Nice try, but that doesn't prove anything.
I don't see a WRX or a Boxster S.
That's one track and one race, with one set of drivers at the wheels.
It shows the awesome handling abilities of the Evo 7 on a tight track.

 

Actually I was talking to Rafal, cuz he said the EVO 7 is slower then the boxster.

 

Oh, sorry. Well he sounds wrong.
I don't think slalom speed can be correlated to track performance-- unless someone can produce an analysis that shows that. It'll could be a good indicator but you won't be able to rank cars strictly by that.

 

evos are definatly faster than the boxter s.

 

I a little bit confused here.
I said R&T shows in their standard slalom speed test EVO7 slower then BoxterS and you counter this with a video where:

1st EVO
2nd 360 Modena (6 speeds)
3rd M3 (6 speeds)
4th EVO (GTA)
5th 360 Modena (F1)
6th M3 (SMG)

Did you get your coffee today?

As for my source here:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/features...?ArticleID=224
EVO7 - 68.7 mph
BoxterS - 69.7 mph

 

I'm skeptical about those slalom tests...especially if it's Road and Track...they're not always consistent. Why doesn't Evo magazine have those tests?

 

SCC found a 72.6 in their slalom for the 7.

 

Slalom times don't mean a thing.

Lap times from the Nurburgring, Boxster S, 8:32, Impreza GT Turbo(208hp 1st generation Impreza, slower than US WRX), 8:37. Sure it lost, but not by much. Considering how much more power, drivetrain, and suspension work in an STI or EVO, they would SMOKE a Boxster S. Just wish I had times to see by how much.

 

I doubt this one is not consistent. Great CART driver driving all test cars on the same day and same track. Read the article, it's quite good.

They do. I read a lot of on track comparisions in EVO. The difference is EVO puts more weight in a joy of driving not flat out performance. In their test many times wins not the fastest but the most rewarding car. Like the one where they called SuperlightR too scary to exploit (but it was the fastest that day).

 

Probably a different slalom. Hard to compare.

 

Listen, the Boxter S may be able to keep speed up faster in a slalom than an Evo (for the sake of argument). But, you see, they have these areas at the race track that they call straights. And the Boxster S lacks the power to come out of corners and for top speed on the straights. Unless the driver is terrible, the Evo will lay the smack down at the track. This is a silly discussion anyway

Erik in LA

 

Ah... There's a basic problem here. Slalom times are great for assigning a number to handling, something that people love to see when reading magazines, but it doesn't mean that a car has better or worse handling than another because it's numbers are different.

A slalom is around a bunch of cones on a flat surface, an utterly controlled condition. Bumps, armco, varying camber, differing surfaces, decreasing and increasing radius corners are not part of the equation. Let's look at an admittedly great-handling car, the Mini S, that absolutely dominates on the slalom. Does anybody tout it as being the top track car, then? No, because what works on the slalom doesn't translate as well to the track or the mountain roads.

Another equally misleading test is the skid pad. The M3 doesn't post anywhere near the same numbers as the Z06 on the skidpad, yet they are rated as being nearly equal on the track. Why? Because controlled conditions don't translate well to reality. And the skidpad doesn't test overall handling and grip as much as it tests what set of tyres a car comes with. Put a Honda Civic on slicks, and it will post incredible skidpad and slalom times too.

Cheers,

Paul Hansen

 

Another very large problem with slalom testing is that the width of the vehicle can actually make drastic differences in time. Wider cars have to physically traverse further to each side while narrower cars have the advantage which would not translate to track performance in any way whatsoever.

 

Nice try. I am not sure about EVO VII width but BoxterS is a bit wider then US EVO VIII.

 

I wasn't referring to any two particular cars whatsoever, just a bias that slalom testing has. Doesn't mean a wider car will lose to a narrower car every time; that all depends on the cars. I'm just saying width is another variable involved in the test; one which wouldn't really have any bering anywhere else.