thats a strong statement

 

especially coming from a Subaru owner
probably cuz it's a TS? (planning on getting one myself, actually).

In response to the thread, I would probably buy it if there was no EVO (As is the case in Canada )

 

Let me give you the reason why I say that. First of all, Subaru are sooo weak. Not in terms by power, but by strength of the body. A touch in any part of the body will give you a dent. I tried gentlly close the door with my knuckles and it gave me a big dent. The interior is kina cheap. It sucks in winter. One time during winter, the car got packed by snow underneath, I car was rasied off the ground by like 1.5 inches. Took me an hour to clear the snow out before I was able to control my car again.... Why get a AWD that does not do the job right...

 

i think any1 who had the money wouldn't mind an STI, but i mean like impreza and wrx, people would just get them because they look the exact same as sti...other than some minor things, like badges and rear spoiler... 4wd is attractive, power is attractive, the car is attractive too, i admit...but i stay loyal to mitsu, mainly bc mitsu makes more balanced cars while subaru goes for power... 2ndly, i lost respect for subaru when they gave the sti a 2.5 just to be able to beat the EVO in SOMETHING...

 

Um... deathstryfe, Subaru didnt really beat Mitsubishi on anything. Yes, they do have 500cc more than Evo, but if you notice this show call "Top Gear", they sent out the best stock Evo (Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII FQ320) verses the best stock STi (Subaru Imprezza STi WRX WR1) to race against the clock in their closed circuit track. STi did some aweful understeering (way way more than Evo). The finishing time for STi is 1:29.4 and the finishing time for Evo is 1:26.0. You see the difference? Even the Subaru STi WRX WR1 cant beat the previous version Evo, Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VIII FQ330.

That show did say that STi is a boy's car, but Mitsubishi Evo is a man's car. I love Mitsubishi.

 

+1

 

I think the STI is a nice looking car. I went to a dealer and he told me they started at 32k and had pretty much nothing in it, not even a radio. He also told me the new ones coming out where gonna be about 33k and now they come with a radio lol. Personally id rather spend the extra 3 or 4 thousand on the evo and spank the STI in power. I think if they lowered the price it be a tougher choice tho. We're all car enthusiasts i personnaly don't dislike any car since with lots of money you can make a car fast as hell. I just hate over priced stock sports cars that can't keep up with our stock evos lol.

 

Yeah, the lancer with stock turbo at 225hp is pretty much the SRT-4 but worse because the lancer wouldn't be awd. You'd be better off buying the SRT-4 or as i like to call it the still crappy dodge neon that hit puberty.

 

the srt4 is not awd.

 

i think the previous guy was talking about beating as in acceleration like in a 1/4. thsoe times you gave were on a track and we all know tha tthe evo has far superior suspension than the sti. he won bc he could take the corners better.

 

pgmike, a good car is not one that can drive really fast in a straight road. It is the how the car reacts during a corners and accerlation afterwards. If you want a car that can go really really fast in a straight road, get a rocket...

 

i never said that "a good car is one that drive raelly fast in a straight road". i was clarifying waht deathstyrfe meant by saying "beat". and anyway everybodys definition of a good car is different. yours is obviously not straight line performance but for otehrs it may be.

 

The Neon SRT4 isnt a nicer car than the Ralliart as it sits. It is faster in a straight line, but thats about it. I bought the RA for that very reason. Now if the RA was turbo and 225 hp you would have a nicer car AND the straight line performance all in one. AND IF the Lancer RA was turbo AND MIVEC I am going to go out on a limb and say the RA would be faster than the Neon even IF the Neon has a little more peak HP.

 

id take this supposed RA over the srt4 easy. however i wonder what the prie and power diff would be between a RRM TC'd RA and a Mitsu TC'd RA.

 

Of course RRM TC'ed RA will cost much less and more power than Mitsu TC'ed RA. But dont you forget that RRM TC is an aftermarket item. Therefore, it voids warranty if it malfunctions or causes the accident to happen. As you know, all stock turbos are not tune to their full potential. So all you need to do is tweek it a bit and you get it to be as fast as a RRM TC'ed turbo. Mitsu TC'ed RA will be more expensive because Mitsu will actually warranty the turbo and the car. So if your turbo malfunctions, you can get it to repair. Not to mention if your car crashes (knock of wood) because of the turbo, you will still get your car fix for free.