[Rootus]

I don't think I've seen this posted here yet. If it has been, my apologies.

ROADandTRACK.com -- Cover Story - Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution vs. Subaru Impreza WRX STI (3/2008)

They really liked the Evo. The part I don't get is that they claim the Evo was faster in every way than the STI, including straight line. Did Subaru give them a dud? The STI should own the Evo in a straight line test at least.

[stickytires]

I believe R&T were always biased towards the EVO, IIRC.

[damstr]

Doesn't surprise me. I knew the USDM STI wouldn't be as fast as the JDM STI. Where as the Evo IX is practically identical to the JDM Evo except it has AYC.

[waktasz]

The Evo looks terrific in that video. Other than the seats, I still don't like the interior though. What I really don't understand is how they managed to make the Evo cheaper. All the fancy gadgets and seats should add up really fast...hellllo Subaru?

[Rootus]

Originally Posted by waktasz

The Evo looks terrific in that video. Other than the seats, I still don't like the interior though. What I really don't understand is how they managed to make the Evo cheaper. All the fancy gadgets and seats should add up really fast...hellllo Subaru?

The Evo isn't exactly cheap. They ding you pretty hard on the features.

The base price is competitive, but doesn't even include HID's (and IIRC, even the radio is optional). If you want HID's you have to get the SSS package. That raises the price $2000. And if you want the front lip spoiler and rocker panel treatment, you have to get the "aero package" which is ... wait for it ... another $2000. If you want a fully optioned GSR with the Nav system, it's over $39K.

I like both cars at this point. But I don't like either one well enough to increase my debt $15K to get one. If I were to jump in the market right now, I'd actually lean toward the Evo, extra weight be damned. One thing the reviews all seem to agree on is that the Evo handles better and is much livelier. And even if it's not so fast in a straight line, a tuner over on EvoM just posted their first results for a TBE & boost controller -- about 320/320 wtq and whp. And that's without a tune (something you can apparently do on an Evo, but will blow up an STI).

[SpYdEr2723]

Yeah that really doesn't make sense, how a lighter car with more power goes slower then the heavy, underpowered. It makes me think some one is lying somewhere.

[twiSTies]

that transmission has to help in the straight line tests. the 2 shifts to 60 always have hurt the STi acceleration times in mag tests.

I'm less and less impressed with the 08 and I never liked it from the beginning. How they can't beat the EVO after 5 years of development is beyond me. May as well give it up if they aren't going to compete. 2.5 seconds a lap!

[j07sti.ltd]

Sti is 6k more?? I fail to see the added value. BBS should be standard and the added trunk space does nothing for me as I don't like hatches. I love Subaru but don't understand them?!?

[drdome99]

Originally Posted by SpYdEr2723

Yeah that really doesn't make sense, how a lighter car with more power goes slower then the heavy, underpowered. It makes me think some one is lying somewhere.

you are joking right? the suspension makes up for the power/weight around the track. As for the 1/4 mile gearing and launching could make the difference. This is the same thing we have always seen from evo vs. STi. The STi is more "livable" EVO has better suspension and better for the track. EVOs take bolt-ons much better as well, but if you plan to go beyond bolt-ons its a toss up.

And i kind of like the no radio option, stock radios are garbage and overpriced, same with every other "option".

[damstr]

No offense to the STI guys but I've always seen the STI as a more daily driver car and the Evos as more of a track car that takes extremly well to mods.

Looking forward to seeing what the STI does modified but I'm afraid it won't be too much different then what were seeing from older STI's.

However the Evo X seems to be taking extremly well to engine mods just like Evo VIII's and IX's. Like someone else said, tbe manual boost controller and your over 300awhp, tune and your close to 345awhp with less then $1200 spent.

Time will tell when tuners can start tuning both cars.

[Rootus]

Originally Posted by damstr

No offense to the STI guys but I've always seen the STI as a more daily driver car and the Evos as more of a track car that takes extremly well to mods.

That's absolutely true, and I don't think it's offensive. I think it's why the STI appears to outsell the Evo by quite a margin (and why the Evo X is much more refined and consequently heavy than the IX) -- the percentage of people driving either Evos or STIs that uses them as track cars is incredibly small. The vast, vast majority never get more than a half dozen track days a year (and I'd wager more than 50% don't get any), which means daily driver livability is critical.

However the Evo X seems to be taking extremly well to engine mods just like Evo VIII's and IX's. Like someone else said, tbe manual boost controller and your over 300awhp, tune and your close to 345awhp with less then $1200 spent.

The caveat is that the turbo is quite a lot smaller on the X than on the IX, so a stage 2 STI and a stage 2 Evo X may not be all that far apart, both will require turbo upgrades to go easily beyond low/mid 300 whp. The turbo on the X sputters out and can barely hold 20 psi by redline. More than the STI, but then again the STI has another 0.5L to work with.

Hopefully today at the local auto show both the X and STI will be shown. I've not yet seen either one in person.

[CFar]

Too many people are influenced by a very narrow review of two both respectfully, great cars.

Most importantly, this is the first rag I've read that has said the EVO walks the STi. Every other magainze has the STi ahead in at least acceleration, if not both accel and track times.

In an effort to get acceleration numbers, most companies use 0-60 numbers as a reference. After looking at the chart, 0-60 is the only time the EVO is ahead in acceleration until 80 (which is again the first Ive seen). 0-10, 0-20, etc all have the STi ahead. So in general, the STi is ahead, especially at real world speeds (Ill get back to that in a minute). Its painfully obvious that this author is either in someones pocket or doesn't care about giving an accurate rep of the two cars as he even mentions the 3rd shift to 60 but neglects to mention the fact that the acceleration is obviously the STi's strong point when compared to the EVO.

As for trap speed, who knows, but again this is the first comparison that Ive seen the STi behind in this category. Why did the author forget to mention the same ET in the 1/4mile? He has a pension for twisting words and not giving the entire story. He only mentions the STi's apparent weakness.

Back to the real world. Where do most cars spend 99% of the time? On the road. These are road cars first and foremost, with tracking abilities. I think that the track and accel numbers are amusing but little more unless one is just blowing the other one out of the water (or as the author says, mopping the floor (hardly)). Ill buy the car that hast the most to offer, not just track worthiness.

I buy cars based on its ability to thrill me, but most importantly to get me somewhere without having to sacrifice something else. For a base STi (34,995) Im getting everything I want and more. CD, HID, AWD, turbo, HATCH, safety, reliability and fun. Something the STi in my drive of both cars has in spades over the EVO. That and I dont have to live with that awful wing anymore. One positive the EVO certainly has is the dual clutch tranny. To get my wife in the car would require some type of automation of the gearbox, but I guess that will come when I get an electric car in a 5 years

I've got a wife. I've got a kid. I've got a dog. I go places and appreciate being able to take my family there, yet be able to turn around and romp my way through the roads from time to time is why Im not buying a Forrester. The STi certainly brings more benefits to the table when looking at its hauling ability as compared to the EVO.

Every day livability, like mpg, range per tank, lower cruising RPM, etc so on and so forth, all lean toward the STi. A truly every day supercar compared to the EVO, which as everyone knows is a porker.

Now Im admittedly a Subaru loyalist and am VERY biased. With that said, the EVO surely is just as much the bees knees as the STi and to pick a car would be difficult for someone looking from the outside without any experience with either car.

I suppose the thing that bothers me is that people have such a narrow minded view of one aspect of these cars. In this case, I guess its the blind leading the blind.

[UturnSTi]

[Pre]

Originally Posted by CFar

Now Im admittedly a Subaru loyalist and am VERY biased.

I've shortened your post to what it needs to be.

The truth is that they are both fine cars, and still a deal for what you get. I think the choice comes down to personal taste and what company you feel more confident about. I've been in and driven both base models (WRX Hatch and Fully loaded Lancer) recently and the Mitsu was a little better in my opinion. Mitsu has some nice features that you just can't get on the Subaru.

In the end, they are both great cars, buy what you like.

[AMTEXX]

Where are all the "fan boys" of the 2008 now?

Come on, remember, they are making the hatch for better "turn-in, faster laps, more rigidity, etc, etc...."

It still got beat by a sedan! Subaru had a lot of time to make it better in every way to that Evo, and didn't. I love Subaru, but I know they are going down the wrong path.

It's ugly, and now it's worse than the Evo in almost every way. (and costs more without the goodies it came with before)

Why buy an '08??? I'm not sure. It must be why the dealers have to much inventory now.