I launch my car at 4750RPMs. Seems to work ok.

 

I drive '04 STi love both cars, great competition there (have yet to run into an EVO in my area though) but as for the price, with only 1000 being produced for the U.S. I really see no way they would bring the price below 35k...

 

Well looks like we need an MR now to keep up with the STI (stock for stock).
Kinda sad. Id still like to see an 05gsr versus an 05MR test.

While some of us are contemplating the MR versus the STI, there are also a ton of us trying to rationalize the cost between the gsr/mr. For those people...........there are still hangups.

 

Why? The only major difference between the standard Evo and the MR is the 6-speed.

The RS gets the aluminum roof, too.

 

Well I think the changes that would affect performance are: 6 speed, lighter wheels, lighter roof, suspension.

I think the sum is greater then its parts obviously from the comments in the article. Also, Neil comments it being 2sec faster then the 03 evo around Willow. Im wondering what the impact of the MR differences (gearbox, negligable weight savings, suspension) has on times versus the 05 GSR, thats all.

 

That's a great, complete article, and thanks for posting it. I'll be buying my own copy (can't beat the glossy photos!) as soon as I see it a the local bookstore, as I do with any magazine that features the Evo or STi.

 

Preach on brother Twan. I understand exactly what your dilemma is.

 

Please can you be more dramatic? Both cars are almost the same stats wise across the board and a simple tire change was mentioned that probably makes it even more equal. MR wheels may even fit the 05 STi so it's an easy swap. And I wouldn't even call this the "best" from Subaru, we're not comparing it to the Spec C.

Don't forget the things you can't simply add to the MR and not all has to do with performance.. IC water spray, cruise control, climate control, 6 cd, cool instrumental panel with shift light, classier interior, etc All these plus an arguably better build quality, warranty and less $ makes the Subaru a better buy in my opinion.

 

What we do know is that the 05MR was 2sec faster then the 03gsr around willow.
What I want to know is how much of that was attributed to the increase in hp, the addtion of the front lsd, and the addtion of the ACD (all avail on both the 05MR and the 05 gsr and how much can really be attributed to the slight weight savings on roof/wheels, the 6 speed, the suspension (these being the items that set the 05 MR apart from the 05 GSR.

I think Im asking for too much and overcomplicating this, lemme digress.

 

we're not comparing the best evo either, are we? (fq). however, your point about the interior is dead on. i'm excited about my mr arriving, but if i could install that sti dash w/those gauges, the shift light and the auto climate controls in my mr i would be thrilled compared to the relatively bland mr interior.

 

FQ isn't even available in Japan but "MR" and "Spec C" are and considered equals with similar powers. To compare with FQ I guess you would need the Type 25 to make it an Euro battle.

 

Obviously neither do I because even though the '04 STi put up better numbers than the '03 Evo, I own an '03 Evo. It's not all about the numbers, it's which one better fits your driving style and for me that's Evo. I also got to live with both cars for a year on our long-term fleet so I experienced both on a regular basis during that time.

I think that is what Chris was saying in the article, the Evo is more demanding, but it pays off in better performance while the Subaru is easier, less demanding to drive up to 10/10ths. The Mitsu not only came up some in performance for '05, but it is sooo much better as a daily driver in MR form. The Subaru is better also but it was already a decent daily driver in '04. The new steering and improved shifter in the Subaru are what impressed me most for street driving, while the Bilsteins on the MR are nothing short of amazing.

 

I think that, at best, an '05 GSR would be lucky to get within a second of the MR. The MR has a lower center of gravity thanks to the aluminum roof and those Bilsteins do a much better job of keeping the tires in contact with the pavement. Then there's the six speed-which which does a better job of keeping the new turbo on the whistle. I'd have to say the ACD has less to do with the number difference than any other new component simply because we ran it in tarmac mode which should have been similar to an Evo without ACD, according to my logic meter. My meter could be off, but we had good weather the day we tested and no need to select another mode. Chris had done so in the wet at the press launch and noticed the difference, but we were dry, hot and grippy on our test day.

 

The best USDM cars. I'm not concerned with Euro-spec or J-spec cars, they weren't the scope of the test. They're interesting to read about, but that's it.

A simple change of wheels, huh. So simple that SoA didn't do it themselves before releasing the car. Kind of like changing the ECU maps so the cars don't ping. Anyway, prove it to all of us that an STi with MR wheels and tires could beat an MR,then get back to me. Otherwise your claims are just that.

Better build quality? Prove it.
Better warranty? Nope. Best backed cars in the world. 5/60 b2b, 10/100 powertrain - maybe even free maintenance.
Less money? Don't know that either. But it doesn't matter. Mitsubishi already made a cheaper car that beat the STi, so what's wrong with having one more expensive this time?

 

You sound like you're on your PMS. No one said having MR wheels/tires on STi would make it beat the MR, it was just said to make it more even. Like I said JDM STi already has 235 tires, but they're not yet DOT approved for here.

MR will certainly cost more than the STi if not simply by limited quantities and markups. Mitsu's advertised warranty and actual is pretty funny topic too, I hope they're even in business in 10 years. STi cost more than EVOs before is well deserved being more equipped. MR is not better equipped than STi but cost more.