I hate Evos
10-24-2005, 03:30 AM
#41
TECH Addict
Originally Posted by chaman
Yes they are fast little engines, great performance but honestly who 
10-24-2005, 08:56 AM
#42
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Central jersey, nj
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by evo_killer
sorry to jump in and put my .02 in, but imo: the only good thing evo's have is awd from a dig on the street. at the track or from rolls, they are underpowered. i give them props, and i think they loook good from the front, but their track times/records are very unimpressive compared to stock bottom end/h&c/power adder ls1 times. especially, since quickest evo runs 9s.
or with 2 lil mods...a turbo back exhaust and a flash and you could have 70 or 80 whp more? for 1500? what mod on a ls1 can give you 70whp for 1500? not to mention..I can do an exhaust and sending out the pcm isn't hard, but if you have to put in a cam..i can't do that myself..so you'd have to add install price to that. but even so...a cam and tune will be around 1500 and thats not even including headers to realize the full potential of the cam.
10-24-2005, 09:06 AM
#43
Teching In
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mattkimsey
Didn't the old DSM's have just about the same motor?
key word, just about.
totally different head, different turbo, different internals, different cams, different ECU hell even different compression ratio.
10-24-2005, 06:48 PM
#45
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 1,138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went from a Fast C5 to a Real Quick 05 Evo.
Sure the Torque isn't there but the top end power is insane. The car just keeps pulling and pulling. as long as you can keep the AF's safe you can make 500whp for 6k that includes, turbo system, clutch, and fuel system plus you get to keep that along with amazing streetability and handling.
Sure a H/C 408 makes just as much power but it cost more and is harsher on the street, specially with with the huge cams you;ll need to get there.
You have to take every car and it's accomplishments for what it is.... Someones Pride and Joy.
Sure the Torque isn't there but the top end power is insane. The car just keeps pulling and pulling. as long as you can keep the AF's safe you can make 500whp for 6k that includes, turbo system, clutch, and fuel system plus you get to keep that along with amazing streetability and handling.
Sure a H/C 408 makes just as much power but it cost more and is harsher on the street, specially with with the huge cams you;ll need to get there.
You have to take every car and it's accomplishments for what it is.... Someones Pride and Joy.
10-24-2005, 11:04 PM
#46
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: phoenix
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
definitely not a car to blow off...dollar for dollar, there aren't very many cars to match it...you'll beat them stock, but give them 1500$ and they make you look ridiculous...i also love the sound of them, people told me that mine sounded like a street bike off in the distance...It's one of the few import cars that i respect
Spent all of 6500$ in mods to make 444whp at all 4 wheels with 30 pounds of boost...would literally fill the speedo within less than 2 miles without a problem...definitely a lot faster than my TA is now, but my H/C is coming in a few weeks so we shall see
Spent all of 6500$ in mods to make 444whp at all 4 wheels with 30 pounds of boost...would literally fill the speedo within less than 2 miles without a problem...definitely a lot faster than my TA is now, but my H/C is coming in a few weeks so we shall see
10-24-2005, 11:28 PM
#47
Staging Lane
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Aurora, Colorado
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Evo's deserve their respect, it's one sick car. The whole "Oh if you make a 5.7 into a 2.0 l is a really lame arguement for obvious reasons. A Ecotec engine has had 1,200 horse power. Four cylinders are not jokes when you give it to someone who knows what they are doing.
As for losing to a Evo-- don't hate it because you lost, respect it and go back after it. It's the streets, it's supposed to be fun. You'll end up hating a lot of things if you are upset every time they beat you.
EDIT: Oh its been awhile since I have posted, good to see everyone again
As for losing to a Evo-- don't hate it because you lost, respect it and go back after it. It's the streets, it's supposed to be fun. You'll end up hating a lot of things if you are upset every time they beat you.
EDIT: Oh its been awhile since I have posted, good to see everyone again
10-25-2005, 02:53 AM
#48
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bessemer City NC
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EvilDylan
key word, just about.
totally different head, different turbo, different internals, different cams, different ECU hell even different compression ratio.
totally different head, different turbo, different internals, different cams, different ECU hell even different compression ratio.
It's like the LS6 compared to the LS1....different compression, cam, heads, intake, block etc. but the LS6 has definately benefited from the LS1's aftermarket.
10-25-2005, 03:35 AM
#49
TECH Addict
Originally Posted by Nwmembr19
okay first off before someone says i am bashing the evo i'm not it can be and has been proven to be fast, but you guys are jumping from one argument to another.
For one everyone on this site knows how stupid the dollar per performance argument is. Point ten second cars have been built for 2000 including car cost. Dont believe me. It was a four door ugly nova with a motor the guys put together from junk yard parts. I think it is the grassroots motorsports 2004 challenge. You get the idea.
I bought my 98 z28 for 4000, and i have beaten c5's, srt4's, transams, camaros and mustangs. even with 127,000 miles. You cant install your own cam but you can install your own exhaust so no cost is added. So only things you can do dont include installation costs? Dumb argument.
Where can you get 70rwhp for 1500? Are you the biggest f'n moron on this whole site? Ever heard of N20 and a tune. People have run 250 shots on stock bottom ends.
forged internals come on other cars besides evos and is not exactly new technology. The fact that an ls1 has gone 9.6 with stock internals is pretty impressive.
Your car made 444whp with 30psi. That is a fast car but an ls1 with 32psi has made 1900hp and ran 6's.
How much power does a 500 cu in. v8 with 50psi and alcohol produce try 8000hp.
Evo's are respectable cars and are fast, which is a relative term, but dont start trying to act like the evo motor is superior. Especially on a ls1 based site. If you guys want to be evo "fanboys", where ever that queer word came from, go over to an evo site and tell each other how the mighty evo and it's motor should be worshiped like the almighty import that it is. The evo is no more advanced than any other engine it still only puts about 33% of it's actual power to the ground, actually less because of awd, and only produced more power with more boost or something that has already been proven like head flow, port velocity, more duration, more lift, all things that have been done before. When a car comes out with something like electronically controlled valves and there are no more camshafts or something else that has never been done on a car before then we can all praise it but untill then no engine is really that much better than the other especially when a huge amount of air is being forced through the engine. The way i see it why not start with an engine that can take in more air to begin with, max horsepower being the goal intended.
For one everyone on this site knows how stupid the dollar per performance argument is. Point ten second cars have been built for 2000 including car cost. Dont believe me. It was a four door ugly nova with a motor the guys put together from junk yard parts. I think it is the grassroots motorsports 2004 challenge. You get the idea.
I bought my 98 z28 for 4000, and i have beaten c5's, srt4's, transams, camaros and mustangs. even with 127,000 miles. You cant install your own cam but you can install your own exhaust so no cost is added. So only things you can do dont include installation costs? Dumb argument.
Where can you get 70rwhp for 1500? Are you the biggest f'n moron on this whole site? Ever heard of N20 and a tune. People have run 250 shots on stock bottom ends.
forged internals come on other cars besides evos and is not exactly new technology. The fact that an ls1 has gone 9.6 with stock internals is pretty impressive.
Your car made 444whp with 30psi. That is a fast car but an ls1 with 32psi has made 1900hp and ran 6's.
How much power does a 500 cu in. v8 with 50psi and alcohol produce try 8000hp.
Evo's are respectable cars and are fast, which is a relative term, but dont start trying to act like the evo motor is superior. Especially on a ls1 based site. If you guys want to be evo "fanboys", where ever that queer word came from, go over to an evo site and tell each other how the mighty evo and it's motor should be worshiped like the almighty import that it is. The evo is no more advanced than any other engine it still only puts about 33% of it's actual power to the ground, actually less because of awd, and only produced more power with more boost or something that has already been proven like head flow, port velocity, more duration, more lift, all things that have been done before. When a car comes out with something like electronically controlled valves and there are no more camshafts or something else that has never been done on a car before then we can all praise it but untill then no engine is really that much better than the other especially when a huge amount of air is being forced through the engine. The way i see it why not start with an engine that can take in more air to begin with, max horsepower being the goal intended.
10-25-2005, 10:04 AM
#50
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Central jersey, nj
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nwmembr19
okay first off before someone says i am bashing the evo i'm not it can be and has been proven to be fast, but you guys are jumping from one argument to another.
For one everyone on this site knows how stupid the dollar per performance argument is. Point ten second cars have been built for 2000 including car cost. Dont believe me. It was a four door ugly nova with a motor the guys put together from junk yard parts. I think it is the grassroots motorsports 2004 challenge. You get the idea.
I bought my 98 z28 for 4000, and i have beaten c5's, srt4's, transams, camaros and mustangs. even with 127,000 miles. You cant install your own cam but you can install your own exhaust so no cost is added. So only things you can do dont include installation costs? Dumb argument.
Where can you get 70rwhp for 1500? Are you the biggest f'n moron on this whole site? Ever heard of N20 and a tune. People have run 250 shots on stock bottom ends.
forged internals come on other cars besides evos and is not exactly new technology. The fact that an ls1 has gone 9.6 with stock internals is pretty impressive.
Your car made 444whp with 30psi. That is a fast car but an ls1 with 32psi has made 1900hp and ran 6's.
How much power does a 500 cu in. v8 with 50psi and alcohol produce try 8000hp.
Evo's are respectable cars and are fast, which is a relative term, but dont start trying to act like the evo motor is superior. Especially on a ls1 based site. If you guys want to be evo "fanboys", where ever that queer word came from, go over to an evo site and tell each other how the mighty evo and it's motor should be worshiped like the almighty import that it is. The evo is no more advanced than any other engine it still only puts about 33% of it's actual power to the ground, actually less because of awd, and only produced more power with more boost or something that has already been proven like head flow, port velocity, more duration, more lift, all things that have been done before. When a car comes out with something like electronically controlled valves and there are no more camshafts or something else that has never been done on a car before then we can all praise it but untill then no engine is really that much better than the other especially when a huge amount of air is being forced through the engine. The way i see it why not start with an engine that can take in more air to begin with, max horsepower being the goal intended.
For one everyone on this site knows how stupid the dollar per performance argument is. Point ten second cars have been built for 2000 including car cost. Dont believe me. It was a four door ugly nova with a motor the guys put together from junk yard parts. I think it is the grassroots motorsports 2004 challenge. You get the idea.
I bought my 98 z28 for 4000, and i have beaten c5's, srt4's, transams, camaros and mustangs. even with 127,000 miles. You cant install your own cam but you can install your own exhaust so no cost is added. So only things you can do dont include installation costs? Dumb argument.
Where can you get 70rwhp for 1500? Are you the biggest f'n moron on this whole site? Ever heard of N20 and a tune. People have run 250 shots on stock bottom ends.
forged internals come on other cars besides evos and is not exactly new technology. The fact that an ls1 has gone 9.6 with stock internals is pretty impressive.
Your car made 444whp with 30psi. That is a fast car but an ls1 with 32psi has made 1900hp and ran 6's.
How much power does a 500 cu in. v8 with 50psi and alcohol produce try 8000hp.
Evo's are respectable cars and are fast, which is a relative term, but dont start trying to act like the evo motor is superior. Especially on a ls1 based site. If you guys want to be evo "fanboys", where ever that queer word came from, go over to an evo site and tell each other how the mighty evo and it's motor should be worshiped like the almighty import that it is. The evo is no more advanced than any other engine it still only puts about 33% of it's actual power to the ground, actually less because of awd, and only produced more power with more boost or something that has already been proven like head flow, port velocity, more duration, more lift, all things that have been done before. When a car comes out with something like electronically controlled valves and there are no more camshafts or something else that has never been done on a car before then we can all praise it but untill then no engine is really that much better than the other especially when a huge amount of air is being forced through the engine. The way i see it why not start with an engine that can take in more air to begin with, max horsepower being the goal intended.
10-25-2005, 10:21 AM
#51
TECH Addict
Originally Posted by Nwmembr19
The evo is no more advanced than any other engine it still only puts about 33% of it's actual power to the ground.
I think it puts more than 33% of it's power to the ground, else it would only be making circa 99whp on a 300bhp motor.
10-25-2005, 11:44 AM
#52
10 Second Club
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: McLean, VA
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
from the dig, a buddie of mine beat an evo pushing 22lbs of boost by 2 car lengths in his 04 mach 1. he only has shorty headers and exhaust. i know anything can happen on the street but i was kinda suprised to hear that.
10-25-2005, 05:03 PM
#53
Originally Posted by 300bhp/ton
I think it puts more than 33% of it's power to the ground, else it would only be making circa 99whp on a 300bhp motor.
You seem to know a lot huh?
How much power does that motor in specific puts down after all the loses from heat and friction? I know that 33% maybe is wrong but why attack that aspect of his post when i fact the idea is to state that no matter the "performance" of any engine they all share a similar disadvantage: all motors are really inefficient machines since most of the energy they make is lost in heat and friction.
Oh there may be lots of people that drool over the Evo....there is also a lot that dont give a ****, so whats your point, cant deal with opinions??
Go and drink your tea, Mary Poppins...
10-25-2005, 05:36 PM
#54
Teching In
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chaman
You seem to know a lot huh?
How much power does that motor in specific puts down after all the loses from heat and friction? I know that 33% maybe is wrong but why attack that aspect of his post when i fact the idea is to state that no matter the "performance" of any engine they all share a similar disadvantage: all motors are really inefficient machines since most of the energy they make is lost in heat and friction.
Oh there may be lots of people that drool over the Evo....there is also a lot that dont give a ****, so whats your point, cant deal with opinions??
Go and drink your tea, Mary Poppins...
How much power does that motor in specific puts down after all the loses from heat and friction? I know that 33% maybe is wrong but why attack that aspect of his post when i fact the idea is to state that no matter the "performance" of any engine they all share a similar disadvantage: all motors are really inefficient machines since most of the energy they make is lost in heat and friction.
Oh there may be lots of people that drool over the Evo....there is also a lot that dont give a ****, so whats your point, cant deal with opinions??
Go and drink your tea, Mary Poppins...
uhhhh..yeah. Like your sig says, you have issues. I think one of them is stupidity.
10-25-2005, 07:36 PM
#57
Originally Posted by EvilDylan
uhhhh..yeah. Like your sig says, you have issues. I think one of them is stupidity.
You are obviously out of place here, like someone says go to a Evo forum and glorify your rice rocket there.
10-25-2005, 07:47 PM
#58
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Central jersey, nj
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chaman
Great argument!!! Did it hurt thinking about it?? careful we dont want nobody having a stroke here...Stupidity is making a fool of yourself trying to convince others of how great is your car in a forum like this one where most dont give a damn about it.
You are obviously out of place here, like someone says go to a Evo forum and glorify your rice rocket there.
You are obviously out of place here, like someone says go to a Evo forum and glorify your rice rocket there.
10-26-2005, 03:40 AM
#60
TECH Addict
Originally Posted by chaman
You seem to know a lot huh?
How much power does that motor in specific puts down after all the loses from heat and friction? I know that 33% maybe is wrong but why attack that aspect of his post when i fact the idea is to state that no matter the "performance" of any engine they all share a similar disadvantage: all motors are really inefficient machines since most of the energy they make is lost in heat and friction.
Oh there may be lots of people that drool over the Evo....there is also a lot that dont give a ****, so whats your point, cant deal with opinions??
Go and drink your tea, Mary Poppins...
How much power does that motor in specific puts down after all the loses from heat and friction? I know that 33% maybe is wrong but why attack that aspect of his post when i fact the idea is to state that no matter the "performance" of any engine they all share a similar disadvantage: all motors are really inefficient machines since most of the energy they make is lost in heat and friction.
Oh there may be lots of people that drool over the Evo....there is also a lot that dont give a ****, so whats your point, cant deal with opinions??
Go and drink your tea, Mary Poppins...
It's not the numbers it's the ways it's written. As in it should say they LOOSE 33% of the bhp thru the drivetrain, NOT only put 33% to the road. Basically it was written backwards. Sadly you missed this
Although 33% is way to high, 25% is probably nearer the mark, but it's not easy to tell, as deriving hp over 4 wheels needs to be calculated differently.
Last edited by 300bhp/ton; 10-26-2005 at 03:58 AM.