Newest Road and Track EVO X and STI Comparison
Jan 25, 2008, 03:13 PM
#16
SO...everyone still want to row your own gears? it's cool the fastest lap put down by a professional race driver, who drives an open-wheel, paddle-shifted race car for a living, couldn't post a faster lap shifting by himself than the tc-sst could...reminds me of the fable of john henry against the steam shovel...
Jan 25, 2008, 03:17 PM
#17
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the bay, Cali
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SO...everyone still want to row your own gears? it's cool the fastest lap put down by a professional race driver, who drives an open-wheel, paddle-shifted race car for a living, couldn't post a faster lap shifting by himself than the tc-sst could...reminds me of the fable of john henry against the steam shovel...
Jan 25, 2008, 03:21 PM
#18
Evolving Member
I'm definetly likeing the STi more. Nicer interior, nicer overall looks. And they still have the EJ25, havent messed around and changed somthing that works. I was kinda unsure about the new hatch styling, but it is growing on me, and is a bit more mature than the previous cars'. STi>"Evolution" X
Jan 25, 2008, 03:22 PM
#19
We run on that road course all the time down here in Socal and anyone who's track seasoned will tell you that a 2.5sec. a lap gap on a short 1.7 mile road course is a lot. Things may have turned out a little different had they run on the less technical/faster sweepers course next door @ big Willow but who knows.
Nice video. The X looked great on course.
Nice video. The X looked great on course.
Jan 25, 2008, 03:53 PM
#20
well, i guess there will always be hold-outs, just like some people still think carby motors are god's gift. personally i find no pleasure in shifting anymore. I've perfected heel-toe rev-matched downshifts...and keeping the car from being un-settled...but still there are the occasional gear grinds and lock-outs at high rpm. plus, i dare not powershift for fear of grenading the tranny. I can't wait to step up to the tc-sst if it will handle basic mods (exhaust, intake, boost controller, and re-flash) good for about 350 whp. lightening fast shifting and a car that can shift better than a race driver. nice! oh...by the way, john henry died from exhaustion, while the steam shovel driver i'm sure was just focusing on where to dig...and probably eating a donut besides...
Jan 25, 2008, 03:58 PM
#22
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the bay, Cali
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jan 25, 2008, 04:11 PM
#23
Evolved Member
iTrader: (33)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know about everyone, but I do. Just like the personal challenge of potentially messing up under pressure (ie. driver error) and doing more than just steering. This to me is just more fun and satisfying and in the end....it is all about what makes it fun for you.
Jan 25, 2008, 04:39 PM
#24
Jan 25, 2008, 04:50 PM
#25
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boise, ID ->>> Concord, CA
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Did anyone else look at the comparison chart. It said that the 0-60 stopping distance for the GSR was 124 feet, I swear I read that it was 110 feet in another article. That's a big difference. Doesn't the Evo 9 have a 116 ft. stopping distance?
Jan 25, 2008, 05:48 PM
#26
The reviews are all going to be a bit different in the results because there are so many factors. The braking distance being worse in ths test could be the fact that the track wasn't as sticky as others (all tracks periodically have a chemical compound sprayed over it to give it more tack), or it could be that the drivers didn't mash on the brakes all the way not realizing it, etc... The gsr being faster in the 0-60 test is what surprised me the most. So, to all you haters/evo 9 fanboys, all I have to say is this: the first tests in al the magazines were all done with pre-production models, including the best motoring reviews, and now that the kinks have been worked out, EVERY magazine is rating the car at 4.9 0-60 consistenly, 1/4 mile only .3 slower than the evo 9, and the chassis, the MORE direct feel of the steering (even though the ratio is a hair slower), the ayc creating handling dynamics your 9s can only dream of, the motor's willingness to spend all day near it's rev limiter... EVERYTHING IS BETTER ON THE X. Get over it. I mean, you should welcome the x with open arms, it is afterall, the next version of one of the most incredible cars ever made. Your 9s are badass, but the x is better. Admit it, and move on.
Jan 25, 2008, 05:57 PM
#27
Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, another comparison victory for the EVO over the STI.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=6387
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=6387
For instance:
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...8/pageNumber=1
STI 13.3 @ 102.3 and 0-60 in 4.8 seconds.
Then there is this article:
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...6/pageNumber=1
The advantage the Subaru WRX STI has on paper materializes at the drag strip with a lunge to 60 mph in just 4.5 seconds. Its best quarter-mile result of 13.3 seconds at 100.3 mph eclipses the next quickest car in this test — the Mitsubishi Evo GSR — by a full 0.3 second.
The Mitsubishi Evo GSR requires a bit of finesse at the launch to avoid bogging down or, conversely, boiling the clutch into a putrid haze. In the end, it covers 60 mph in 4.9 seconds and the quarter-mile in 13.6 seconds at 101.3 mph.
And where's the Mitsubishi Evo MR during all of this? A few tenths behind the others. Preliminary estimates indicate the Evo MR runs to 60 mph in 5.2 seconds and through the quarter at 13.9 seconds at 98.8 mph,
And where's the Mitsubishi Evo MR during all of this? A few tenths behind the others. Preliminary estimates indicate the Evo MR runs to 60 mph in 5.2 seconds and through the quarter at 13.9 seconds at 98.8 mph,
Also, in the Edmunds Insideline test, the STI was only 0.17 to 0.26 seconds behind the GSR and MR (respectively) around a 1.6 mile track, which isn't very much at all, especially for a car that supposedly has horrible-into-the-trees understeer versus a car with Superotica AYC. I think there has been enough variations in the tests to say that the STI and Evo are pretty damn close (again) and it will boil down to the driver, setup, etc.
One guy had his 08 STI aligned and it had 0 degrees camber upfront. Wtf. How is that conducive to decent handling?
Sorry, I don't want to sound like I'm making excuses for the STI, but it seems people are (once again) ignoring all the positive reviews of the STI. In some reviews the STI is faster and stops better then, in other reviews, the Evo wins.
I'm really curious to see how these Dunlop SP600s stack up to the RE070s or the Advans. All I can say is thank goodness we get 94 octane up here in Canada.
