I have a serious question. Is it still "puke and die" when the torque "pukes" to 320foot lbs and never drops below 200 foot lbs from 4000-redline? Or, in other words. The torque never registers below the maximum peak torque of a b16 at any point on the dyno plot (including at 2500 when tipping into the throttle)?

and i pointed out your little calcs are off and misleading.
i also dont go wot all over the place...do you? off a light its a nice normal accel and the car doesnt really do well. if i do go 1/2 throttle or more it doesnt really move till 4k rpm. which is supported by your stock dsm dyno graph.
then it hits the nice wave of torch...if you keep going itll pull nicely till 6kish and then fall on its face.

heavier , less aggressively geared, lower compression... doesnt have the response even a little n/a motor has. sorry it just doesnt. its also not faster , you even said it yourself(but you ninja edited it out, ya i saw it)

the talon runs well, you have no idea whats been done to it or the care that has been taken with it.

my civic has i/h/e.

i live in a world were stock dsms run 15's ..and shit so do I. modded changes it for anything. but it still doesnt take away from a heavier car, with less agressive gearing and less compression is not going to be as responsive booting around town(1-4k rpm) as an n/a motor...i know its hard for you to grasp, but i drive them everyday.

from a roll btw, the talon barely pulls my civic(my dsm isnt bone stock), obviously out of the hole its gone lol awd.

I said its a dog out of boost and pretty much below 4k rpm compared to the b16(which is it)... blah blah blahi know wtf is up.

Also the 14b rocks.

Truth. I don't notice much difference between the 50 trim and my 14b when partial throttle racing. I'm not sure why, maybe its the lack of boost, but that is just a guess.

The older cars did suck off throttle. Part of the reason was the compression. Most of it was due to the horrible stock mapping though. I've heard that evo 8's aren't so great off throttle but I've never driven one. I drove a stock evo 9 once and it was quite horrible. Fixing up the maps and they are quite peasant to drive and return better gas mileage. I don't know why mitsubishi does this.

Also the 14b rocks.

EDIT:

also by "sucking off throttle" that doesen't mean that it isn't acceptable. It can just be made tons better.

why is it stupid to argue that? it wasnt even an argument it was an observation that people got all pissy about making it into an argument.
people bitch about low end torque "problems" on all kinds of cars especially honda...so i brought it up as being something that is annoying and sucky on the dsm(which it completely fucking is) and all hell breaks lose...god forbid i say anything like that.... i only have the two damn things.
the two cars are in the same performance bracket imo.... (stock straight line speed speaking...obviously the Si is a way better overall car....dont even try to argue handling lol)

its pretty obvious you are one of the many retards that we all see at the track churning out shat times in a honda... you even openly admitted you werent that good. (what correction do you need to do if that track is at sea level?)
the first pass of my entire life i went 15.5 @89. i had had the car for 6 months maybe. first stick car.
brought it down to 15.3 for that day. went back a second time and turned out a handful of 15.1's @ 90.xx mph. bone stock(1.6l) with an intake. stock exh mani ,cat and catback. all times backed up many times over the years.

i fap about both cars... ive fapped a lot about the dsm in many threads, but i dont expect you to pick on it, half the time you probably think im talking about the Si. not my fault. I also bitch about the Si plenty, but thats not attention getting so it gets passed over and probably goes unnoticed many times .(and dont tell me no.... i know wtf i post).

my Si has a 1.8L bottom now...so what? now thatll get into a whole other argument if you want it to...one that ive had with local guys many times...that the extra 0.2L does jack shit. its all in the head.
but we can avoid that for now. the dsm has been around my family for 6 years ... i had 1.6L back then. i felt the same way back then too.

obviously power/weight (among other things) comes into play. nowehre did I say the 4g makes less power ...its rated at 195 from the factory ...no shit it makes more power .
I said its a dog out of boost and pretty much below 4k rpm compared to the b16(which is it). as i said i know its hard for you guys to accept it and blah blah b16 torque yada yada. i drive these two cars back to back all the time. im the only fucking one in here to do it. ive been driving both of them for yearssss, both in various states of tunes and mods. i know wtf is up.

if you think an Si cant run with a gsr or prelude, you have smoked yourself retarded.

you ran a mystical 14.7 with bolts on man... plenty enough to roast gsr's or ludes.

Im done dude,you're worse than a waste of time. Like herpes,scratching you just makes it worse.

gear ratios, weight etc all play a role yet you want to ignore it.

now weve heard another epic thing. dsms are good at handling. LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL... i never said the Si was a stellar handler(but of course you want to shit the bed and take it that way) but its better than a fucking 1g dsm

you never mentioned that...regardless i always thought of that as a very quick(not normal) time...

in my experience gsr, lude and Si is a drivers race..... could it be because my car could turn out 91-92 mph traps? maybe, but in my experience those races could go either way(provided they were driven well... not driven well would be the loser regardless)

hrmm maybe now that I have a header I should go to the strip and see what it can do

ps cliff: i wish my car blew up that wouldve been fun, but thats not what happend

have you ever seen a dyno? lol. driven one, own one? no, i do.

well I guess that would make sense.....if you were right and had any clue what you were talking about. LOL