Evo11V

iTrader: (18)

My friend was telling me about a magazine i think motor trend (a recent one) that said the Evo was faster then the STI in everything. 1/4 mi, 0-60 breaking. Every stat was higher then the STI anyone know why since they were both stock?

MP5

iTrader: (4)

Hes wrong line up against a STi in a stock evo and draw a picture of that ugly wing

DGS

Haven't seen a recent one, but I saw the comparo R&T did in June.

Straight line braking went marginally to the EVO, because it has larger front rotors than the STi (14.0 vs 12.7). (The STi's rear rotors are slightly larger than the EVO's so braking in turns may be different -- but that's largely a matter of driver, anyway.)

0-60 went marginally to the EVO, because the STi has a 6-speed box, and has to make an additional shift to reach 60. The EVO can pull to 60 in 2nd, so it just edged out the STi. In the quarter, R&T's run went marginally to the STi.

A local shop did some 4WD dyno readings on a stock EVO and STi. Despite the different engine ratings, they both put about the same to the wheels.

On the skidpad, remember that the EVO wears sticky 235 series Advan tires, versus the 225 series Bridgestones on the STi.

Most magazine articles I've seen prefer the STi, because it's "more civilized" in daily driving:: In other words, the more responsive steering of the EVO doesn't let you "zone out" in daily traffic -- you have to pay attention to your driving. For me, that's an endorsement for the EVO.

If you're going to be upgrading from stock anyway, you could do well with either platform. If you want maximum "out of the box" handling, go for the EVO.

Either one is better than galumphing along in a truck.

webguy330i

iTrader: (17)

DGS, just a slight correction, the Evo has 12.6" (320mm) front rotors, not 14".

mprtklr

iTrader: (7)

WRONG.

Front EVO brakes are 14.0
Rear EVO brakes are 12.0

see this
http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...2003134229.pdf

Bogie

iTrader: (11)

It was in the June issue of Motor Trend. It was not a comparison test--the cars were run in two seperate tests. Allow me to quote MT, "Although we tested both with the same driver and timing gear, we believe the surface we ran the Evo to be slightly grippier. This won't affect acceleration (these are AWD cars, so little wheelslip is involved), but would give the Mitsubishi a handling and braking advantage."

It was in that very issue that we see the Evo's best published performance numbers: 0-60: 4.59, 1/4 mi: 13.08@105.12, 60-0 106 ft, 600-ft slalom: 71.4 mph.

webguy330i

iTrader: (17)

LOL, mprtklr they are 12.6". R&T messed up, plain and simple. Go out and measure them yourself. FYI rears are 11.8". Do you realize that with 14" rotors and the matching 4-pot calipers that you'd likely need at LEAST an 19" wheel to clear them?

webguy330i

iTrader: (17)

It was also believed to be that Mitsu fed M/T a ringer car to boost pre-sales performance stats hype.

webguy330i

iTrader: (17)

Correction from above post, 14" rotors can fit under 18" wheels.