Notices
Evo X General Discuss any generalized technical Evo X related topics that may not fit into the other forums.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: CARiD

EVO X vs STI - Tsukuba Lap Times

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 11:13 AM
  #1  
BlackTrack's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,223
Likes: 0
From: Minneapolis
EVO X vs STI - Tsukuba Lap Times

I just found this on Autoblog, thought some people may be interested...


http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/05/e...uba-lap-times/

Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X : 1:06:46

Subaru Impreza WRX STI : 1:05:95

So there you have it. The new engine placed further forward in the engine bay of the EVO X than in the EVO IX has indeed proven to be a handicap, while the STI's "wheel at each corner" longer wheelbase plus new double wishbone rear suspension has proved its worth.
Im sincerely disappointed in the Evo X so far

-Ryan
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 11:19 AM
  #2  
Canexican's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 700
Likes: 2
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Originally Posted by BlackTrack
I just found this on Autoblog, thought some people may be interested...


http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/05/e...uba-lap-times/



Im sincerely disappointed in the Evo X so far

-Ryan
Who isnt.
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 11:27 AM
  #3  
eddie's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
I was actually expecting a bigger gap between the two cars considering the weight difference. IMO, not as bad as anticipated.
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 11:29 AM
  #4  
Canexican's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 700
Likes: 2
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Originally Posted by eddie
I was actually expecting a bigger gap between the two cars considering the weight difference. IMO, not as bad as anticipated.
yes, but the fact remains, its still slower...the IX never had that problem.
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 11:36 AM
  #5  
Hanzo's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
From: VA
The article said both wasn't as fast as earlier model but they forgot to mention some of those fast times in the low 5s and 4s are the special light weight model like the Spec C RA-R and RS.
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 12:06 PM
  #6  
jackygor's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
From: VANCOUVER BC
Well, we all kind of expected that STI will be faster than the Evo X after watching BM....

But like someone mentioned above, I am surprised that the time gap between STI and Evo X wasn't bigger.
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 12:13 PM
  #7  
LivinJUGGERNAUT's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
From: Orlando
WOW, even more evidence that all that posturing Mitsu has been doing is all bullcrap and they have been lying us.
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 12:16 PM
  #8  
nEVOr_slow's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Originally Posted by Canexican
yes, but the fact remains, its still slower...the IX never had that problem.
Actually, if you look at the autoblog link, it appears that the IX _was_ slower than the STI.

Copy/paste for the lazy (like me!):

EVO / STI

2006 1:05:07 / 1:04:72

2005 1:04.88 / 1:04:17

2003 1:05:30 / 1:04:69

2001 1:05:17 / 1:06:56

1998 1:04:69 / 1:06:73

1996 1:07:00 / 1:05:92

1994 1:06:52 / 1:06:26

1992 1:10:90 / 1:07:99

[Source: CAR Top magazine]
Of course, these are just the times from one source. I seem to remember lots of Best Motoring battles where the IX was faster.

Last edited by nEVOr_slow; Dec 5, 2007 at 12:18 PM.
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 12:23 PM
  #9  
X_Dragon's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
thats becuase they offer the Spec C models in japan.. they've always walked on evo's
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 12:23 PM
  #10  
EvoIXMR's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (66)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 0
yeah, I cannot believe IX, VIII or VI was slower....
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 12:36 PM
  #11  
eddie's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Canexican
yes, but the fact remains, its still slower...the IX never had that problem.
Well according to the article the Evo was almost always slower then the STI since inseption. If you want to base your purchase on bench numbers alone then why did you buy a IX over an STI?
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 12:51 PM
  #12  
evilution310's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
From: LA
Originally Posted by eddie
Well according to the article the Evo was almost always slower then the STI since inseption. If you want to base your purchase on bench numbers alone then why did you buy a IX over an STI?

last time I check the evo runs the faster times in the
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 01:07 PM
  #13  
asdfasdf128's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (60)
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
From: Nu Jerzey
STI pwns Evo X

Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X : 1:06:46

Subaru Impreza WRX STI : 1:05:95



http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/05/e...uba-lap-times/
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 01:10 PM
  #14  
Canexican's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 700
Likes: 2
From: Pittsburgh, PA
You've just been issued a citation for a repost. - Repost Police
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2007 | 01:14 PM
  #15  
asdfasdf128's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (60)
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
From: Nu Jerzey
fack...
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:05 AM.