evo vs. sti. vs. R32
Jun 16, 2003, 01:52 AM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: irvine/fullerton, ca
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jun 16, 2003, 02:32 AM
#2
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow that seemed like a totally biased Pro-VW report. It seems very far off from what other reporters have said. Also, without a clear description of the course set up, How long the straights were, or if the course was set up to try to favor the less powerful R32. Also so saw that the 0-60 times aren't important is stupid. It might have been done a million times before, but it is the gold standard to evaluate a cars acceleration, with 1/4 mile times coming in a close second, but only for the better educated consumer. The R32 claimes a 6 second 0-60 time, with the STi breaking 5 and the EVo claiming 5.1 I mean, one 0-60 dash and that would account for the difference in lap times. How can this be ignored?? doesn't this make anyone else mad???
Jun 17, 2003, 07:10 PM
#3
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: irvine/fullerton, ca
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mean TT
Wow that seemed like a totally biased Pro-VW report. It seems very far off from what other reporters have said. Also, without a clear description of the course set up, How long the straights were, or if the course was set up to try to favor the less powerful R32. Also so saw that the 0-60 times aren't important is stupid. It might have been done a million times before, but it is the gold standard to evaluate a cars acceleration, with 1/4 mile times coming in a close second, but only for the better educated consumer. The R32 claimes a 6 second 0-60 time, with the STi breaking 5 and the EVo claiming 5.1 I mean, one 0-60 dash and that would account for the difference in lap times. How can this be ignored?? doesn't this make anyone else mad???
Wow that seemed like a totally biased Pro-VW report. It seems very far off from what other reporters have said. Also, without a clear description of the course set up, How long the straights were, or if the course was set up to try to favor the less powerful R32. Also so saw that the 0-60 times aren't important is stupid. It might have been done a million times before, but it is the gold standard to evaluate a cars acceleration, with 1/4 mile times coming in a close second, but only for the better educated consumer. The R32 claimes a 6 second 0-60 time, with the STi breaking 5 and the EVo claiming 5.1 I mean, one 0-60 dash and that would account for the difference in lap times. How can this be ignored?? doesn't this make anyone else mad???
Jun 17, 2003, 07:37 PM
#5
Evolving Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: North Central MA
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No kidding, you walk onto their turf expecting them to fellate you with EVO praise? For it being an all VW site, I'm pretty sure the Evo and STi got a fair shake. It'd be just like if EvoM did the same test, there's bound to be an Evo bias.
That being said, I'd rather own the R32.
Flame away.
That being said, I'd rather own the R32.
Flame away.
Trending Topics
Jun 18, 2003, 08:14 AM
#8
Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really the same class.
2 door versus 4 door
6 cyl. vs. 4 cyl
WRC bred EVO & STi versus street car
VW lost in acceleration and handling.
conclusion:
At the end of the test there was no one that wouldn't be happy in any one of these vehicles which speaks volumes about these cars. The decision concerning which one to buy will depend completely on your own tastes, preferences, needs and wants. If you want the fastest car in a straight line, the STi or Evo are your best choice. If you want the best handling car that is the easiest and funnest to drive, either the Evo or R32 will fit the bill. If you want something a little subtler with more creature comfort and a great sounding V6, the R32 may be your cup of tea. If you enjoy the rush of a turbo the STi and Evo will due quite nicely. All of this also depends on which car fits you better, which styling you like better, and a raft of other subjective things we can't decide for you. No matter which you choose, you can be sure that you are buying something special and unique that will place a perma grin on your face.
I like the Evo
2 door versus 4 door
6 cyl. vs. 4 cyl
WRC bred EVO & STi versus street car
VW lost in acceleration and handling.
conclusion:
At the end of the test there was no one that wouldn't be happy in any one of these vehicles which speaks volumes about these cars. The decision concerning which one to buy will depend completely on your own tastes, preferences, needs and wants. If you want the fastest car in a straight line, the STi or Evo are your best choice. If you want the best handling car that is the easiest and funnest to drive, either the Evo or R32 will fit the bill. If you want something a little subtler with more creature comfort and a great sounding V6, the R32 may be your cup of tea. If you enjoy the rush of a turbo the STi and Evo will due quite nicely. All of this also depends on which car fits you better, which styling you like better, and a raft of other subjective things we can't decide for you. No matter which you choose, you can be sure that you are buying something special and unique that will place a perma grin on your face.
I like the Evo
Last edited by Evil_Lution; Jun 18, 2003 at 08:16 AM.
Jun 18, 2003, 09:26 AM
#10
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Highland Park IL
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mean TT
Wow that seemed like a totally biased Pro-VW report. It seems very far off from what other reporters have said. Also, without a clear description of the course set up, How long the straights were, or if the course was set up to try to favor the less powerful R32. Also so saw that the 0-60 times aren't important is stupid. It might have been done a million times before, but it is the gold standard to evaluate a cars acceleration, with 1/4 mile times coming in a close second, but only for the better educated consumer. The R32 claimes a 6 second 0-60 time, with the STi breaking 5 and the EVo claiming 5.1 I mean, one 0-60 dash and that would account for the difference in lap times. How can this be ignored?? doesn't this make anyone else mad???
Wow that seemed like a totally biased Pro-VW report. It seems very far off from what other reporters have said. Also, without a clear description of the course set up, How long the straights were, or if the course was set up to try to favor the less powerful R32. Also so saw that the 0-60 times aren't important is stupid. It might have been done a million times before, but it is the gold standard to evaluate a cars acceleration, with 1/4 mile times coming in a close second, but only for the better educated consumer. The R32 claimes a 6 second 0-60 time, with the STi breaking 5 and the EVo claiming 5.1 I mean, one 0-60 dash and that would account for the difference in lap times. How can this be ignored?? doesn't this make anyone else mad???
vw has more luxurious interior and better quality interior then both evo and sti. Still in the end it didnt match evo's performance.
Jun 18, 2003, 10:35 AM
#11
Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Miami/Coral Springs, FL
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
uhhh why are they using words like "funnest" and "subtler" in an article that gets this much exposure. I'm not one to pick apart grammar, but that's like 2nd grade level **** right there.
Jun 18, 2003, 11:23 AM
#15
Evolving Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Pottstown, PA
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by ChillinEvoVIII
r32 is for lunch
r32 is for lunch
That said, I wouldn't mind owning any of those three cars.
