AMAZING!!!! an ON-topic post!!!!

 

Great post Paul!!

Just curious, what track is this because 2 seconds is an eternity... well maybe not so much at the Ring. Was this EVO7 a GSR because really the comparision should be made with an RS, wouldn't you agree?

Whoa I'm going to have to do some research on that puppy. Is that one of their regional only models like some of the AUDM only WRX's, UKDM only P1/UK300/RB5?

Wonder how much of a difference the standard gearing on the Type RA's (as opposed to the shorter gearing previous Type R/Type RA's were endowed with) make on a track now?

 

It was a Japanese track, not Tsukuba circuit. I think the time difference would have been narrower if it was. I didn't pick up that magazine like I normally would have, I was rushing to get my brake calipers and whatnot installed that day.

It was a direct comparison between the JDM STI type C and the JDM Evo VII, and I would like to say an RS version, but I don't have the article in front of me. I wouldn't say it's impossible that they tested it against an GSR vs. an RS, but I would generally believe that they would have picked a fully optioned RS (not the stripper with the 15" rims and small brakes). The interesting thing about that article is that they tested it with professional drivers and non-professional drivers. The gap was even larger with the non-pro's, something that was interesting to me, since it's generally felt that the systems in the Evo VII made it easier for non-pro's to go fast. I wouldn't say that this is the be-all end-all of the comparisons, traditionally when either the Evo or STI gets faster than the other, the next model series swaps it around again.

Given what looks to be a broader torque band on the STI type C vs. the previous models, the longer gearing may actually be a bit of a benefit, especially if a longer track is used. It's hard to say myself without driving them back to back at a track. That said, my friends STI type RA Coupe (ver. IV) isn't that bad even at Motegi.

Paul Hansen

 

if you like comfort and don't intend to modify the engine (and you prefer understeer) get the STi. If you like upgrading performance, get the Evo which is a better platform.

 

So lets see if I have this right. You take a standard Scooby, modify it and call it an STi. You then modify it further and call it the RA and then race it against a standard Evo, whether it is the GSR or RS. And finally it wins. Congrats to Scooby, they finally have caught up with the Evo

Now lets think what happens when you want to go faster! With only a small amount of tuning, the Evo would leave the STi RA for dead, but how much more can you get out of the RA and how much would it cost? Just to start with, the Evo is still on standard suspension, while the RA is certainly not! Just ask Claudius how much difference good suspension makes!

I suspect that the Evo used was the RS, because without the electronics it is harder for a non-professional to drive fast than a GSR. IMO, the difference between a pro and non pro would be most obvious in the RS.

As somebody has already said, if you are not going to modify the car, then consider the STi, but remember that a standard STi is slower than an Evo. You need to get the RA if you want to compete against the Evo.

 

snelson,

agree with you. have been to the track with 15-18 scoobys (after a while they all look the same) some STi and some RAs, some of the cars were very heavily modified, AP brakes, anti-lag, all kinds of Pro Drive stuff. Given that my car is not exactly standard, I could keep up with most of them (which is pretty good seeing that I have no driving talent and it was my first time).

Have also driven a few scoobys over the years, first thing to do is change the suspension to correct the handling.

 

One - the RA STI has been around for ages - it's to the STI what the RS is to the Evo series. It's not on a modified suspension. It does have revised front suspension geometry, which will probably show up in next years version of the STI. ie, the reason why Evo's and STI's have version numbers, they update quite frequently.

The Evo is a modified Lancer - a modified version of the base, 120hp FWD Lancer. It's no different than the STI in that regard. The difference is that the base Lancer does not compete with the base WRX turbo.

STI and Evo's have been duking it out for *years*. Why do you think they are in version VII right now for both models? This may be news to some people, but there's been a big back and forth between the two makers in making the best WRC machine.

And finally, there seem to be quite a few owners of STI's that modify them, so it's possible that people think that it's an adequete platform in it's own right. The real truth of the matter is that it's going to depend on the driver more than the car - the Evo and the STI are close enough together that there's no clear-cut picture of superiority.


Paul Hansen

 

Nice one Billy... and another one on my ignore list, congrats penguin

 

Paul

I just "phoned a friend" about the suspension on R/RA cars. He has owned 4 of them and he insists that the suspension on these cars is not the same as a standard STi. In fact, he says that there is a choice of suspension that you can specify for the car, non of which are the same as the standard STi. While I don't know about this, I suspect he does

BTW, my friend now lives in Australia so it cost me an international call to check!!!!

 

I dunno, I live right here in Tokyo. I honestly cannot remember any specific literature on the "different" suspension vs. the standard STI other than the revised geometry - specifically to reduce understeer.

You can order different suspension settings from STI, but given that your friend lives in Australia, I can't say what Subaru of Australia supplies. Of course, he's not talking about imported STI's, right? If so, then he got whatever they came with as used vehicles.

And you could order differing suspension settings from Ralliart for the Evo's I'd wager, given that it offers different suspensions setups also.

Let's put it this way - the test where the STI RA Type C came out on top was *no different* than many of the other tests that have taken place in the past in regards to the various versions of the STI's and Evo's. Subaru didn't organize the competition, the magazine did. They probably did what they always do - asked Subaru and Mitsubishi for their fastest stock versions of either car. This time, the STI came out on top. I'm willing to wager that within a year or less, there will be another comparison vs. a Lancer Evo RS VIII vs. the Type C STI RA, and the Evo VIII will come out on top.

Paul Hansen

 

Nihongo shaberun darou ka, shiro?

 

anmari jyouzu janaiyooo

Paul

 

Ah, so ka. Maa, yappari chotto shaberun da. Ain't that funny!

 

Konichiwaa! Excuse my spelling!

I run struts/spring off a JDM RA on my lil Impreza RS and it gives me a fair bit of body roll.

From what I understand the suspension on STi Type R/RA's, is just standard JDM WRX fare... not even as good as a regular STi suspension which is quite firm and perhaps in that regard, better suited to makeshift tarmac duty.

Type R's and RA's have traditionally been stripped down competition models (ie.no AC, roof vent, no power windows, little if any undercoating, lightweight bumper beams, etc) when compared to the regular STi models... and as such were destined for rallying action where most teams strip down the body for some choice acid dipping.

When they rebuild it, they put some real suspension on and chuck away the old suspension so no sense in driving the cost up unnecessarily by fitting better stock suspension when you're just going to chuck the stock components anyway.

IMO this is why the STi Type R's and RA's should be compared directly to the EVO7 RS and not even the RS2.

Also you can compare a regular STi to EVO RS2's, RSX's, GSR's. Yes there are differences but they are not extreme and this comparision is close enough that the driver will make the difference.