evo8 vs st205 vs sti

O

OlyST185

Active member
Toyota's exit in rally was to focus on Formula Atlantic post '98.
Click to expand...
miamm the 4AGE small port developping 240hp at what? 13 000rpm? lol
open air quad throttle body, enjoy the sound.
 
I

illGT4

New member
OlyST185":21cxqfb4 said:
Toyota's exit in rally was to focus on Formula Atlantic post '98.
Click to expand...
miamm the 4AGE small port developping 240hp at what? 13 000rpm? lol
open air quad throttle body, enjoy the sound.
Click to expand...

Yeah that would be sweet.. Now where did I park my mr2..

I was told that at 240hp levels... the engine will normally expire after 8 hours. :shock:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
illGT4":2w36cjc2 said:
furpo":2w36cjc2 said:
there is a reason why the st205 is no longer competitive in production car rallying. it is because cars like the evo and sti have out developed it.
Click to expand...

The reason for the ST205 not being competive in rally is because of disqualification. After that TTE move onto the Corolla.

It wasn't because the EVO and STi out developed it. :) Toyota's exit in rally was to focus on Formula Atlantic post '98.
Click to expand...

so you are saying the evo 8 and new wrx have not yet caught up with the technology toyota was using with the st205? the celica still is the most successful rally car in terms of rallys won so they are a very good car. better than all other cars of its day. i find it hard to beleive that the st 205 will still be competitive in present day group N (production car) championships however.

roger
 
M

muneo

New member
Actually We need to clarify exactly what they did to get disqualified.
I read that it was some type of restricter plate hidden in the afm. BUT after this, I hear different stories. One say that the restricter plate actually opened up like a throttle plate which was illegal. Another story I heard was that it was ok to have it in there but was in a funny position inside the afm that allowed more air to flow thru wich disqualified them. One seems intentional and the other seems like it was a way to disqualify Toyota because they were winning so much (Basically Playahatin').
 
C

ChrisD

New member
There was a hidden plate on the TURBO, not the AFM. Here's some info.

toy_turbo.jpg


The cause of complaint was that Toyota had fitted turbo restrictor's which were modified in three ways:

The restrictor was not sealed so it was possible to move it without touching the seals.
It was possible for air to enter the engine without passing through the restrictor.
The position of the restrictor could be moved so it was further away from the turbine than the 50 mm limit permitted.

It was discovered that these irregularities were made possible by a flange which had a special hidden bypass device which was held open against a very strong spring. The hose which connected the restrictor to the turbo had a metal casing inside, and attached to this casing were catches which could secretly force open the by-pass flange to the extent of 5 mm.

Max Mosley explained: "When the system was dismantled, the flange would automatically close itself and remove evidence that extra air could have entered engine. This system not only allowed extra air which did not pass through the restrictor to enter the engine, but also the restrictor itself could illegally be moved further from the turbo.

"The hose was fixed to the restrictor by a jubilee clip. A special tool was then applied to open the device and then the device then gripped in the open position by a second clip. Both of these clips had to be undone for a scrutineer to check the restrictor and in the process of opening those clips the device snapped shut.

"Inside it was beautifully made. The springs inside the hose had been polished and machined so not to impede the air which passed through. To force the springs open without the special tool would require substantial force. It is the most sophisticated and ingenious device either I or the FIA's technical experts have seen for a long-time. It was so well made that there was no gap apparent to suggest there was any means of opening it."

The FIA estimates that 25 per cent more air was allowed into the engine than permitted although admits it's difficult to estimate how much more power that would achieve. An expert put it as high as an extra 50 bhp - a considerable advantage when the cars are supposedly limited to 300 BHP.

TTE did not claim the device was legal but was represented by lawyers who entered a plea in mitigation. Mosley went on to say that the points Toyota and their drivers, Juha Kankkunen, Didier Auriol and Armin Schwarz had gained in 1995 would simply be taken away but others would not move up to fill the gaps.

The team would also be banned from contesting the 1995 Network Q RAC Rally and the 1996 World Rally Championship. He also stated that the FIA would not allow the team to get around the restrictions by entering under another guise and went on to say that there was however, nothing to suggest that the drivers were aware of anything going on.

According to Toyota the device had been devised at a "certain level" and the management knew nothing about it. The FIA dismissed this claim, saying that as a team they were responsible for all their actions.

He went on to say that there were indications that this type of thing was not happening with in other teams and praised those who were concerned with discovering the irregularity. TTE has announced that it is planning to appeal against the ban extending through 1996.

The absence of the team would weaken an already frail championship and leave it to a fight between Subaru, Mitsubishi and Ford with Subaru being the obvious favourites.
Click to expand...
 
I

illGT4

New member
Anonymous":2z9qlbcg said:
so you are saying the evo 8 and new wrx have not yet caught up with the technology toyota was using with the st205?

roger
Click to expand...



No Roger I'm not saying that. That has nothing to do with what I said. I'm talking about the year Toyota pulled out and not when the EVO VIII and New WRX were introduced.. apples to apples here..I'm not comparing a 10 year old 205 with a 3 year old VIII or STi... That seems a bit stupid.
 
F

furpo

New member
yes i know. that is what i am saying as well. this topic is not comparing the older evo or wrx to the st205 though. it is comparing the st205 to the evo 8 and also the new wrx.

so now we agree?

roger
 
I

illGT4

New member
furpo":1iojd0qi said:
yes i know. that is what i am saying as well. this topic is not comparing the older evo or wrx to the st205 though. it is comparing the st205 to the evo 8 and also the new wrx.

so now we agree?

roger
Click to expand...

Yes and No?

What exactly are we comparing here? :)

I believe the ST205 can hang with today's AWD turbo cars. (along with a ST185 too... not stock for stock, but running similar boost pressure, etc..)
In other words, IMHO, the EVOs active diff or the WRX whatever, aren't leaps and bounds over what Toyota used. The GT-Four was always an "easy car" to drive.

I don't believe the STi and EVO VIII havn't caught up to Toyota's 10 year old technology.

Again, all I stated was that: "It wasn't because the EVO and STi out developed it. Toyota's exit in rally was to focus on Formula Atlantic post '98."
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
we are comparing the standard off the production line st205 gt4, evo8 and wrx sti.

what i said was the st205 is no longer competitive (ie at present, not when toyota was dsq) in group N (production car) rallying because cars like the evo 8 and wrx have come around. if the st205s where still competitive then people would still be using them.

down here in new zealand the gt4 is the best value for money car that can be brought. an st185 can be picked up for around $5000nz and a st205 can be picked up for $15000nz. the older evo 1-3 and similar aged wrx are $15000+nz and the evo4-6 is still 30000nz.

the other reason i thik the gt4 is a better car to base a project of than the mitsi or subaru is the chassis strength. open the doors on an evo or wrx with the car on the hoist and you will not be able to close them again. my st185 has no problems passing this test.

roger
 
A

alltracman78

Active member
Anonymous":2c85vao2 said:
open the doors on an evo or wrx with the car on the hoist and you will not be able to close them again. my st185 has no problems passing this test.

roger
Click to expand...

Really? That's interesting. So if you support a evo at the jack points the chassis will flex enough that the doors won't close? That seems a bit weak to me. Maybe 'cause of the 4dr instead of 2?
 
G

GT4 Addicted

New member
just my opinions...

but here in France we have the STI & the evo8 available...

i'm one of the only lucky st205 owner... i've imported it from Italy as the st205 was never sold in france...

i'm a track addict... i mean i practice track days as often as i can... i've allready practised on Magny Cours / Charade/ and so many other well known tracks here in France...

all i can tell you is no matter how more devellopped are the evo 8 or the sti ... the st205 can easily be compared to them... even in stock form...

this car was really in advance compared to the year of made... really...

here are some pics from last month track day:

DSCF0863.jpg


DSCF0834.jpg


DSCF0824.jpg


DSCF0816.jpg


DSCF0800.jpg


DSCF797.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top