Garage419.com Compares Evo X & New STi. Video.
Apr 24, 2008, 09:20 AM
#62
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one can deny that both cars are great but, come on, the STI engine and tranny bulletproof? And easily capable of twice the stock hp? The fact alone that the engine is a boxer makes it much more vulnerable (almost twice the moving parts as an I4). And i guess what people are saying about the STI's gearbox being sensitive is just an urban legend huh? The only weak link I can think of when doubling the EVO's power is the central diff. Anyway, most biased video I've ever seen. Never mind, the truth is out there...
Apr 25, 2008, 12:19 PM
#68
Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can see the shop owner slightly hesitate when he answers questions on the Evo. The engine and drivetrain are new and he already knows what the limitations are? I don't think even the interviewer bought his answers.
May 1, 2008, 06:22 PM
#70
the 08 subaru 2.5 liter turbo charged engines, have a world wide recall. they knocking high, even at idle at a traffic light when you waiting for the green....
just for start...
http://www.autospies.com/news/Subaru...-Models-28435/
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/07/s...with-turbod-2/
Last edited by Robevo RS; May 1, 2008 at 06:29 PM.
May 3, 2008, 06:28 AM
#71
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: 23rd Quadrant of the Gamma Sector
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed, totally a worthless review and all about how much better that shop owners STi is over the X. I'll take the X FTMFW any day
In my opinion the new WRX and WRX STi are what the new Focus and Focus SVT should have been
In my opinion the new WRX and WRX STi are what the new Focus and Focus SVT should have been
May 3, 2008, 08:17 AM
#72
-One car out of several hundred of them have had a gas padal issue. You need to check your head for even bringing that up.
-Transmission and clutch, you got us. The STI transmission is much more robust, and 2007 was the first time they got the gearing right.
-ECU, well that's just the stock mapping. In case you missed it, the stock Evo made more power and torque than the STI.
Want to talk about the (much worse) shortcomings of the Subaru now? Weak engines that spin rod bearings at even moderate power, a top mounted intercooler, a tiny stock turbo, extreme pipe travel distance to even get to the turbocharger... I could go on and on.
On to the video, the guy needs a beatdown for saying "Oh definitely" like infinity times. And the bit on drivetrain loss is redonkulous. I don't agree that the boxer has more driveline losses than the 4B11. Why can't that big boxer 2.5 make as much torque as a 2.0 does stock? Its the factory mapping, that's why, and its sad.
Another thing I can comment on is that I use an identical dyno to that and the numbers are bang on. My Evo stock made _exactly_ the same whp as that Evo did. Its an uncorrected Dyno Dynamics, and that is a great thing.
The tuned STI was bad comedy. Only 274whp through a cutout with a full tune, CAI, and upgraded TMIC? And it still have that trademark Subaru stock turbo with total puke-n-die up top.
My car with only a drop in and cat back made 5whp more than that, and made it from 6800-7500, where its the most useful. All this with the stock cat! We are remapping with a test pipe and DP, and I fully expect to see 290+ without the aid of a cut out or an uprated intercooler. Give me those parts, and the car should close in on 310whp on a Dyno Dynamics, a full 30whp more than that STI.
Their comments on the ECU in the new Evo were off. I bet they haven't even flashed an X yet. They certainly aren't an EcuTeK vendor on here.
"If you want to buy a car with the idea of getting power, which do you buy"
"You would go further in the Subaru than the Mitsubishi".
TOTAL BULLSHAT. I'm already making more power than they are with less mods, a cat in place, and have spent just over half what they did in upgrades.
It looks like another 5 years of Mitsubishi domination over Subarus in power are upon us.
May 3, 2008, 10:55 AM
#73
Evolving Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The STI transmission is much more robust, and 2007 was the first time they got the gearing right.
ECU, well that's just the stock mapping. In case you missed it, the stock Evo made more power and torque than the STI
.
Weak engines that spin rod bearings at even moderate power, a top mounted intercooler, a tiny stock turbo, extreme pipe travel distance to even get to the turbocharger... I could go on and on.
I don't like the boxer four sound at all.
Why can't that big boxer 2.5 make as much torque as a 2.0 does stock? Its the factory mapping, that's why, and its sad.
.
It looks like another 5 years of Mitsubishi domination over Subarus in power are upon us.
. What tiny edge in handling that the Evo has this year is completely dependent on the computer. When Subaru decides to add a computer co-driver to the STI, I wouldn't want to be an Evo fan . Will 
still be selling cars in the US in 5 years?
May 3, 2008, 11:31 AM
#74
What's wrong with the pre-2007 gearing? It's short, but it may be taller than the gearing on the X.
Not enough more power, apparently, to make up for the extra weight. Neither Subaru nor Mitsubishi provided great stock tunes apparently. At least the Subaru starts every time, though
I see more rod bearing failures on EvoM than on IWSTI. If you wanted to talk crap about the STI engine, you would have been better off sticking with thin ringlands. Bearing failures are very rare. I'd definitely like to have thicker ringlands, but I don't plan on going over mid-400's whp with this car so I'm not too bothered by it.
A matter of opinion. Certainly some STI owners do put on equal length headers to kill the sound. Can you explain to me what the buzzing sound coming from the 4B11 is? Right through the firewall at 3250-3500 RPM or so? Is that just a characteristic of Evo engines, or specific to this incarnation? It sounds odd and unhealthy, but since they all do it I guess it's normal.
Sad perhaps, but with a proper stage 2 tune the new EJ257 makes 375 ft-lbs of torque at the wheels. Peak horsepower is similar on a stage 2 4B11, but I like all that extra area under the curve with the 2.5L .
.
And another 5 years of superior sales, quality, and reliability by Subaru.
Plus, I wouldn't assume that Subaru will wait 5 years before doing their own flavor of AYC .
.
[quote]What tiny edge in handling that the Evo has this year is completely dependent on the computer. [quote]
Tiny edge? Have you seen the comparos? Even with the straight line deficit due to weight, the X has won the track showdowns in every one I've seen with ease. I'd call that more than a tiny edge.
When Subaru decides to add a computer co-driver to the STI, I wouldn't want to be an Evo fan
Will still be selling cars in the US in 5 years?
still be selling cars in the US in 5 years?
