heezyo2o

While driving home the other night, I passed a newer body style STI that wanted to play and I freely obliged.

I was just lazily driving home with the cruise control set around 75mph. Before long the STI was by my side and paced me for a bit. He then gunned it and I followed suit. Now that he knew I was game, we lined up and did the whole three honk deal.

We did multiple runs from around 50-80 up to 140. Each time I started in 3rd gear (7gear auto). It may be a surprise to some, but the cars were very evenly matched. As long as we both got an even start, we would literally be bumper to bumper all the way up to 140+ with no one gaining or falling back.

Not sure about exact speeds, but when my third gear was close to redline, around 5K rpm, I would get a little jump on him and might pull a bit as he upshifted. Alternatively, if I was lower in the RPMs in third, he might get an immediate 1/2 car jump where it would stay. At times, the transmission would not let me select 2nd gear. If I would have been in 2nd gear and closer to redline during some of those runs, I do believe we would be even once again.

During some of the runs, I thought he might have had some difficulties with his shifting as I pulled a bit at times during his shift. We took the same exit, and he mentioned that other than a blow-off valve, that he was stock. From what I know, the blow-off valve might actually hinder performance in this case.

heezyo2o

In case I didn't mention, I was driving a stock '07 SLK350. Thought I'd mention it as I'm not sure if they changed anything from the earlier models.

R107SL

WOW! Though it seems tough to believe, the cars are pretty evenlyy matched. From 0-60 the STi should pull very hard, but at highway speed and triple digit speeds the SLk has three advantages. First, the drag coefficent is much lower on the SLK than the Subaru; second, the boosted four cylinder engines lose tons of power up top. Last, I have heard that the Subaru suffers tons of power loss from the AWD setup.

Militant-Grunt

Not suprising at all. The Sti/Evo's have no grunt past a certain speed.

AndrewAZ

I must say a lot of people underestimate the SLK350... Back when I had my M3 I had one race me and during 1st gear we were dead even then 2nd gear I would only slowly start to walk him. But I had SMG and was not using launch control(not that would help) and I also had near bald tires while the SLK 350 was torque braking at the lights. But from a roll of 40+ I would pull a lot faster..

Has anyone dynode the 350 motor? I think 268 hp is quite an understatement for the motor and my guess is it makes around 280-290 and it was only rated 268 so they could sell out the remaining older 5 liter V8 that only made 302 hp.

CEZA

they have no power in the higher gears, but im still skeptical

turbo kraut

i have to call


or the sti driver doesn't have a clue what he was doing

and did you guys race from a dig or were they all from a roll? if you raced from a dig they sti with a good driver would of smoked your auto benz....... weight to power ratio + the awd would have given him one hell of a launch

and awd on the sti wouldn't make him loose too much power that you guys were dead even....... and to militant...... i am an a4 owner too, and alot of guys leave audi to go to the sti or evo cause of their awd systems are pretty evenly matched to audi's and they come with about 50-100 ponies more depending on the a4

stock 01 a4 is 170 hp...... tunned/chipped you get about 200
stock evo/sti is about 245....... tunned chipped close to 300

AndrewAZ

Got torque??? Diffrene between Mercedes + BMW vs others is the engines make a high peak HP for a short time with little or no torque to back it up. Both BMW and MB make a lot of torque for a long period of time usually they make as much torque as rated peak horsepower.

turbo kraut

i understand that, i used to have a 320i, it was ballsy for a 4 banger, but my point was, and i barely remeber it........ it was said that awd cars loose alot because of the awd and i was saying that an awd car would smoke a bmw mb or most any car for that matter from a dig

you get something like a evo or sti...... 2.3l 4 banger motors with some *****, then you tune it, and you got power that a highend euro/jap v6 has or an american v8 out of a 4 banger....... i used to be the type that said there is no replacement for displacement till i started driving a boosted ride...


anyways moral of the story is, if you wanna race take it to the track and don't drive a luxuary car like you stole it.... they are to be seen

turbo kraut

AndrewAZ

Still is no replacement for displacement... I still prefer NA power over turbo. When you get into boosting more and more you end up with more and more turbo lag and a none linear power distribution. But again that is just my personal preference and I am not saying one is better than the other its just what I like.

badger

I have an STi in the garage along with my C240, and I'll fill in some of the gaps. In 3rd gear (of 6) I typically don't have to shift until about 105 mph boosting about 17psi. In other words, I'm taking 3rd gear from a 50mph role (assuming I'm racing this SLK) and staying in gear for the next 55mph before I have to shift. The SLK definatly has the displacement, and I certainly think it makes for a fantastic sports car, but if the dude running that STi had any ability to know to stay in gear, there is no way you would've kept up with him. I would assume you could take him starting around 125-140mph, but if you're racing on the streets up there, then....

hit the track.

heezyo2o

Believe what you'd like, but if you're going to call BS, at least read the thread and original post before replying.

If you'd bother to read the original post, you'll see that each run was initiated from a roll at roughly 60mph. No one is doubting that from a dig, the STI with its AWD would have the advantage. No need to post the obvious buddy.

If you look at the trap speeds, it will give you a better idea of how the two cars will compare in a roll-on type of run. In stock form, both cars trap roughly 104mph.

heezyo2o

The guy was not the best driver in terms of shifting. When he was on his shifts, the runs were even. As mentioned though, he would fall back on the shift at times. He did have a blow-off valve, so you could overall hear his shifts and reaction time. At times, it did appear and sound like his shifts were somewhat slow.

edit: In my original post, I say that the runs were started from 50-80. From driving the other day, third gear in the SLK only goes up to 70mph. I'm use to an original 6-speed manual, so the mph in each gear differ a bit with a 7-gear transmission.

Boxer2Blower

As a former STI owner....I would have to say that the driver had no clue.....

FishtailnZ

Going by the OP's account, it is entirely believeable - stock vs. stock. They both trap at just over 100mph in the 1/4 and from a 60 to 140 roll (no awd advantage there that's for sure), it's no stretch to see the outcome posted.

Blue_Monster

I raced a Brand New STI like the first week I got my car. I know he had @ least an upgraded exhaust, that **** was loud. We raced from a dig, i pulled about a half a car right away, and pulled a full car on him until we hit about 110 MPH. The next light, the look on the guys face was priceless. He said" What the hell is that thing" I laughed and drove away. Him and his passenger both couldnt believe it.

turbo kraut

and that might be, but again that kid couldn't drive


and you are right, from a 60 punch awd won't help, it might, probably does actually hurt

but from a dig, you put an experienced driver in both cars and the awd will win everytime

just like you put the same guy in an evo and sti and you will get almost identical #'s

bbelt88

Sorry this story is untrue......STIs are putting down 300 HP, as opposed to your 268 and quarter mile wise they run low 13's while you run high 13's......evenly matched i dont think so......Maybe you raced a modded WRX with an STI badge?

WhatTheHulk

that car (STi) is much faster. If you guys were neck n neck, it was because of his driving.

FishtailnZ

You're missing the point. 1/4 mile ET is much less of an indication for what will happen in a ROLL on encounter than trap speed. Here we have two cars that trap similarly, so yes the outcome can happen as described. I go to the track regularly with a local F-body club - a couple buddies have 11 second cars and at the track they destroy me. BUT on the highway I can keep up and in some case pull on them. Why? Trap speed and gearing. I can come close to their traps, and since they're set their cars up for 1/4 mile racing, I have a gearing advantage on the highway as well.

FishtailnZ

The STi is much "quicker" in the 1/4, not faster - there is a difference.

shahedC

so.. quicker is for acceleration and faster is for speed?

FishtailnZ

Yes. "Quick" is in reference to ET, and "fast" as in trap speed. The STi will be almost a second "quicker", but it's trap speed and that of the SLK350 are pretty close. So in any race from a dig, it's fair to expect the STi to win fairly easily, all else being equal. But in a highway roll on, it will be close - one way or another.

turbo kraut

ok, i think everyone is missing the point, not to call bs, but bs to an extent......

if what he says is true...... it is like he said, cause the guy missed some shifts...but he said he did too, so they both suck at shifting and he is an auto where the sti is a 6 speed

but all in all..... the sti should of won but the driver sucks *****