Yeah that MR start was terrible, not even a tire chirp. It sounded like the stig just brake torqued it, and didn't engage the launch control like they did on the best motoring videos. That STI looked so sloppy on the track when Jeremy was driving, so much under steer.

 

Lol all of you must be formula one drivers to critique the stig... he beats those Formula One drivers BTW around that track.

As expected the stock X can't beat the IX when the driver is the stig, or anyone else capable. I predicted this result last September.

 

yeah i think it was even quoted in that show that the new X is better than the 9... he put it pretty plainly (just stirring the pot, awaiting evo 9 fan boys to rush in...)

 

The direct Clarkson quote is "I thought it would be impossible to make a four door saloon more exciting than the old Evo 9, but with the 10... they have."

Doesn't address the faster/better part.

 

No, the MR just sucks at launching because its an autotragic. You guys are overthinking this. He doesn't need a bunch of time to adjust to either car's electronics, he's the frakking Stig! Its not like his first lap ever in any car is the one they record for the show. This guy could take that stock SST Evo and make anyone in their car in this thread look like Mickey Mouse on a bicycle.

His prowess is easily seen in that understeering non-revving STI. He made it look like a racecar when Clarkson couldn't place it anywhere near where it was supposed to be on track.

 

It beat the VIII though, didn't it?

Put FQ 360 vs the FQ 360 and it'll be close. The UK IX has SAYC, and their X was an SST, so that comparo is not valid to the cars here in the US.

 

Most reviews place the SST faster on the track over the MT. I of course prefer the MT but just letting you know.

 

They say the MR is faster, which also gets Bilsteins, lighter wheels, different front rotors, etc. Their SST car didn't have the BBS wheels, what else does it not have that our MR does?

Those review places also probably do a running start, go after a warm up lap, or take the fastest lap of a series, not what Top Gear did. If the SST can't launch better than that, its really quite sad.

I'd not own an SST. I daresay I'd much rather have kept my IX than go to that transmission.

 

I think they should do the clean bumper test...Which car will keep the black soot off the rear bumper the best...This is the car that wins...LOL

 

I guess, that would be an anfair comparison. The STi can also be reflashed to 360 levels, and the FQ360 is nothing more than a reflashed GSR with a few bolt-ons.

 

In Europe we have SST GSR as well as MT MR, so that must have been an SST GSR.

 

SST vs. 5MT, It looks like the SST is in S-sport mode. It was definitely slower off the line and recovered lost ground after it got going.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg23MVJ-p8Y

 

Just watched it on youtube, the evo killed the sti.

 

I love Top Gear, but I was expecting a little more out of this comparison. I know that we all want to know how they do on the track, but I was hoping he would go a little more indepth into what each car is like day to day.

I must agree though, compared to the previous STi's, the new car is hideous. It may even be a good car, but the hatchback styling and body lines just arent as nice as all the previous WRXs.

I don't know, I guess I just expected a review similar to that of the Evolution FQ-400 vs the Lambo.

 

Jeremy's section was pretty sick... anyways, he did do an "indepth" review of the Evo X, but its written. Here's the link >> http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol...cle3812271.ece

Which probably explains why he prefered the Evo!

...btw, I also heard they did another segment on the Evo X on the show... anyone know which episode that was or have a youtube link to it?