I've grown to like the looks of the WHITE base model STI. The fenders and **** are huge in proportion to the length of the car. The stance is w-i-d-e. I like that look.
If compared with the Evo, though, I personally favor the Evo over the STI for looks. I think that a slammed Evo with concave low offset rims looks so hawwt! That Jun car looks so good in the video going around the track...

 

sti in canada is 44k with navi, dvd, and bbs wheels. evo gsr with navi and dvd, with premium package is close to 46k and it doesnt come with 6spd which i really like.

i love both cars in every way front to back, but both have interior down falls, seats in the sti, cheap quality in the evo. other than that i love them exactly how they are.
there is a subie already in the family and i decided to go for the evo to be its darkside comptitor hahaha. =]

 

I use to think the new sti is soo ugly. The looks is starting to grow on me.

 

i like them both too. But i just like the X better.They did some stupid design problems and they can do only bandage on those . No real solution for that. Like the door rubbing on the fenders etc.
so i would stick with the X. Those test winner STI's dont forget always a JDM STI'S and never the USDM.

 

For stock cars. I don't know about you guys, but my cars stay stock all of 2 weeks before the modding begins. So overall platform capabilities are most important than initial performance characteristics that those magazines measure...and both of these cars are more than capable platforms. The STI's 2.5 motor can make a lot of power where the twinscroll 2.0 can't. The stratosphere is lower, but the usable torque is flatter. Although, that lightly tuned STI in the video exhibited excellent torque compared with the Jun Evo. It would rocket and squirm out of the corners, where the Evo would catch up with revs.

I remember back in the mid nineties when a stock mustang would kill a stock civic in every measurable performance test. Well, that didn't last very long when tuners got their hands on the Civic. Not exactly the same here but food for thought...

 

you are 100% wrong on the 2.0 vs 2.5 STI engine.
The 2 liter one destroys the 2.5 any time. It is a proven fact . Only reason they put the 2.5 liter in the non JDM STI . because it makes the car to build cheaper.

for mods the 2liter STI engine is very very good engine , kinda like the 4G63T.
Meanwhile the 2.5 is straggling to hold over 350 whp in stock internals.
And so on.

 

LOL...

Did you not read my post? I simply stated that the EJ207 can't make the power where the EJ257 can. They simply don't have the same torque characteristics. I wasn't judging the two. I'd love to have an old Impreza with a twin scroll EJ207 transplanted.

But being wrong isn't a bad thing, I suppose, every now and again.

 

sorry i miss understood.

 

My bad. I meant to say...

"...The STI's 2.5 liter motor can make power in CERTAIN RPM RANGES that the JDM 2 liter twin scroll can't..." namely the lower----->mid-range with a much flatter torque curve enabling a less peaky power delivery. The EJ257 may have weaker rods, rings, valve train than the EJ207, but that becomes an issue when pushed to nearly double the WHP output of stock on a good tune. Not bad.

Sure, revving the 2 liter to 8500rpms may have its strength on straights, but on tight technical circuits, where corner exit speeds are most important, the 2.5 liter is much more useful...or so that's how the time attack guys and auto-xers feel.

*edit* to say that the T/A guys remove the rev limiter on the 2.5 to get that extra rpm for the straights. Though, they replace the valve train and rods to accomidate the extra stress. Valve float is a common problem to the 2.5, but anyone who is seriously racing, even the 2.0, is strenghtening everything anyways...

 

i think you need look after more the 2l version. They make a tremendous torque.
Just like in the WRC. Most racers who have a chance to get those 2l version they all willing to pay more for that vs the 2.5
Even the new X engine, makes with crappy tune more / 10 tq factory / like the 2.5l sti engine.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...test_data.html

 

I agree about the 2.0 liter's *capability* to make torque. You could see it in the BMI video. BUT, those rally cars you are referring are displacement limited and have developed EXPENSIVE anti-lag setups to increase the torque.

My humbled opinion is based off of countless racing teams, IN THE US, that have chosen the 2.5 as engine of choice. Even the overall winning time attack car in the UK is running a 2.5 Cosworth engine. I think YOU should rethink the 2.5...


...or not.

 

both cars are almost even but sti has a little edge for power and weight.and like what everybody said, it all comes down to driver...i wanna see if they switch drivers, then we will find out the results, and that would be a more accurate way to tell which car is better... but for the looks evo x ftw hands down...the wagon doesnt appeal to my taste.....