STI wins a comparo against the Evo X?!
May 12, 2008, 11:48 PM
#2
Account Disabled
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats BS. The mags. are helping out Subaru because if they don't sell the STI the company with lose big time. As far as the STI winning that is complete BS. Don't buy into it. Every other magazine picked the EVO X by a big margin.
May 12, 2008, 11:57 PM
#4
Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: WA
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe they liked the manual shifter better. Car and Driver was 4.6 0-60 and 13.4 1/4 mile in the 5 spd GSR, repeatedly they say, so maybe the AT's 5.2 and 13.9 1/4 mile had something to do with this loss. The STI managed about what every other magazine's getting, 5.1 and 13.6, but with a 6 spd manual.
May 13, 2008, 12:22 AM
#5
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOTH the new Evo AND the new STI are pale imitations of their former glory. If I had to choose, I'd go (in order of preference) with the Evo IX, then an older (probably '05 model) STI then the new STI. Then, and only then, the new Evo X. Sorry, it's just my opinion.
And the journal writer's opinion is also equally clear. So what if he's bucking the trend? Comments about bias in order to help sell Subarus are uncalled for. I could equally well assert (with no proof whatsoever) that all the other magazines are glossing over the X's failings to help Mitsu sell more cars. But in the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary, I prefer to give the journos the benefit of the doubt - they're speaking with integrity.
In any case, for the first time, non-JDM Evos and STIs are on a much closer footing than most would feel comfortable with. Whereas in the past the Evo has always outstripped the (non spec C) STI. That's either a measure of Subaru's success or Mitsubishi's failure. Or maybe, just maybe, BOTH of them have dropped the ball, just to different degrees.
Maybe it's time for the rivalry to end. As Chandler (Friends) once said, "C'mon, I think we're all losers here".
And the journal writer's opinion is also equally clear. So what if he's bucking the trend? Comments about bias in order to help sell Subarus are uncalled for. I could equally well assert (with no proof whatsoever) that all the other magazines are glossing over the X's failings to help Mitsu sell more cars. But in the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary, I prefer to give the journos the benefit of the doubt - they're speaking with integrity.
In any case, for the first time, non-JDM Evos and STIs are on a much closer footing than most would feel comfortable with. Whereas in the past the Evo has always outstripped the (non spec C) STI. That's either a measure of Subaru's success or Mitsubishi's failure. Or maybe, just maybe, BOTH of them have dropped the ball, just to different degrees.
Maybe it's time for the rivalry to end. As Chandler (Friends) once said, "C'mon, I think we're all losers here".
Trending Topics
May 13, 2008, 03:51 AM
#8
Evolving Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Low Profile, TX
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May 13, 2008, 04:19 AM
#10
Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly the decision was more of a personal one rather that a performance one ... wouldn't look to far into it. Back in the days of the Evo VIII the Top Gear guys concluded that the Evo was faster, but they'd still take the STi ... different strokes.
May 13, 2008, 04:20 AM
#11
Evolved Member
Evo usually calls it like they see them. I don't think it's to help out Subaru selling cars. That said Catchpole has always been an Evo guy and it just seems he's one of the ones who fears the evolution of the Evolution.
I really think you are going to have to get an RS if want an Evo that's similar to the standard VIII's and IX's.
I really think you are going to have to get an RS if want an Evo that's similar to the standard VIII's and IX's.
May 13, 2008, 09:40 AM
#13
Evolved Member
Yup, strange to say at least! How in the world a car can stop from 100-0 quicker then the other (4.2 sec vs. 4.5) and at the same time it takes longer to do that (305 ft vs. 301 ft)? Is this physically possible?
Yes, I think biased is a good word to explain this! They when on to tell you exactly how good things work for the STI and then instead of doing the same thing for the EVO, they started complaining about the bad things. They finished it off with being unsatisfied with so uncommunicative EVO which also laid down quicker lap times along the way (for some reason they failed to mentioned it in the article) which is another oxymoron in this article. Or simply, I am just too biased my self!!
Fedja
Yes, I think biased is a good word to explain this! They when on to tell you exactly how good things work for the STI and then instead of doing the same thing for the EVO, they started complaining about the bad things. They finished it off with being unsatisfied with so uncommunicative EVO which also laid down quicker lap times along the way (for some reason they failed to mentioned it in the article) which is another oxymoron in this article. Or simply, I am just too biased my self!!
Fedja
May 13, 2008, 10:38 AM
#15
Dear god evo drivers are touchy and insecure people. So the STI was chosen as the favorite in a review, so what? In the past several reviews have chosen the STI as their favorite despite the evo being faster/more raw, it boils down to personal preference, driving habits and what people value/are able to live with. I love how everyone on blows a fit when the STI wins while everyone on NASIOC blows a fit when the evo wins, the two vehicles are so similar I can't believe how much the two sides hate each and how ridiculous the arguments become (like grand conspiracy theories).