Parikh1234

iTrader: (2)

no they dont, cause then id have to buy an STI and I really really dont want to do that

Rootus

Subaru needs to get their act together? More like Mitsubishi needs to. In the past the Evo has been forgiven for being a low quality unreliable car because it was a terror at the track. The STI has always been a far more reliable car, and much better suited to be a daily driver/weekend warrior machine. This year, the X is still low quality, perhaps even more unreliable than in years past (how about those pedals -- it's been more than one, now ) .... but no longer is the performance there. 14 second quarter mile? 5.x 0-60? This is not particularly impressive for a $40K car. Neither the STI nor the Evo can make much of a claim for bargain basement performance rocket any more, but at least the Subaru still has the reliability and daily utility. Looking at sales between the two, it looks like Subaru's plan is working out better. At the rate Mitsu is going, I'd not be surprised if there isn't an Evo XI, at least here in the U.S.

mike100

iTrader: (4)

The SST is looking to be the track transmission of choice, but the rest of the MR doesn't hold up to being the ultimate evo option package. Why did they soften up the suspension on the MR? it has repeatedly shown slower slalom speeds and looks to have a lot of body roll.

anyways...the GSR is the model for me for several reasons.

Noize

iTrader: (24)

Unreliable? The 4G63 was infinitely more reliable than the EJ257. And AFAIK, we haven't seen a 4B11 go down yet on here.

I don't know if you read the end of the article, but that slow automatic 14 second MR donkey punched that underseteering pig of a 13 second STI on the mountain road by almost four seconds.

What if there is no Evo XI? Well, I guess the VIIIs, IXs, and Xs will just keep kicking the crap out STIs on track.

News flash: You're on an Evo board. Most of the members would risk the 0.05% gas pedal failure in an Evo than drive a non revving, tiny turbo with miles of exhaust piping pre-snail, rod bearing spinning, heat soaking TMIC having STI. Your car is an 06, so tractor gearing gets added onto the list for you.

PS: The STI has come in dead_freaking_last in almost every US mag comparo that is out there between these cars. And more than one mag even picked the VW R32 over the STI. That's just sad, man.

slicedbreadno2

iTrader: (9)

I'm fairly surprised how good the Evo did and how bad the Sti did. Also all these cars need a fairly different driving style that is why probably they kept on referring as to how easy the Evo and GTR were to drive because of the advanced AWD mechanics(AYC,ACD,Twin clutch transmission) The Subaru IMO is more of a driver's car it has nothing fancy that helps it understeer less or take corners faster. Imagine if it did. It would of definitely have come in a higher place than the Evo.

It just seems that the only reason the Evo does so good is because of how the computer aids it so much, and if you decide to drive another car you'll just do terrible because you aren't advancing your driving skills whilst the STI you will learn to control it better and become a better driver. If I had a choice between any of those cars I'd definitely get the Lotus or Sti. Also this is only one lap, how consistent will the times be when the enormous weight of the Evo and GTR takes their tow and they start losing grip and understeering and the brakes start fading.

Thegame

iTrader: (26)

The whole point you're missing is the fact that the "driver" element is removed from this comparison because the same driver drove all the vehicles. He is a professional driver and regardless of AWD assist mechanisms and such, the same guy was behind the wheel for each test. I don't really see why guys use the arguement of "well so and so car is more of a drivers car. It's faster if a pro is driving." Guess what? 99% of all guys who race are not pros! Why would you want to buy a car that is impossible to drive? Also, what's the difference between AYC and coilovers? Both enhance the handling of the car. Or how about R-comps vs. All seasons?

And as for your STI comment... the Evo VIII MR was once quoted by Car and Driver as being the harder of the two to drive, but it still whooped it's ***!

dcasandman

I like this comparo. I would luv to see edmunds allow the EVO and STI to atleast be tuned ECU wise to see the outcome. All the other cars cost double, so a 1k tune wouldnt upset the cost balance.

jimm

iTrader: (3)

Probably what the rest of the teams in F1 thought when Williams came out with their car in 1992...guess what? the computer assisted car won out. Alain Prost at the time said he thought it required MORE from the driver because it stretched the limits so the driver was required to understand more for setup and to concentrate more because they were going faster and that is a 4x WDC who won 51 races in the top form of circuit road racing.

fmly evo

iTrader: (4)

Well my thoughts are as follows the evo X seems more and more like a great deal for the money and the performance with boltons...

I'd be super pissed i wasted my money on buying an STI, i don't even think it would win in a rally event over an evo X.

I am super pissed i will not be able to afford a R35 unless i hit the lottery cause i want that car bad!!!!! that is just a mean american muscle killin machine oh and you could probably add italian machine!!!!

i need to hit the lotto

STevo

4-G-rim

iTrader: (1)

Thats pretty funny, though I am sure if Chevy had a Corvette ZR1 to give they would.

The Evo X being up there with the top 3 along with the GTR and R8, thats is very respectable.

EvoX326

With its stability control switched off and its Super Active Yaw Control precisely directing drive to the appropriate contact patch, the Evo found itself 2nd only to the GT-R in the fastest segment on the mountain road. Its peak speed through this section of road was 1.5 mph faster than the R8. There's more confidence here through fast transitions than in any other car.

jimm

iTrader: (3)

Well considering you can have an EVO for around 30K and OTD for 3K less than the base STI, you could easily get the leather interior which is really the main advantage for the STI...of course you still don't get the Recaro seats in the USDM STi so I still say the EVO has an advantage.

As for overall quality the new STi has issues...Much much worse paint issues, a stop sale on some models...not to mention that the STI basically need roll bars and springs pretty much out of the box. As for sales..where i am from, there were 6 STis and 8 Evos on that have been on sale at 3 different dealerships. 2 new STis have sold while 5 EVOs have sold.

MrBonus

iTrader: (4)

I paid around $31,000 OTD for my Evo. Find me a new STi at the price so I can not buy it again.

kRT

It sounds like you consider terminal understeer and poor handling a sign of greatness. My Chevrolet pickup is all about that, maybe you'd prefer it to the Evo?

I define a "driver's car" as one you're more likely to enjoy. If it has electronics, they should contribute to the experience by being transparent and giving you greater confidence than you would otherwise have. Really, this applies to anything; an engine tune, suspension, whatever. The Corvette's stability control and the Evo's transmission and AYC are great examples; even the race-car drivers leave them on.

By that standard, the Evo is a better driver's car than the STi. Better, even, than the Lotus Elise. The Edmunds people say the Elise scared the bujeezus out of them, and it's about as stripped to the essentials as a car can be. If you're too afraid to push a car, it isn't much for driving. In that vein, I've never understood the undercurrent of machismo about doing it all yourself. Anyone with ABS is already reliant on computers whenever they mash the brakes on a wet road. Is the Evo less of a driver's car because you don't have to start it with a hand crank?

Anyway, Subaru's error wasn't losing to the Evo. By moving to the hatchback configuration and raising the price, they've priced themselves out of the market. In this country, we tend to consider hatchbacks downmarket, and Subaru doesn't even have the brand prestige of VW. There's no way the STi is worth 36K relative to the 135i, the GTi, the Evo GSR, or most especially, the Mazdaspeed3. It's easily 5K too expensive.

EVOL2003

iTrader: (4)

didnt they say the mr was auto.....i think it would have faired much better if it was manual