it was a b16. i know the guy and all he does is race all the time so he is a pretty good shifter. i'll try and get him a couple more times.

Anything else done to it or just a stock b16 swap? Just wondering, because i have a friend with a B16c swap into a del sol and he runs 13's constantly with i/h/e, crank, stage 2 clutch, upgraded injectors and basic management. Once he gets his p&p head, upgrade to stand alone and a slightly larger full exhaust he should be in the 12's.

2redgerm6

06-25-2006, 02:51 AM

killerxromances

06-25-2006, 03:11 AM

i'm pretty sure its stock. i know from expereince that putting a header on a b16 makes a world of difference, but at the most he has an intake. but it just goes to show ya thats a 160 hp motor (just like the tc) that comes from a light car and its swapped into an even lighter car and i still beet him. back when i had my rolla with i/h/e i was about even with 95 civic sis with intake (pretty much a driver race). this whole argument about hp winning races well i prefer to think of it a little diiferent. the way i look at it torque is like hp in the low rpm range and hp is power in the upper rpm range.

Obviously though, theres a huge difference between the jdm b16 and the b16's we get over here.. But, still same concept. If its the 99-00 Si engine stock then it has right around 130-140whp on a 2,100lbs car. Which is why i asked what else was done to it because heres a basic fact sheet:

Hatchback Weight: 2,280lbs (est. depending on model and est. drivers weight)
B16 motor with just say intake: 142whp
Power to weight: 16.05

Your tC weight: 3,100lbs (given your interior set up, plus driver..also rough estimate)
2az motor with your mods: 150whp
Power to weight: 20.66

As you can see, not only is power to weight differences night and day, but thats not taking into effect that the gearing on that Si motor is geared more aggressivly than the 2az, and torque doesn't mean you win especially when you compare it to a car that weighs almost 1,000lbs lighter. The lighter you are, the less torque really matters.

In the end, something sounds way off. It makes no sense that you would win, and less sense that you would "kill" him unless either hes not the best driver, but you said he races all the time..which doesn't mean much, or your lying about it. Now i'm not trying to start anything with you, you seem like a cool guy. But i know a crap load about hondas, how they react to swaps and mods, and power to weight effects + gearing effects since thats most of my experience. I owned a gsr, 231whp n/a raised redline to 8,600rpm, with custom gearing i ran high 12's low 13's with horrible traction in the upper part of 1st and part of 2nd.

2redgerm6

06-25-2006, 03:48 AM

as to me possibly lying. i don't lie. you do have a lot of great #s and honestly i don't know much about hondas or how they react to swapping, except my real life experiences which are me being able to stay even all the time with b16 sis with intake, in my corolla i/h/e thats 130 stock + maybe 20hp at the most to the flywheel. now as far as my car now on the door where THE REAL WEIGHT of a car is its like 3800 pounds.power to weight and all that doesn't matter to me. what matters to me is when i pull away from them. i only raced him once in the tc and i will go after him a couple more time and find out his mods to post. but as far as questioning my character, please don't. if you don't want to believe what i've seen with my own eyes thats your perogative. as stated earlier i could stay with sis with intake in my modded rolla but that same si with i/h/e would destroy me so no doubt it would probably beat the tc as well. but thats not what i raced.

2redgerm6

06-25-2006, 03:51 AM

killerxromances

06-25-2006, 05:44 AM

civic hatches don't way 2280 pounds look on the door where THE REAL WEIGHT is and you will see they are a lot closer to 3200 pounds than you may think. when i talk to the civic hatch owner i will also post his gvw so you aren't looking at the curb weight which is not accurate.

Hey man, the real weight is no where near 3,000lbs. The tC is no where near 4,000lbs. Where are you looking because i honestly haven't looked where your talking about in terms of weight goes, but i know when i had my gsr the weight wasn't posted on the door. I have personally seen a weigh in of a 1996 hatchback with a driver during dyno testing and the weight with a driver was 2,350lbs with a h22 swap, driver, and mods. That is the real weight. So i don't know what your talking about.

I'm not questioning your character, as i said before you seem like a cool guy. But you do admit a Si with i/h/e would defeat you, a hatchback is a good 300lbs lighter than the 99 Si and you are talking about the same motor minus h/e on a car thats lighter. What your saying though makes no sense, specify what weight your talking about because as i've said before, i have personally seen a 96' hatch with a h22 swap register 2,350lbs during dyno testing.

killerxromances

06-25-2006, 05:51 AM

Also, curb weight is the actual weight of any car minus cargo and passengers, or anything else other than the car and whats needed for the motor to run. I.E fuel, tranny fluids, so on. If you don't believe me search any automotive website and it will show you what curb weight is, by definition and how they determine curb weight..I'm sure you could find that out too.

Heres one link i just clicked the first one from yahoo just to show you an example..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curb_weight

So i have no idea what your talking about. The weight you might be referring to is the max safe weight the car can handle without causing frame, or other forms of destruction to the car itself. For instance, you can usually find out max cargo weight and/or max passanger weight of any vehicle by the manufacture and/or the internet. I've never recalled seeing this posted on the car itself, but it might be but just never noticed it before. It's not something i look at.

But trust me when i say, the curb weight is actual weight of any car, minus any sort of cargo or driver.

rhythmnsmoke

06-25-2006, 06:02 AM

i raced a 94 civic hatch with an si swap and whooped him. i tried to race a boosted 94 civic hatch. i was driving regular (which is still kinda loud) and he hauled asz around me i heard his blow off as he went around so i thought i would try and catch him at the next light so i got on the gas but didn't down shift (i was in 4th at around 50mph) as soon as i started to match his speed he turned. so i didn't get to see how that would go. but he really didn't seem too fast to me.

Majority of honda motors aren't ideal for boosting, if he boosted the D series motor then you would have easily killed him. The 94 hatch with an Si swap, which Si motor? If you smoked him then it sounds like he possibly mis-shifted because early 90's hatchs are light as hell, with any B series motor they are reasonably fast, with a K series swap i don't think you would have won if you are n/a. Depends on what Si motor though.

...Actually, i know you wouldn't have won if it was ep3 or z1 swap, unless he wasn't familar with the motor yet. *Shrug*

:yawn: :nope:

it was a b16. i know the guy and all he does is race all the time so he is a pretty good shifter. i'll try and get him a couple more times.

Anything else done to it or just a stock b16 swap? Just wondering, because i have a friend with a B16c swap into a del sol and he runs 13's constantly with i/h/e, crank, stage 2 clutch, upgraded injectors and basic management. Once he gets his p&p head, upgrade to stand alone and a slightly larger full exhaust he should be in the 12's.

and trapping at what speed?

In the end, something sounds way off. It makes no sense that you would win, and less sense that you would "kill" him unless either hes not the best driver, but you said he races all the time..which doesn't mean much, or your lying about it. Now i'm not trying to start anything with you, you seem like a cool guy. But i know a crap load about hondas, how they react to swaps and mods, and power to weight effects + gearing effects since thats most of my experience. I owned a gsr, 231whp n/a raised redline to 8,600rpm, with custom gearing i ran high 12's low 13's with horrible traction in the upper part of 1st and part of 2nd

:rofl: :yawn:

cmndrjamesbond

06-25-2006, 06:24 AM

but thats not taking into effect that the gearing on that Si motor is geared more aggressivly than the 2az

WRONG!

Do not even respond to this post if you don't want to be made a fool of again.

2redgerm6

06-25-2006, 07:29 AM

i just researched the weight argument and you are correct i feel like a dumb azz about argueing with you so adamently about the weight when i was wrong the whole time. but that doesn't change my real life experience raceing them.

2redgerm6

06-25-2006, 07:42 AM

rhythmnsmoke

06-25-2006, 02:07 PM

killerxromances

06-26-2006, 02:17 AM

how comes i tell you i beat a civic with an intake and you tell my i couldn't have because:

i have a friend with a B16c swap into a del sol and he runs 13's constantly with i/h/e, crank, stage 2 clutch, upgraded injectors and basic management.
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````

oh and my car was 3055 pounds with me in it. btw thanks.

I was just using that as an example.. That hatch should be in mid 14's with that motor. Even stock should be in the 14's with the b16 swap, with your mods a tC doesn't come to those times.

killerxromances

06-26-2006, 02:32 AM

but thats not taking into effect that the gearing on that Si motor is geared more aggressivly than the 2az

WRONG!

Do not even respond to this post if you don't want to be made a fool of again.

Okay man, your getting on my nerves. Heres the facts, and don't respond to any of my posts again without knowing what your talking about..

tC gear ratio's:
1st: 3.538:1
2nd: 2.045:1
3rd: 1.333:1
4th: 0.972:1
5th: 0.775:1
reverse: 3.583:1
Final: 4.235:1

99' Civic Si gear ratio's:
1st: 3.230
2nd: 2.105
3rd: 1.458
4th: 1.107
5th: 0.875
reverse: 3.000
Final: 4.266*

*4.266 final drive is a debatable spec. If you look in a Helms manual for the 99 Si , you will see that 4.266 is the final drive spec. Eddy Lin has found that to be false - he physically took a 99 Si tranny apart and counted the final drive teeth which calculated to a 4.40 final drive ratio. So it is debateable, but these numbers i based above are factory spec only for the sake of arguemnt.

As you can see 1st and Reverse are the only gears the tC has that are geared more aggressivly.

killerxromances

06-26-2006, 04:47 AM

rhythmnsmoke; my friend with the del sol usually has a trap speed of 104-109mph depending on how well of a run he..well runs. But the last i've heard of was 12.9 @ 107mph.

cmndrjamesbond

06-26-2006, 07:20 AM

http://myspace-793.vo.llnwd.net/00842/39/76/842556793_l.jpg

2redgerm6

06-26-2006, 07:41 AM

i will post info on the civic hatch with b16 that i beat. when i talk to him again please stay tuned.

rhythmnsmoke

06-26-2006, 03:48 PM

What people fail to remember, is that what happens on a Track, and what happens on the street are two different things.

killerxromances

06-26-2006, 07:04 PM

What people fail to remember, is that what happens on a Track, and what happens on the street are two different things.

Thats pretty obvious, but where did that come?

rhythmnsmoke

06-26-2006, 07:14 PM

killerxromances

06-26-2006, 09:05 PM

What people fail to remember, is that what happens on a Track, and what happens on the street are two different things.

Thats pretty obvious, but where did that come?

Everytime someone says "i beat such and such" you raise a BS flag...especially if it's Honda related, and say "No way you could have, because my friend goes X amount of time in the 1/4th mile".

Not true, but when someone says they raced a hatchback with a b16a swap it raises question. Am i completely disproving his race? No, i'm sure it did happen but given what a stock 99' Si runs, given the hatchback weighs about 300-400lbs lighter than the Si, it makes me question it. Especially with his mods.

I know the tC can beat hondas, i have never said it couldn't. The problem is, people tend to say "Oh i beat a rsx-s with i/e with my i/h/e/short shifter". Yeah, when people say things like that i'm going to raise a bs flag. Its not the fact the tC can't beat a honda, its what people claim to have beat. And its not just honda's, i've raised a bs flag on some guy thinking he can take on a modded Sti with his tC putting down 260whp, i also talk about it when people say they beat ANY car, ANY MANUFACTURE, that obviously should be in question and/or bs. And i'm one of few that actually question some of the claims because most people that respond to these kinds of threads are the same people, and they all tend to believe their tC is unbeatable because of torque, 2.4l, and the "pricey" Scion.

rhythmnsmoke

06-26-2006, 09:13 PM

killerxromances

06-26-2006, 09:22 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-26-2006, 09:38 PM

killerxromances

06-26-2006, 10:06 PM

^
For once i actually agree with you, which is has been my point for some time now about your ep3 race(s). Sure, sometimes your n/a tC (not talking about your car currently) could have been faster than the ep3, but i know for a fact stock for stock and mod for mod, except boost, the ep3 is equal to the tC. I've noticed that you say things like this when its not about your races, but when we talk about your races you kind of ignore that and put me down for questioning your stuff. :tap:

And also notice before you even brought this up i said "It makes no sense that you would win, and less sense that you would "kill" him unless either hes not the best driver" which refers to mis-shifting, or shifting too early. When you quoted me before on that same paragraph, you " :rofl: :yawn: " yet you agree'd with me. Thats the kind of stuff the annoys me on here. People put me down on here, and then if i say something you agree with or proves something they say wrong, they find something else to complain about just to make themselves look right and me wrong.

It happens.... :P But sometimes your post come off, like the tC isn't capable of beating anything on the road. That's the problem I have with your post. Everything seems to be...."The tC can't do that, or the 2az isn't capable of this, or capable of that".

It's probably because i get annoyed with people on here so often that i feel i need to skip the niceness and just get straight to my points. Its always hard to fully realize what people mean on the net. I know the tC has potential, 2az i strongly dislike and i dislike the weight factor on the tC, but i know it has potential. And i do know it can beat many cars, given situtations and limits. But thats the thing, a lot of people don't realize the place of a tC and thats when you get forums about tc vs sti's, evo's, i've seen a tc thread about how to out handle a type r, beating gto's, beating rsx-s with minimal mods, new si's downplaying what they are able to do just to up the tC's image, things like that ____ me off. Because its comparing the tC to cars that are out of the league of the tc, sure you can modify the tc enough to out handle or out perform. But that can be done with any car, to me that doesn't prove all that much. I mean sure you can get a strong suspension and spend a good $3,000-$4,000 to out corner a type r, but if the type-r has just minimal mods then its over. Thats what people don't take into effect.

2redgerm6

06-26-2006, 10:56 PM

killerxromances

06-26-2006, 11:45 PM

i talked to the guy with the si swap last night go figure he lost an engine bearing (maybe something to do with why i "killed" him). but also last night i blew the doors off an evolution with stage 3 turbo upgrade built internals and a 150 shot of nitrous that guy was a putz. i made him look like a chump. true he was standing next to his car in a parking lot, lolol. any who my point is i understand where you coming from throwing the bs flag around but how hard is to believe i beat an si swapped civic with little or no mods?

earlier post of mine:
i havn't been able to race much cause i broke my leg (only 3800 miles on tc) but i beat a acura tl and yes it was the 240 hp one and i launched like an idiot with rediculous wheel spin. my point here is i know i can't beat a tl 98% of but that time i did. whether the guy was a puzzy or not i don't know but i know he followed me around some twisty roads at over 85 mph and took off hard when he saw me do the same so it was a race. ps i beat a zo6 in my corolla hahahaha.

you just never know what someone else is doing. i never said i could beat every swapped hatch on the planet i only spoke of my expereince. and you imediately blast me of there being no way and then nicely say i could possibly be a liar. like i said i don't make stuff up without making a joke in the end. i have some great stories in my little rolla. one time i beat an olds 442, true on the very short straight he was pulling from me like i wasn't moving but then we hit the turns and i passed him cause he couldn't accelerate through the turns as well without losing the back end. then we hit straight then he passed me again very quickly . them we hit another turn and i passed him again then there was a light. i still call that a win but i tell the whole story. i also had a similar experince with an supercharged grand prix. another time i got my butt handed to me by the supercharge monte carlos. most of the races i won in my rolla were on twisties but i would tell the whole story. i am very honest about my wins. but i did beat this civic and i have stayed with just civic si (90 model) in my rolla. believe me or not, but please don't question my character. btw i have never been on a track in my life so i don't know my trap or 1/4 mile time at all but i am going to remedy this soon. :)

I never said i didn't believe you, but i do believe you now knowing that he has lost an engine bearing. Plus i now know hes a retard for racing a car that has a issue in the motor department. Can easily do more harm with a few more races. Early 90 Si's were pretty slow, well compared to late 90's to now. The only early-mid 90 Si's that were worth it in my opinion were the Del Sol Si's/Can SiR's. Other than that, yeah.

Now that all the facts are in, its believable. If the motor was in perfect condition, it wouldn't be as believable simply because a hatchback with a b16a is going to be faster than a tc with even i/h/e. How do i know this? I've seen both cars run, i've seen how both cars react to mods, and so on. I wonder why he chose the b16a for a swap. Oh well, glad to see that story is put down to rest.

At least you understand where i'm coming from on the bs flag's, its easy to say "i killed ___ today" on the internet because no one knows if its true or not, so some just say good kill or congrats (not aiming on rythmnsmoke, most people do this without really knowing much about the other car envolved) while others judge the story from personal experience and knowledge, and facts. Which obviously, is what i do.

2redgerm6

06-27-2006, 12:33 AM

when he gets his car up and running again i will try and race him again before he goes turbo (which he plans to do soon). so we will see how that goes. keep an eye out, i'm going for a kill (even if i have to run him off the road lol).

rhythmnsmoke

06-27-2006, 03:38 AM

killerxromances

06-27-2006, 03:57 AM

killerxromances

06-27-2006, 04:16 AM

Also, which B16a was it? Because not all B16's have same out put, and although its Jdm that doesn't make it faster or better than the u.s B16a.

B16A 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '89-'91 Civic SiR JDM 160@7800 111@7300

B16A 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '90-'91 Integra XSi/RSi (DA) JDM 158@7600 112@7000 10.2:1

B16A 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '92-'93 Integra XSi/RSi (DA) JDM 158@7600 112@7000 10.2:1

B16A 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '90-'91 Civic SiR JDM 160@7600 111@5200

B16A 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '92-'95 Civic EUR 170@7800 116@7300

B16A 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '92-'95 Civic SiR/SiR II JDM 168@7800 116@7300 10.4:1

B16A 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '92-'95 Civic SiR II EUR 168@7800 116@7300 10.4:1

B16A 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '89-'92 Civic SiR HB (EF) JDM 158@7600 112@7000 10.2:1

B16A1 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '89-'92 Civic 1.6i/VTi (EE/ED) EURO 158@7600 111@7000 10.2:1

B16A1 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '90-'91 Civic SiR (EF) JDM 160@7600 111@7000 10.4:1

B16A2 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '99-'00 Civic Si (EM) USDM 160@7600 111@7000 10.2:1

B16A2 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '96-'00 Civic VTi (EK) EUR 168@7800 126@7300 10.4:1

B16A3 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '93-'94 del Sol VTEC USDM 160@7600 111@7000

B16A4 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '96-'00 Civic SiR II (EK) JDM 168@7800 116@7300 10.4:1

As you can see by what i listed, not all B16a's are equal, and of course not all mod the same. I listed full specs and one car it was in per motor to see if you can identify which B16 it was. When you talk about Honda motors, theres a huge difference between one and the other although they are the same engine codes.

rhythmnsmoke

06-27-2006, 03:24 PM

Now that all the facts are in, its believable. If the motor was in perfect condition, it wouldn't be as believable simply because a hatchback with a b16a is going to be faster than a tc with even i/h/e. How do i know this? I've seen both cars run, i've seen how both cars react to mods, and so on. I wonder why he chose the b16a for a swap. Oh well, glad to see that story is put down to rest.

At least you understand where i'm coming from on the bs flag's, its easy to say "i killed ___ today" on the internet because no one knows if its true or not, so some just say good kill or congrats (not aiming on rythmnsmoke, most people do this without really knowing much about the other car envolved) while others judge the story from personal experience and knowledge, and facts. Which obviously, is what i do.

I judge based on personal experience. And in my personal experience, a Hatch with B16a would have a hard time keeping up with a tC with i/h/e. In COMPLETELY STOCK form, we have raced a 90's model 4 door Teggy with a JDM B16a with I/H/E and we pulled on him. When we were COMPLETELY Stock.

Did he mis-shift or anything, thats hard to believe with a tc stock. Also, a 4dr teggy is heavier than a hatch so its hard to compare the two in terms of how well one would do. A b16a hatch with i/h/e will be faster than a same set up 4dr tegra, early 90's two door then its closer to the same weight. Which year 4dr? Newer ones heavier than older ones.

No, he didn't mis-shift. Infact, Misti was driving, and she wasn't paying attention, because he kinda screwed up when he was honking. So, she took off late. By the way, this was from a dig. When she finally took off, he was already to our front bumper. But the tC started pulling on it, like I said we were Completely stock at the time. He will tell you himself, that he lost to us when we were stock. He has the square shaped Teggy. Also, I have raced the round headlight style - two door Teggy at the local crappy track. He had I/H/E and we had I believe just an exhaust at the time. We were neck and neck until I missed a gear, and took the victory. I knew I had him, but oh well, sh!t happens.

rhythmnsmoke

06-27-2006, 03:26 PM

They all look the same to me as far as power output. But anyhow, this should be the one he is running.

B16A1 1.6L 16V DOHC VTEC PGM-FI 1595 '90-'91 Civic SiR (EF) JDM 160@7600 111@7000 10.4:1

Also my other friend has a 06 Si. We raced from a dig. He didn't catch up to me until 80+ mph. I've driven his car before, and without Vtec, that thing just dosen't do it for me. You have to stay in Vtec to have as much fun as you do in a Stock tC. Not bashing on the Civic or Honda, so don't think that I am. It's just my observation that's all I'm saying. Can't really feel anything unless your hammering down all the gears all the time.

rhythmnsmoke

06-27-2006, 03:59 PM

I thought that this was very interesting observation.

Then I raced a CRX with a B16. He did not disclose that he was running a 65 shot of Nitrous until after the race. I thought I won, he thought he won, nobody else could tell. A draw?
http://media.putfile.com/vs-B16-CRX-with-nitrous

Ryno379's tC is S/C by the way. And he was dead even with a CRX (so much lighter) with B16 + 65 shot of Nitro. It probably was running I/H/E combo as well.

rhythmnsmoke

06-27-2006, 04:09 PM

I'm double posting, but it's relevant to this thread. Click on the link to the vids.

Saturday was the second time for Flashlight Drags at the Clarion County Airport. Once again, I got videos. My Azure Pearl tC is in the far lane in every video except the last one. I raced 9 times! It was so crazy, I couldn't race everyone that wanted to.
Fist I took on an S2000. I got schooled. When setting up the race, I thought it would be close, then he smoked an 04 or 05 GTO and I was like, uh oh. This Honda was insane!
http://media.putfile.com/vs-S2000
Then I challenged an SRT-4, I was disappointed that I didn't fare better. I launched very poorly.
http://media.putfile.com/vs-SRT-4-74
Then I challenged and smoked a Mustang GT. It was an 01 or 02 I think. I've waited a long time to do this.
http://media.putfile.com/vs-Mustang-GT
Then a Solara SLE V6 challenged me. No contest.
http://media.putfile.com/vs-Solara-SLE-V6
Then I raced a CRX with a B16. He did not disclose that he was running a 65 shot of Nitrous until after the race. I thought I won, he thought he won, nobody else could tell. A draw?
http://media.putfile.com/vs-B16-CRX-with-nitrous
Then an Acura Legend with a 3.2 V6 challenged me. He was saying "It's 320 hp". I think his mouth is more powerful than his engine.
http://media.putfile.com/vs-Acura-Legend-32
Then I easily beat a Mazdaspeed Protege. Sorry, no video.
Then a Grand Prix GTP Competition Group challenged me. Silly supercharged Pontiac.
http://media.putfile.com/vs-Grand-Prix-GTP-Comp-G
Then in the Top Tuner Event, I lost to a WRX. I hate AWD in the 1/8th mile. He lost in the semis against the SRT-4 that won the championship. I'm in the near lane this time. The video didn't catch the beginning, just me pullin hard on him at the end.
http://media.putfile.com/vs-WRX

killerxromances

06-28-2006, 04:12 AM

rhythmnsmoke

06-28-2006, 04:29 AM

killerxromances

06-28-2006, 05:54 AM

As for the 2door round tail light teggy goes, i can believe you stayed with him i don't think you would have smoked him, but chances are it wasn't a gsr either. It was probably a ls or gs. A gsr would have easily beat you with those mods.

Also, if your talking about the crx being so much lighter than the civic hatch, it depends on the years. The last few years of the crx was only 50-100lbs lighter than the same year civic hatch's depending on the model.

If he does have the b16a1 with i/h/e in the tegra, and you were stock, something just sounds off. Like the motor isn't running to full potential wether it be a bad o2 sensor or what.

And yes, Honda's do have to stay in vtec to be fast, but thats how they are designed, to be revved high. From a roll the integra should easily beat you if you were still stock, you said it was from a roll which unless boosted, not many B16's are great for since they have little to no bottom end. Reguardless, i still don't think you should have killed him if hes a good driver and if the motor has no issues. It should be a different story from a roll. Again, if nothing is wrong with the motor.

What were your mods when you raced the 06' Si? Because it shouldn't take no where near that long to catch up if you have no more than i/h/e. And yes, again, you have to stay in vtec to be fast. Its part of the design, which to me is fun. I'd rather take it easy through the gears when just driving and if i want to drive fast or have fun, i like to hammer it down and shift at high rpm's and yeah. Its fun to me, some perfer to just tap the gas and have fun and i guess you are one of those people.

I'll take my TQ over having to wait for a kick past 4k+ RPMs. And the crx was in relevance to the weight of the tC. And when I raced my boy in his 06 Si, We only had a full exhaust. (ZPI S-pipe + ZPI Exhaust matched to Blitz Nur Spec Muffler). And come to think of it, we done a 15.1 in the 1/4th with just an exhaust, which is what the 06 Si is rated at in Stock form. I have the vids on here if you would like to do a search. If you can't find them, then swing over to ZPI's forum, and you should be able to find the vid. I was calling out the mph in the vid. And not until 80 or so, he didn't start to pull on me. At around 90ish I was at his back bumper, which the tC trap speed is in the 80+ mph range.

From a roll, is a joke, and I'm starting to realize it. I'm actually tired of doing 40 drops, as real drag racing starts from Zer0.

Real drag racing is boring to me anyway, i'd rather have a car that can out handle another, than have a car that can out run the other in the 1/4. Thats just me though, to each their own.

Sure a roll might be a joke, but that doesn't change the chances of you winning would be decreased. I'm sure you would agree with me on that.

The 06' Si is rated at 15.1 by a few editors, but i have seen a video of one (fully stock) doing 1/4 in 14.8 and i have personally seen one with a full exhaust (talked to the owner) and he ran 1/4 14.5, i forget what his trap speed was but yeah. If it was mod for mod, no contest. Personally, i still don't see you beating him until 80mph but for the sake of not arguing, i won't try to prove you wrong. I will say though, the guy at the track raced against a i/short shifter rsx-s and beat him, i think the rsx-s ran 14.7 but not completely sure. And i know that it takes more than i/h/e to beat a rsx-s in stock form with the tC, then again it could have also been driver error.

I don't know if you realize this or not, but Honda has downplayed the k20 in the 06 Si's. AEM as well as two other fairly major companies did base runs and showed at the crank the motor pulls between 204-209hp. Honda rated the Si at 197hp, which is probably due to small insurance increase when breaking into 200's, and the competition would kill the rsx-s if they rated it with the rsx numbers. But yeah, just thought i'd add that in there.

TimmyT

06-28-2006, 07:07 AM

Power isn't the only reason a scion tC has a hard time in the 1/4 times. or Vs. cars like the type S and the vic Si.

Both the Si, and type S in stock form Don't have anywhere near the traction issues a scion tC has in stock form.

rhythmnsmoke

06-28-2006, 03:06 PM

Real drag racing is boring to me anyway, i'd rather have a car that can out handle another, than have a car that can out run the other in the 1/4. Thats just me though, to each their own.

I have one of those too. It's called a 350Z. Setting up for Track and Drift.

Sure a roll might be a joke, but that doesn't change the chances of you winning would be decreased. I'm sure you would agree with me on that.

Actually, I disagree. Reason being, if you can't drive at the track, you might loose to slower cars due to you wheel spinning halfway down the track. But on the Street from a roll, you would eat that very car up for breakfast and spit it out to make room for lunch.

The 06' Si is rated at 15.1 by a few editors, but i have seen a video of one (fully stock) doing 1/4 in 14.8 and i have personally seen one with a full exhaust (talked to the owner) and he ran 1/4 14.5, i forget what his trap speed was but yeah.

The best time ran in our tC with just an S-pipe and Exhaust was 14.8 @ 90+mph. Got vid of that too.

If it was mod for mod, no contest. Personally, i still don't see you beating him until 80mph but for the sake of not arguing, i won't try to prove you wrong.

Guess you don't feel like searching for the vid, so I provided the link for you. Click here to watch 2006-Si-vs-2006-tC (http://media.putfile.com/2006-Si-vs-2006-tC)

By the way, my boy didn't have a Passenger in the car until like the last couple of rolls

I will say though, the guy at the track raced against a i/short shifter rsx-s and beat him, i think the rsx-s ran 14.7 but not completely sure. And i know that it takes more than i/h/e to beat a rsx-s in stock form with the tC, then again it could have also been driver error.

It would take a good I/H/E and a crank pulley to keep up with a RSX Type S

I don't know if you realize this or not, but Honda has downplayed the k20 in the 06 Si's. AEM as well as two other fairly major companies did base runs and showed at the crank the motor pulls between 204-209hp. Honda rated the Si at 197hp, which is probably due to small insurance increase when breaking into 200's, and the competition would kill the rsx-s if they rated it with the rsx numbers. But yeah, just thought i'd add that in there.

Do you have a link to this supposedly crank of 204/209hp. If that's the case, then the 06 Si is even slower than I thought for having that much power under the hood + an LSD.

killerxromances

06-29-2006, 02:22 AM

Slower with a bad driver maybe. Let me see if i can't pull a dyno sheet up.

killerxromances

06-29-2006, 02:28 AM

Heres a baseline dyno of a 06' Si, stock, to the wheels.

http://members.shaw.ca/powercivic/2006SI.GIF

Let me try and find a crank run.

ISmokeGuys

06-29-2006, 02:29 AM

Slower with a bad driver maybe. Let me see if i can't pull a dyno sheet up.

Are you speaking about my friend, if so, he can drive just fine.

killerxromances

06-29-2006, 02:46 AM

http://tinypic.com/i53gaw.gif[/url]

Yellow represents stock.
Green represents stock without airbox.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I'm really happy with the results, first run was the best run since the engine was coolest. I had him do 6 pulls in a row with only a short break in between. Hood was open but the fan was only pointing into the radiator, it was one of those flat rectangle fans. Bone stock down to the paper airfilter. Sorry i cannot scan all the runs until this weekend, i can only take pics of the paper,lol.

could someone host the video or is there somewhere i can host it?

Ambient temp 77* / Humidity 34% / Elevation 1092ft.

HP / TQ

174.3 123.9
173.5 122.6
169.2 124.0
176.9 126.7
180.5 128.2
180.8 132.4"
http://www.imboc.com/forums/imagehosting/82284484ae1f8c6d0.JPG
http://www.imboc.com/forums/imagehosting/82284484ae79dad3e.JPG
http://www.imboc.com/forums/imagehosting/82284484ae84f1e8d.JPG

Later in another thread, someone showed 179whp stock and 208whp with i/h/e.

killerxromances

06-29-2006, 02:51 AM

killerxromances

06-29-2006, 03:15 AM

Scion tC vs. 06 Si
http://www.fesersoft.com/honda/videos/06SI_Beats_TC.wmv

06' Si vs. bmw 325
http://www.fesersoft.com/honda/videos/06SI_Beats_TC.wmv

Just threw the bmw one in there for a kicker, but the first one the tC had i/h/e, the bmw one he didn't know what mods he had.

killerxromances

06-29-2006, 03:20 AM

Cuthbert

06-29-2006, 03:43 AM

killerxromances

06-29-2006, 04:00 AM

Oh, and here is a combined video of a Si with only aem cai doing 14.1's, both runs low 14's and only mod is intake.

http://video.tinypic.com/player.php?v=11mbvuv

This is why i believe your friend with the Si wasn't as good as you, maybe not a horrible or bad driver. But, definitely not as good.

Hi, friend. First off, I would like to say I thoroughly enjoy reading pages and pages of your middle school like arguing, especially from someone who was supposedly getting rid of their xb and wouldn't be around here anymore. Second, I really admire your devotion to going into threads completely unrelated to your vehicle and arguing for several pages, it really takes a lot of free time that most normal people don't have to accomplish this. I appreciate the fact that you dislike the tc, the tc's weight, the tc's motor. This is of course your right. I am sure that many people dislike having to wade through several pages of your quibbles, but I get a chuckle out of it sometimes so I just wanted to say thanks. May we all suffer through countless more of your humorous, informative, knowledgeable posts.

How am i informative? Your entire post was off topic to begin with. I post knowledgable information given what i have seen, what i have experienced, and what i know. I'm not going to apologize just because i don't own a tC. I like the tC, i just don't like certain things about it. My opinion, that doesn't mean i'm going to put down anyone for buying one.

If you don't like my input, do yourself a favor and don't read it. Rythmnsmoke and I are always at it in threads, yet lately we have come to an agreement on this thread and aside from the arguing and disagreement, there is information to be had. If people would look away from what i drive and look into what i'm actually saying, maybe some or alot of you would shut up as far as putting what i say down based on useless information not provided by me, but provided by a little box that says what i drive and a profile. Thanks for wasting peoples time when they read your informative, off topic, and 100% useless comment towards one of my posts.

Edit: If you'd like to contribute to this thread, then contribute. Since you replied to one of the posts of which i provided a video or two, respond to that. But don't be a jacka_s by just trying to argue or whatever else you wanted to gain.

killerxromances

06-29-2006, 04:16 AM

2redgerm6

06-29-2006, 06:58 AM

yes sis are pretty fast but you know what so are lotus elises and the guy in your video ran a 15.25(which is slow for that car) thats slower thand a stock tc or a i/h/e mazda 626 (garbage) so that just goes to show any body can have a bad launch or poor driving skills, and make there car look bad to other car owners. btw just curious not trying to poke fun or anything but have you ran you xb and what time did it run if you did? again not trying to make fun just curious. thank you.

rhythmnsmoke

06-29-2006, 03:12 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-29-2006, 03:19 PM

rhythmnsmoke

06-29-2006, 03:30 PM

Anyway,

i'm watching your video and i notice that the Si driver keeps letting off the gas as soon as he passed, which makes it hard to determine how much he actually would have beat you by in the 1/4 or just on the street. The tint sucks for filming man! lol

But yeah, the video doesn't do any justice for the Si driver if he keeps letting off the gas, and it makes me question if he even knows how to race properly. Do you know where he was launching at? Not trying to start another huge argument with you, but i have seen Si's run faster than that and also with just intake, watch the video of a Si, two videos combined down low 14's. A trd s/cer, with exhaust would be able to hang to a Si with a intake, without the intake and just a tC with an s-pipe makes no real sense, not with the Si times and not with the tC times and mod.

IF you paid attention more closely, he didn't let off the gas until he passed me. WHICH would have been Right Near the 1/4th of a mile mark. I just keep going after that, and he didn't realize it, and stepped back on the gas, so his letting off the gas has nothing to do with his racing ability or the validation of this race. And just so you know that he does a good job at driving. Another guy we know owns an 06 Si as well. He has an I/H/E and he raced my boy with the bone Stock 06 Si. Guess who won? The bone stock one. So, he is a decent driver. Si's are rated at 15.1 in the 1/4, I'm sorry but I don't think you can drop a whole SECOND off the 1/4 time from what reports show.

TC is rated at 15.6/15.7. Which for the most part, real world people reporting around the same #'s. I can't view your vids yet (IMAC computer), but I don't believe those are bone stock Si's.

killerxromances

06-30-2006, 04:39 AM

Okay, how about "you're a Honda Fanboy." BTW, who trades up from a 271 whp integra to an xB. You're so full of it, it's actually pitiful to listen to your nonsense. Last I checked, most of my friends who had 271 whp integras were trading up to Corvettes, or at least Bimmers, not 105 hp toaster boxes on wheels that can't outhandle a 15 PAX, let alone Dodge Caravan.

Like i said, don't talk about stuff you don't know about. I never traded the integra in (231whp not 271whp) it was totalled, and after a few months of checking out other cars i went with something new and different from what i was used to.

killerxromances

06-30-2006, 04:43 AM

killerxromances

06-30-2006, 04:51 AM

rhythmnsmoke

06-30-2006, 03:34 PM

I know these are whp numbers, but you can do the math and see that this puts the crank power into the 200's. I can't find that crank one though, but these should prove what i mentioned earlier.

Ismokeguys; I don't know your friend so i can't say he sucks or he doesn't. But i can say, with confidence, a bone stock Si can keep up with a rsx-s just fine. The stock numbers compared to a rsx-s stock numbers are only 2-6whp difference, and also little difference as far as pull and track times so i've seen. A tC shouldn't be able to keep up with a stock Si that easily, not with just a s-pipe.

Tha'ts S-pipe and Exhaust, don't get it twisted. :P And I'm probably at most about 100 - 150lbs lighter than a stock tC. That's why we could do 15.1 constant in the 1/4th with just S-pipe/Exhaust.

If you brought up that 100-150lbs lighter thing earlier, i probably wouldn't have disagree'd with you as much about it. lol But still, watch the videos.

Oh, fyi: I didn't give the video of the si vs. lotus thing to make the si better, i know the lotus should be faster. I posted it simply to show another 14.1 run to show its constant, and some freak of nature ordeal.

Can't see the vids right now. And do you personally know the Si driver, or your just speculating that it's a stock Si? Either way, they still feel slow, even though they are faster than a stock tC. They don't provide the Uumff! that I need to have fun. It feels like a GIANT turbo lag until 4k rpm. I don't like to wait for it, and then have to keep it above 4grand just to have fun.

ignitionr34

06-30-2006, 06:28 PM

Which forum facist did you get to delete my post this time? I bet it was the 16 year old. I'll probably get another warning any second now. Hey, even if they delete my account, I probably have more email accounts to sign up with than you have pairs of tighty whities.

LOOL was that you who posted that pic up???

killerxromances

07-01-2006, 04:04 AM

rhythmnsmoke

07-01-2006, 07:42 PM

^^Yep, and I don't know any.

TimmyT

07-01-2006, 08:36 PM

killerxromances

07-02-2006, 03:25 AM

Killer is a known honda fanboi. You won't change his mind.

You can provide countless pics, vids, or general information and he'll dismiss it with "I know a guy who...".

The Civic Si is comming up on its first anniversery. And thus far i have not seen any civic Si's touch on what a the tC has done in its first year.

In performance AND aftermarket support.

That alone should speak for itself.

I gave three videos of Si's doing 1/4 in the 14's, i can give you much more too. So how can you "change my mind".. I've shown my proof, you just dismiss it because you dislike me. And thats it.

Aftermarket has been slow, yes but several companies are coming out with stuff if haven't already. Majority of the stuff released within the first three months was suspension and basic motor stuff. Coming up on the 1st year? Still has a while, it was released in december but didn't hit all dealerships until 1st of january.

And rythmn, you might not know a guy because your too busy hating hondas without actually looking into it more and talking to people.

ignitionr34

07-02-2006, 04:52 AM

^^^^^ dude i wouldn't be talkin u always have some way of puttin the tc down and it's really f***in annoyin. I'm damn proud of having a tc and many have managed to get good times w/ this car n/a - aaron for example hit a 14.7 w/ bolt ons and underdrive pulley .... now thas amazin and btw, get a life cuz seriously almost every single post i see from you is something against the tc. You drive an xb so go post on that section...lol i don't think ny of us want u postin here

i dunno why i even bothered sayin this cuz u aint gonna get it through ur peanut head and ur jus gonna reply w/ some other crap that people don't wanna even see!

TimmyT

07-02-2006, 06:12 AM

Killer.. no one is trying to take your wet dream from you....

I am not saying an Si can or can't do the 1320 in 14's.

What I am saying is. No matter how many pics, graphs vids, people show you. You still won't change your mind about the tC's achievements.

And I have yet to see an Si anywhere near 400 whp with a stock block and internals. And i seriously, completely doubt i will see one with in the first year.

The tC and its 2az is a better platform for aftermarket and tuning compared to the civic Si. In my opinion of course. and many opinions of people on this board i would like to think.
And the tC achievements Vs. the Civic Achievments in the first year speaks for itself.

Its already july. the aftermarket is not there like it was for the tC. So how do you expect the civic to meet the standard?

ignitionr34

07-02-2006, 06:29 PM

i don't even give a crap about the new si,, they prolly gonna be a lil more mod friendly to bolt ons compared to our cars but ya know what WHO CARES! TC's are still hot cars for the price and actually seem to be BOOST friendly

rhythmnsmoke

07-02-2006, 10:50 PM

And rythmn, you might not know a guy because your too busy hating hondas without actually looking into it more and talking to people.

I don't hate on Hondas. My boy's are Honda fan-boys. I catch more hate for having a Scion than the Honda boys around here. On the same note, why would I be looking into the Si, when I don't have one, and if I wanted to know about it, or drive it, I have friends for all that?

rhythmnsmoke

07-02-2006, 11:08 PM

rhythmnsmoke

07-02-2006, 11:12 PM

killerxromances

07-03-2006, 02:45 AM

rhythmnsmoke

07-03-2006, 03:28 AM

Oh, and here is a combined video of a Si with only aem cai doing 14.1's, both runs low 14's and only mod is intake.

http://video.tinypic.com/player.php?v=11mbvuv

This is why i believe your friend with the Si wasn't as good as you, maybe not a horrible or bad driver. But, definitely not as good.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe that Si was stock. My boy's Si does not sound like that. Also, those where DR's he was running. We ran 15.2 on Stock Scion tires.

I said he had an intake, yeah its pretty much stock but its not 100% stock. Like i said, he showed me pictures of the full car with the dates on the pictures (i think the dates were 06/20) so, sure he could lie about it but theres no reason to.

And yes, he wasn't on stock street tires but that doesn't change his time, i mean he still ran 14.1. On street tires that time would drop to around 14.5ish range, but nevertheless still 14.1.

TimmyT - Yes, i doubt you will see 400whp Si's in the first year as well, but its also a totally new motor. You can't really base it on a older design with the same platform like you can with the 2az. Minor differences between 2az tC and 2az Camry, that also helps.
Also, if you look at before the tC and Si was even released, more parts for the Si was in the developement phases than the tC, or already released. i/e/and some suspension parts were released a week prior to the offical release of the Si.

I might also add, there are very, very few tC's i know of or heard of running 400whp daily, majority of boosted tCs are between 220-310whp.. Again, so i've seen and heard. Plus, Scionspeed turbos have caused a crap load of issues.

Ok, lets back up a little bit. You say it's a totally new motor right, and that you can't really base it on a older design with the same platform like you can with the 2az. What older design platform are you talking about in respects to the 2az? Surely your not talking about the Camry version. If there is only "minor" differences between the 2az tC and 2az Camry, then why don't you find 400whp Camry's on boost? And why did a Camry opt to swap out their 2az, instead of boosting it to the 300+ like us tC boys?

As for the release/development of parts, you say there were Si parts before tC. That's a matter of opinion. You look at mainstream, and the only 06 Si's on the cover, or in the mags have all been company owned. Where are the privately owned Si features, if the market was so much more booming compared to the tC? You know and I know that the 2az does not have some history of aftermarket support. But the history of the k-series engine is a lot stronger, yet STILL they are not flying off the shelves with builds of the Si when you compare it to the growth of the 2az from the tC, when it SHOULD be the other way around.

You said you seen most boosted tC's in the 220-310 range. Where are the Si's even putting out THAT much? You would think you wouldn't have to look far, if they were putting down the #'s boost or N/A otherwise. There's even a 300hp N/A tC 2az, and we know N/A is the LEAST sought after route.

FYI.....ScionSpeed dosen't even existence, where have you been man. That company went sour almost a year ago.

killerxromances

07-03-2006, 04:46 AM

rhythmnsmoke

07-03-2006, 03:15 PM

DouBLeJ16

07-03-2006, 04:30 PM

Wow, a 15.2 for the lotus driver.. That's just sad.

That car should be deep into the 13s.

killerxromances

07-03-2006, 09:24 PM

^
I know scionspeed went under, i used that as an example because i figured thats what he was talking about since i don't know any other turbo kit that produced that much whp, and i know of no one running 400whp period except company owned scions, and some of them aren't even using the 2az. Also, show me a 300whp n/a 2az, i'm not proving you wrong but i'd like to see it. I mean, you never showed me a 200whp 2az and thats a large jump so can you show me a dyno run or a website providing information? Again, i'd like to see this, not proving you wrong, i'm just interested in seeing this. Because so far, n/a for parts, nothing touches near 300whp.

The company owned Scions are well over 400whp and doing it on a 2az (well, at least ZPI is). And I've already showed you a 300whp N/A 2az. It was the one you argued about being that it was a drag car, when the whole point was not about the car surrounding it, but that the engine is the same as the production engine, and it's pumping out 300 ponies N/A.
Remember

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c25/nick120580/SE/DragtC3.jpg

Also, would you like me to find a n/a 06' Si in the 200whp+ range for you? It shouldn't be hard at all, let me know if you would like me to because i will. Yes, k-series have a much stronger aftermarket support than pretty much any other motor out there in the under 25k mark with a few exceptions obviously.

Not necessary, as the car already comes with 197 @ the crank. Therefore, adding an i/h/e you get 200ish whp. tC comes with 160 @ crank. Obviously i/h/e is not going to put it 200ish whp. You need 1 or 2 more components and you would be there. You are also trying to compare an engine that is built more towards N/A builds (high compression) against an engine that responds better to F/I (because of factory low compression). So, the comparison is not even valid. I can turn around and do the same thing, but on the F/I aspect, and tell you to show me a 300whp "privately owned" Si on F/I, better yet, show me an Si over 220 N/A.

If you look at the 2az and you look at the k20z in the Si, the k20 is a completely new design. Yes, it shares parts of many other series motors but as far as the total design goes, its new. The 2az is well based on the camry 2az. I'm not saying the motors are equal, nor am i saying they are the same. I'm just saying that you can find many parts on the 2az (tc) platform that you can on the camry 4cyl, much more are the same than different.

Not from what I've heard. Maybe different from the RSX engine, but supposedly the RSX one is not the one that should be compared to it.

I perfer n/a, and many people still do in the honda community depending on the motor. I mean the b16c5 for example, your pretty much limited to n/a because of its design. F/i would be suicide. So its still there, but yes i get what your saying. Boost is much more popular now and it should be, its the fastest, cheapest way to make power.

You can't just say you perfer N/A and that's it. You have to go the route where the engine is most efficient. 2az it's boost. K20 it's N/A. You have to cater to that engine's design, and not say..."Oh well, if you can't build it N/A, then it sucks". I say the same thing about the K20...."If you can't build it out of the shop with good F/I, then it sucks". You have to stop being narrow minded, and look at the big picture. One is better for boost, one is better for N/A. Neither Suck, so don't try to down play the 2az because it dosen't like N/A parts as much as it does boost, because I don't down play the Si motor because it likes dosen't like boost as much as it does N/A parts.

Yes i know you have to go by what the motor is designed for, if you haven't noticed, i tend to drive cars that are more suited for n/a over boost.

Also, you have showed me a picture of the drag tc (hardly a tc but lets just say it is so we don't go into it again), you haven't showed me any detailed information on it, or a dyno run showing it hitting 300whp. Unless you just read it was 300whp and just automatically believed it. Show me more than just a picture of it and i'll believe it, otherwise that information isn't true information. I still haven't seen proof that its even a 2az, its not the body, chasis of a tC. Lets see the specs!

Also, i have showed you much information supporting the fact the k20z in the Si is downplayed on factory specs, all companies i have looked into have rated the Si higher than factory on crank out put, unless you think a 7-17hp drivetrain loss is enough to justify 197hp. I don't think so. lol Would be cool if it was true though.

I'll try to find some dyno runs, on 8th gen Si forums they have a 1/4 run sheet showing the times, some offer mods, whp ratings, and so forth. One 219whp n/a Si there, but provided no dyno sheet.

Also, theres a company cybernationmotorsports.com that is releasing turbo kits for the 06' Si soon so i hear, that puts the Si at 279whp on their "Stage 1" kits. I believe the psi levels are some where around 11-12psi, which for how the motor is designed, thats pretty good. I know the tC will out boost the Si, the k20a2 in the K series line up is best comparable for boost to boost on the 2az, but thats not what we are talking about anyway.

I'm busy now, i'll check later and see what dynos i can show you. A friend of mine with an Si says theres a company releasing a port and polish package, and with i/h/e, crank should yeild 240-250whp. I don't know the company or what hes talking about, i'll find out if you want.