Cy

iTrader: (3)

This was my first year in STU and I have to say that the STU field is full of talented drivers and nice people too.

Congrats to all the STU trophy winners, especially the Jung/Kenna team.

Diana drove my car for the first time on Tuesday on the practice course and then went on to beat last years STUL champ (Amy Fair in the Vorschlag Evo X) on Th/Fri by a very narrow margin.

Congrats Amy on the trophy and great driving!

S1MPSONS

iTrader: (2)

Thanks everyone for the kind words!

I wish I brought home the jacket with Subaru this year but I just didn't drive perfectly. Bad driving day one left me with a well deserved 0.6 second handicapped going into day two and a cone on my last run, day-two, cost me the win (had the run been clean it would have been enough to make up the 6/10ths handicap... barely).

Overall, I am happy with the podium finish. I think I got what I earned out there driving (and over-driving at times) the **** out of the car. I am even more happy about running in the most competitive non-stock Solo class with the absolute coolest and most friendly drivers.


Just so you know, I run on 450lbs/in F and 330lbs/in R spring rates on non-adjustable dampers. Stop worrying about setup and concentrate on driving PERFECTLY. That is truly the only way to win.

Loser

iTrader: (9)

What Jake didn't mention is the new technique he discovered earlier this year... HAM FISTING!

Silencer

iTrader: (4)

Congrats to Thomas and Rick for a 1-2 finish in Rick's Bilstien/Dunlop equipped 03' Evo. Also, congrats to the rest of the trophy winners!

Dave

madmax199

iTrader: (20)

Good showing Jake, a 3rd place at nats in your rookie year I believe is great!!

CDeutsch

iTrader: (5)

I agree with focusing on driving over setup (especially since I got spanked by a guy driving the same car) lol, BUT I've been in this class since before it was an official class and I don't know you from Adam, so unless you can convince me you have a legit tune, your advise doesn't hold a lot of weight with me. Not trying to be an ***, but who tuned your car and have you verified for yourself that the boost settings haven't been changed? I've reviewed other STU Evos that went and got an "STU Legal" tune from a local tuner and they had the boost tables changed and they didn't even know.

I think Driver, Tires, and HP are the biggest factors in STU. Followed by the rest of the setup. I'm sure you had legal tires, so the question is which of the other two options are you're biggest key to success? (I can guarantee you drove better then me regardless, lol)

Not sure if you have the same tune that you had in this old post:
http://www.iwsti.com/forums/gd-membe...da-rx7-r1.html

But I looked into this tune and found this in the notes:
"STU GT100v117, developed for as an SCCA STU legal map for the STi. Requires use with ONLY Sunoco GT 100 high octane, street legal fuel. MILs have not been disabled. THIS MAP IS VERY AGGRESSIVE IN TERMS OF BOOST RISING WITH RPM, THE IGNITION CURVE BEING MUCH MORE AGGRESSIVE THAN STAGE2, AND RUNNING THE MOTOR LEANER TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE QUALITIES OF GT 100 RACE GAS. MUST USE FACTORY INTAKE OR COBB TUNING SF INTAKE. NO OTHER AFTERMARKET INTAKES ARE CERTIFIED COMPATIBLE WITH THIS MAPPING."

Not sure how they got the boost to rise more aggressive with the RPM without touching boost tables, but doesn't give me a confident feeling it's legit.

I'm sure you're a nice guy as other people have said and hope to meet you in person at a future event. All I'm saying is ALL STU drivers should double check their tunes and if you don't know how to do it find someone who does.

evo8dad

iTrader: (15)

The reason some STU tunes have boost tables that have been adjusted is that, unfortunately most so-called "tuners" are cut and paste tuners that just use prior ROMs from other cars with similar ROMs. I've seen into time and time again...

Honestly I doubt Jake is cheating. Than again a certain someone last year in ST (than STS) was found to have illegal valvetrain to which he claimed he had no idea since he had someone else build the head for him. Like I said though I would find it hard to believe Jake would do something knowingly that is illegal.

S1MPSONS

iTrader: (2)

From COBB http://www.accessecu.com/cgi-bin/dow...GT100v117.pdf:

"I would like to explain what we have seen with the factory boost control settings on the stock STis (2004-2005). The OEM ECU raises the Wastegate Duty Cycle (WGDC) percentage approximately 40% as RPM increases from 2400 to 5600 RPM. The factory does this in an effort to compensate for the restrictive exhaust system found on the stock vehicle. They are trying to maintain boost at higher RPM while running with the restrictive, stock exhaust system. If a less restrictive exhaust system is installed on an otherwise stock vehicle, then the increasing WGDC will make boost rise as RPM increases on the stock boost table settings. This is also known as boost creep. It is highly possible that fuel cut can be reached in 4th, 5th, or 6th gears with the high boost levels seen after installing a turbo-back exhaust system."

Yes, I'm a cheater. Protest me.

PS: No tuner has ever touched my car or ECU. My map is COBB "off the shelf".

^^^^ You are obviously a confused boy if you rank horsepower over suspension.

CDeutsch

iTrader: (5)

I'm not calling you a cheater, just saying I don't know you. If evo8dad will vouch for you that's good enough for me that you wouldn't knowingly cheat. I'm saying this to your face instead of behind your back because there was talk this year of a hand full of cars being visibly faster then the rest (not sure if yours was one or not) I still would like to see a gentlemens agreement worked out that the top 5 cars next year have their tunes and boost lines pulled by an independent party to verify legality. Obviously there are logistics issues but I think we can over come most of them if we put some effort into it.

On that note, has anybody independently reviewed Cobb's STU tune? Just because it's "off the shelf" doesn't mean it's legal although the additional info you posted gives me a little more faith that it is. Thanks for sharing that.

HP may not compensate for a stock suspension but it will compensate for a non-ideal setup which you seemed to claim in your original post is just fine for STU and can be driven around by "perfect driving". And I'm only claiming HP as a larger factor then a "perfect suspension setup" for STU since I've tried and seen wildly different setups that seem to "work just fine". I think the combo of AWD, HP, and skinny street tires makes the "ideal setup" less important in STU then other classes. That's what I was trying to say with that statement.

CDeutsch

iTrader: (5)

Unfortunately the illegal STU tune I found locally wasn't from a cut and paste tuner. In fact he tuned mine the first year I went to Nats and did it correctly (I just doubled check to make sure). Another guy comes in a couple years later and asks for an STU tune and he changes the boost tables (probably because the guy requesting it didn't know what specifically to tell the tuner not to touch). The tuner is not an autocrosser so he doesn't get it. He's just trying to make the most HP he can I guess.

spool_sample

iTrader: (3)

I'm not sure if Jake's comment just rubbed you the wrong way, but this doesn't seem like the most constructive response. I don't know you and I didn't go to Nats, but I met Jake at the Toledo Pro and he's a heck of a nice guy and a damn good driver. The way the post reads to me, it sounds like you are mostly writing off his skill as a driver and putting the credit for his trophies on an "illegal" ECU map. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's not cool.

That being said, I think you are twisting Cobb's wording a bit about their map. They have a lot of disclaimers concerning their different maps that are all mentioned in the fine print - "use with a turboback ONLY", "for off-road use only", "don't use without a note from your mother", etc. etc... hence the warning about the boost creep. If I remember right, the Stage II map actually has a lower WGDC than stock. Furthermore, from what I've seen, it's not uncommon to see a 100 octane STU map make nearly as much power as a Stage II 93 octane map. FWIW, it didn't seem like Jake's car was noticably slower/faster than Corey's Evo, or any of the other ones for that matter.

This is mostly off the top of my head, but if someone has proof (either for or against), feel free to throw it in.

CDeutsch

iTrader: (5)

Yeah it kind of did. Especially when he says "Stop worrying about setup" implying I'm some newb to the class.

Glad to hear more people confirming he's not some dude with a little bit of skill and an illegal car.


I'm not twisting anything. That quote I posted was found in the "off the shelve" map I downloaded. What you guys posted though about the tune and Subarus makes sense in theory though so thanks for clarifying (I'm not a Suby expert). Still would like it verified that the WGDC wasn't changed that's all.

delongedoug

iTrader: (20)

This is part of the reason I stopped preparing for a certain class. The rules are ridiculous, enforcing them is impossible and all it does is leave people speculating or frustrated. I still think STU is the class I would most like to be in, but it's just not practical for me anymore.

S1MPSONS

iTrader: (2)

That map is online for you to download. So is the street tuner software (for a fee). Go to town.

CDeutsch

iTrader: (5)

Cool, thanks. The software I downloaded (AccessPort Manager) looked like it was just to load the map. I'll have someone take a look. Sorry for making assumptions about you, but like I said I don't know you and by your initial comment to me you obviously don't know me either. Even if your car was boosted (I'll assume for now COBB's tune is legit and predict it probably is) you still need to drive the thing and you obviously did a good job at that this year.