STi Evo
0-60 4.78 5.19
1/4 mile 13.36@100.2 14.01@96.5
490 ft salom 47.0 mph 48.01mph
200 ft skidpad .88g's .91g's
0-60 braking 114 feet 100 feet

 

just about expected. no suprises there

 

I disagree, Seems off, especially from reading the forums for a while and everyone posting their times. Also the Motortrend and car and driver articles are more crediable

 

These times are slow for the the Evo but even Motortrend admits their article is not credible, and promised their readers to retest the cars. Customer Evo won't do a 13 flat 1/4 stock, sorry.

 

I thought mitsubishi said the evo could get .99g's on the 200ft skidpad....

 

the reported skidpads have seemed really low considering what mitsu has reported with the 0.97 g's. I wonder what the conditions were when mitsu ran their test vs what the mags conditions were.

 

Oh please, this autoweek article is definitely more credible than the motortrend one.. motortrend overstated the figures, and yes autoweek's appear to be somewhat understated..

But really, I think there'd be a helluva lot more Evo owners out there getting the figures reported by Autoweek, than by motortrend. I could count the number of people getting a 13.08 or better 1/4 mile in a stock Evo on one finger.

..and don't flame me just because I intend to purchase a STI, use some common sense.. which seems to be in short supply on both this forum and NASIOC when it comes to these vehicles.

 

these two cars are so close that it is going to come down to driver and even at that neither will smoke the other. personal preference i say. if you like the STi get one if you like the EVO get one just dont be dicks and say the other person is a poo poo head for choosing either.

 

Road and Track did get .97 g. No big deal here. Every skid pad is different, and so are the conditions.

Warm your tires up, cool them down, test the car brand new, on dusty skidpad, on a skidpad where another car has just burned hot rubber into the pad, in the heat, in the cold, when your tires have 1000 miles on them, when your tires have 5000 miles on them........you will get different results.

 

Yeah, I think for direct comparisons between the STI and Evo, as long as the skidpad/driver/conditions are the same then the actual results aren't as important as the difference between those results.

 

I thought some of the evos hit like 13.5 or somethin...i know they can get low 13's

 

Some Evo's probably can get low 13's, but not Road and Tracks, or Autoweeks, or Automobiles or Car and Drivers. Take that as you may.

 

Aren't those magazines located in California? I fell the lower numbers are due to that.

The Evo should be faster than that. The STi is faster however. Who cares? I sure don't. What I hoped for was the handing to be better. It sounds that all magazines gave that to the Evo

Thanks,

 

You should care! The faster Subaru make the STI, the more likely it is that Mitsubishi will also look at matching or bettering on the next generation Evo.. and vice versa..

We're all reaping the rewards and I'm certainly more than interested in how things go with the Evo, even though I currently plan to get a STi..

The STI has more in common with the Evo than it does with the WRX.. I think it would be pretty cool to have STI/Evo meets rather than keeping them oriented by manufacturer as is generally the case with these forums.. we need more of a community spirit going between the two camps..

..probably just a pipe dream.

 

If you are ever able to buy or drive an STi you will understand what I mean Speed was never a factor on my decision to purchase the car. Now, if can improve even more on road feel and responsiveness I am all for that. The problem I see is: for the past 8 generations, Subaru has not been able to challenge the Evos on that department. I don't see things changing unless Subaru makes some radical changes on the present set up!

Please take this with a grain of salt, my opinion is based on present and past reviews of drivers and magazines.

P.S.: Going back to my last post. I still think the lower numbers are due to 91oct gas