Newest Road and Track EVO X and STI Comparison
Jan 25, 2008, 08:12 PM
#31
Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're really going to have trouble selling that argument to some people because everyone is not looking for the same thing.
While I agree the X a much better car in a technical sense, the sharpness of the IX was a major reason I bought it rather than an STi, for example. They specifically mention that the X doesn't feel as sharp, even though it handles well, etc etc. It all depends what you're looking for in a car as to whether it's better or not.
OTOH, it was indeed awesome to watch them tossing the X around the track. Looks like a blast!
While I agree the X a much better car in a technical sense, the sharpness of the IX was a major reason I bought it rather than an STi, for example. They specifically mention that the X doesn't feel as sharp, even though it handles well, etc etc. It all depends what you're looking for in a car as to whether it's better or not.
OTOH, it was indeed awesome to watch them tossing the X around the track. Looks like a blast!
Jan 25, 2008, 09:57 PM
#32
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Fort Myers, Florida
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check out the latest C&D...has the new CTS-V on the cover. In a three-way shootout between the X, STI and R32, the X came in first, R32 second and the STI third. The STI was slower 0-60 than the Evo and a tenth slower in the 1/4 mile, calling it a toss up. The X engine seemed to have a broader power curve than the STI which was apparently asleep below 4K rpm. Dynamically, there was no comparison and the X was a far better driver's car than either. I'm surprised the STI came in behind the R32 however. The STI had bags of understeer and wasn't as good as the other two in the twisties.
Jan 25, 2008, 09:59 PM
#34
Evolving Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check out the latest C&D...has the new CTS-V on the cover. In a three-way shootout between the X, STI and R32, the X came in first, R32 second and the STI third. The STI was slower 0-60 than the Evo and a tenth slower in the 1/4 mile, calling it a toss up. The X engine seemed to have a broader power curve than the STI which was apparently asleep below 4K rpm. Dynamically, there was no comparison and the X was a far better driver's car than either. I'm surprised the STI came in behind the R32 however. The STI had bags of understeer and wasn't as good as the other two in the twisties.
Jan 26, 2008, 11:48 AM
#35
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the bay, Cali
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check out the latest C&D...has the new CTS-V on the cover. In a three-way shootout between the X, STI and R32, the X came in first, R32 second and the STI third. The STI was slower 0-60 than the Evo and a tenth slower in the 1/4 mile, calling it a toss up. The X engine seemed to have a broader power curve than the STI which was apparently asleep below 4K rpm. Dynamically, there was no comparison and the X was a far better driver's car than either. I'm surprised the STI came in behind the R32 however. The STI had bags of understeer and wasn't as good as the other two in the twisties.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
camlob
Evo General
7
Dec 23, 2008 08:00 AM
spt
The Loft / EvoM Car Talk Corner
15
Apr 10, 2008 05:47 PM
gl4662
Evo General
28
Feb 13, 2005 11:48 AM
