[zerepjd]

Hey all,

Just read an article comparing the EVO and the STi in Automobile magazine. According to the article the STi got its doors handed to it. Taking it with a grain of salt though, because of a few questions that the article raised. First it was comparing the Euro spec STi to the EVO. But didn't say if the EVO was US,Euro, or JDM spec I'm assuming US spec with Mitsubishi having already announce the EVO release. Rumors also have the US spec STi having more HP than it's Euro spec brother. Another question that I had after reading was when the article was comparing stats it listed the STi at $29,900 and the EVO at get this $37,000. Now if I remember correctly the Evo was suppose to be $3-4,000 cheaper than the STi. My friend (who mentioned the article to me) said that there were different models to the Evo. RS, GS-R.... and that the model in the article as the top of the line Evo GS-R. The stock GS Evo was suppose to come in at around $25,000 or so.
The article also gave the Evo better 0-60, stopping, cornering under all conditions, throttle response, HP, and torque....Etc. After reading the article I think that the author was kind of biased, because he really didn't say anything good about the STi other than the 6-speed shifter shifted quicker and smoother. And he still had problems with the shifter. Sorry about the book. Just thought that I'd run what the article said by you all and see if there was any +/- feedback. I'm still getting the STi because I think that it is a better made car. Even if the Evo is faster. Nothing a few mods won't take car of. Right?!!!!!

Jared
Sorry STiWant1. Didn't catch your thread before I wrote the novel, or I would have placed it there. Don't want to step on any toes.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: zerepjd on 2002-04-19 00:53 ]</font>

 

[Rufus3383]

I've read the article and basically it was a rip off. The article implied that they would be reviewing and comparing the US versions, but in fact, the versions were European. At no point did I see any attributed facts or sources quoted about the US versions. The price for the EVO said $37,000 (estimated).
Estimated on what basis? At this point, even Subaru denies that the STI is coming over here, so where did they get this "US" version. IMO, Automobile magazine pulled a shoddy trick to get readers. The article may have been a fair comparison of the two Euro cars, but I wouldn't take anything other than that as more than unsupported rumor.

 

[frankster]

Jared,

You'll find a whole lot of other guys saying the same thing in this thread http://www.imprezawrxsti.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?topic=228&forum=1&29 you'll find 1 post and a reply from me which attempts to debunk what everyone is saying - I'd like to discuss the topic further, noone else is prepared to.

The EVO VII is a better performance car than the STi. I agree, the article you read, IMHO, even based on a mis-match of models versions - Euro, JDM & US, could be flawed however if your after the solution to your question of EVO VII Better???? why dont we look at the two JDM STi and EVO?

Coincedentally, an article published in Australia tries to solve the same question you ask, it compares a locally delivered STi to a locally delivered EVO VI TM and a JDM EVO VII. Strangely enough the two EVO's came out on top of the STi in performance stakes, that said, the article still votes the STi as a better choice only because the VI is a Tommy Makkinen Edition priced $30,000AUD more than the STi sold here, and the VII isn't locally delivered. (You'll see the article at the end of this post).

My conclusion is, no matter which version you try to compare, the EVO is a better car.

The solution that "mods will fix it" is flawed. Let me ask you a question - why buy an STi when you you can modify a cheaper WRX with better modifications? You'll probably say to yourself "because I'll be starting on a higher platform and save money", well imagine what the same amount of money can do to an EVO?

You mention the STi has a better build quality than an EVO. I ask you, have you ever been in an EVO?

If we were lucky enough to have the EVO VII locally delivered to Australia, and priced at a competitive price to the STi, i would almost certainly prefer that over an STi.

Heres the article:

I'VE NOW REMOVED THE ARTICLE. - 21-APR-2002


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: frankster on 2002-04-20 23:47 ]</font>

 

[STiWant1]

I think a valid point in all of this is, for the UNITED STATES(and Canadian) market what is the best bang for the buck? Right now nothing beats the go/$ of a WRX. If you want proof of that just read any American car magazine. Do we need to get upset about a comparo between 2 cars that are not available in the US nor are specifically described in their final US form? I say no. Until specific information and dollar figures are available about the actual US production forms of the STi or the EVO there needs to be some level headedness on the part of everyone.

To Frankster I would say this: if you personally prefer the EVO, for what ever reason, and it is available, put your money down at the Mitsu dealer. But, explain that you don't care about looks, comfort, shifter, or whatever it is that other people feel are better on the STi. Bang for your buck is still Your bang and Your buck.
I've said it before but I'll say it again, for some people bang for buck means marginal performance loss for marginal comfort gains.

(Flame retardant applied)

_________________
"Now we play 'the waiting game'...awww, waiting game sucks! Let's play Hungry Hungry Hippos!" -Homer Jay Simpson



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: STiWant1 on 2002-04-20 11:52 ]</font>

 

[danc]

Or bang for buck could mean I expect this car to run over 100k miles. Anyone expect the Mitsu to run to 100k miles without serious problems? :smile:
(frankster, here's some more good reading:
http://www.edmunds.com/news/feature/manufacturers/44684/article.html )

Or bang for the buck could mean owning an AWD car with mechanical diffs that let me do the driving, not sensors driving the ECU driving electronic aids.

Or bang for the buck could mean boxer engine, six speed, and Subaru feel.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: danc on 2002-04-20 12:15 ]</font>

 

[alfredob1]

I read the Edmunds article, what a shame.

 

[D$]

I read the Automobile mag article, and I won't ever trust anything they say again. Was this article commisioned by Mitsu? Why bother comparing the Euro spec STi to the JDM spec Evo? The "Top Gear" evo and sti video sums it up best.

 

[frankster]

It's a real pity you guys in the states didn't get the GC8 model (even though i know of a few RS conversions). In terms of Bang For Your Buck, this was a better BFYB car to the new gen WRX bar none! The new gen WRX has lost ALOT of its appeal to the compromise of better refinememt (read: weight), bolt-on modifications seem to not respond as well as the older versions until you start playing around with remapping the ecu and looks can be best described as love it or leave it.

Do we need to get upset about a comparo between 2 cars that are not available in the US nor are specifically described in their final US form? I say no.

I wasn't getting upset, I took the question for what it was, not for what it wasn't...IMHO, its quite a fair question, given you have an unbiased opinion. I've got no bias on me, i for one shouldn't have seeing as though I previously owned and much loved my WRX.

Until specific information and dollar figures are available about the actual US production forms of the STi or the EVO there needs to be some level headedness on the part of everyone.

Level headedness aside, we can still ask the question with a degree of compromise can't we?

To Frankster I would say this: if you personally prefer the EVO, for what ever reason, and it is available, put your money down at the Mitsu dealer. But, explain that you don't care about looks, comfort, shifter, or whatever it is that other people feel are better on the STi.

I cant comprehend how you can sit there and tell me what is the better looking car? This is entirely down to personal preference. It's just like me saying your girlfriend/wife is ugly?

It's quite obvious we don't see eye-to-eye on what you like in a performance car (as i thought the STi was), and im starting to think this whole forum is of the same opinion. As such, lets leave it at that shall we?

Bang for your buck is still Your bang and Your buck.
I've said it before but I'll say it again, for some people bang for buck means marginal performance loss for marginal comfort gains.

Thats fine, point taken. As aforementioned, your bang seems to be quite different to mine.

regards,
Franky

 

[frankster]

On 2002-04-20 12:15, danc wrote:
Or bang for buck could mean I expect this car to run over 100k miles. Anyone expect the Mitsu to run to 100k miles without serious problems? :smile:

Was that smiley face on the end a sign of uncertainty? :smile: FYI, I know plenty of WRX's which have blown with alot less ease to which you think they do and that includes gearbox's and engine's.

Point being, i wouldnt own a car with more than 60,000km's anyways! :smile:

(frankster, here's some more good reading:
http://www.edmunds.com/news/feature/manufacturers/44684/article.html )

Homework for tonite.

Or bang for the buck could mean owning an AWD car with mechanical diffs that let me do the driving, not sensors driving the ECU driving electronic aids.

Ohh, have you driven an EVO VII? I'd love to hear your full opinion on the ACD and AYC's peformance. I've read they are more mechanical than electronic...oh, what's that? You haven't driven one before??? Oh right...

How can you give an opinion when you haven't driven the damn thing? Of all the reviews i've read and video's i've watched, never one of the drivers who have actually driven the car to its limits mention the "overbearing electronics" people who think they have an idea seem to harp on about.

In fact, Tiff Needles in his top gear video and the magazine review i scanned for you above, mention how both the evo vi and vii are more nuetrally handling and provide more feedback mid corner. If anything, far from electronically balanced.

Or bang for the buck could mean boxer engine, six speed, and Subaru feel.

This is probably the most valid thing you've said in this post. I agree, you cannot go past that boxer rumble! The STi 6sp is also something of an amazement.

regards,
Franky

 

[danc]

frankster,

I have read both a driver with rally experience post on i-club, and several reviews call out the active diffs as taking away from the driving experience. The person with rally experience didn't like them because they made the car less predictable - whereas with the STi, he knew it was going to handle how an AWD car handles, and he could adjust for that. The reviews that mentioned them negatively basically said they made the car less of a driver's car because the EVO did everything for you.

Hey, if you've driven them both, and prefer the EVO, fine. I haven't. But the diffs ARE a valid differentiation point, and some people prefer the STi's, regardless of over or under-steer, for personal reasons (not the least of which I'm sure is better reliability).

And yes, the EVO will break down much sooner on average. Listen to people who have owned and driven both in Japan. It's well known EVOs are not built to last like Subarus.

I would certainly have preferred the previous body style WRX/STi. It's a shame we never got them. But the new tranny still is a very good reason to want a new STi vs. the old one.

Hey, if all you want is 60k km on a car, the EVO is probably a good choice. I expect a car to last me much longer.

 

[frankster]

ok. the sti is a better car.

 

[danc]

It seems your mission was prove to the unwashed masses of us hanging out here that the EVO is the better car. And with the last post, you seem resigned to failure in that mission.

You can't prove something like that without a set of unassailable, universally agreed-upon, objective criteria. The problem is, no such set exists. You seem to think your set is the one that proves the EVO's better. Fine, but others have a different set. I've mentioned some of my criteria: 6 speed, diffs, reliability. The first two of which are performance-oriented features. So which is the better car? Depends how do you weight those criteria. It's up to the individual. One objective criteria could be fastest in a straight line on tarmac. EVO wins. Add some money to the Subaru, it'll win. So is your criteria stock performance? And, if so, why should that be someone else's criteria? Another could be around the twisties. This depends on the quality of the road, and who you talk to (I've read accounts from both sides). So it's down to specific road, or specific track, and, most likely, specific driver.

You can't win an argument that the EVO is the better car, unless you specifically list all your criteria. And that will be meaningless to anyone who disagrees with your choices.

 

[alfredob1]

What you don't see with your eyes, don't invent with your mouth.

 

[BuDDyLeE]

OMG this IS the topic. JJ, put this in its own section....dig the music, feels so, important.

my rant begins...

The Mitsu EVO may be a better car driven off the lot. being faster and having more tarmac appeal but it is being pushed closer to its breaking point than the STi. The STi has that rally feel for a reason EVO dudes, you want to drift dontcha??? whats that? no, you like to hug the rally turns like pimples on a seventh grader? me personally, i want the rally drift, 4 wheel slide baby, rumble of that Scoobysport in my ear, debris flying everywhere feel of a subie. take your EVO and as a matter of fact, take your STi, i need neither of the two. nearly unobtainable for a mere mortal such as myself (turn 19 on may 29, and am lucky enough to already have an 88' IROC 5spd and the 78' Lil Red Express Truck) i will glady accept into my stable a lowley (HA!) 2003 WRX (in green) $1850 in motor mods and im @ 295HP, another $500 for the cryo freezing of my tranny gears, and another $3000 for the racing center viscous and suretrac F/R diffs. still not good enough for ya? throw in the 18*7.5 Speedlines and BFGs for $2100, Cusco coil-overs and STBs for $2600 and im barely above the cost of an STi. anyone that says that wouldnt take a stock EVO or STi is crazy. $10050 in mods and with car a total of 36,000, of which i would add the $2600 in cusco stuff and the speedlines/BFGs @ $2100 to the STi anyway. And who would feel right modding the first run of EITHER car, i certainly wouldnt. i mean, a REAL STi. not a STi clone. a REAL STi or EVO-GSR...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: BuDDyLeE on 2002-04-22 18:54 ]</font>

 

[frankster]

Australia just completed its annual "Targa Tasmania" (http://www.targa.org.au). A 5 day road race around the island of Tasmania. It attracts Australia's leading drivers. Of the modern cars racing, 2 x EVO's, a VII and VI RS, placed in the top 5, 3rd and 5th respectively. 1st and 2nd were Porsche 911 turbo's 4th was an R34 GTR N1. First subaru home was in 14th (http://www.targa.org.au/results2002/leg5m.htm)

This year was the first time Road/Rally based car's were allowed in the event and they certainly made an impact! (the EVO's ie. :smile

Danc, i think you should stop playing with boy-racer cars like the wrx and evo, i think you'd be much suited to the style, class, refinement of a BMW M3 or something. I purposefully didn't mention "performance" as an M3 trait, because i have no idea how you personally classify "performance" in a car.

sincerely,
Franky

 

[frankster]

my rant begins...

<snip>

can i have some of the drugs your on BuddyLee? :smile:

 

[STiWant1]

Frankster you bring up some valid points and you have me thinking, which my wife hates more than anyone in this forum. But anyway,

It's a real pity you guys in the states didn't get the GC8 model (even though i know of a few RS conversions). In terms of Bang For Your Buck, this was a better BFYB car to the new gen WRX bar none! The new gen WRX has lost ALOT of its appeal to the compromise of better refinememt (read: weight), bolt-on modifications seem to not respond as well as the older versions until you start playing around with remapping the ecu and looks can be best described as love it or leave it.

Excellent point. I did like the old 2.5RS, and the WRX/STi was not available till now. Bolt ons are not and never will be a point with me, as far as I am concerned I'll buy a different car before I buy a new ECU or FMIC. But your statement also brings up something I've said before and that is as the car changes evolutions it generally moves upscale until it is replaced by something more "raw" or "pure" for enthusiasts.

I wasn't getting upset, I took the question for what it was, not for what it wasn't...IMHO, its quite a fair question, given you have an unbiased opinion. I've got no bias on me, i for one shouldn't have seeing as though I previously owned and much loved my WRX.
.
.
.
Level headedness aside, we can still ask the question with a degree of compromise can't we?

Fair enough, I was actually talking about the rabid STi fans.

To Frankster I would say this: if you personally prefer the EVO, for what ever reason, and it is available, put your money down at the Mitsu dealer. But, explain that you don't care about looks, comfort, shifter, or whatever it is that other people feel are better on the STi.

I cant comprehend how you can sit there and tell me what is the better looking car? This is entirely down to personal preference. It's just like me saying your girlfriend/wife is ugly?

The point of my comment is not that I think something looks better or that you should think something looks better. I simply think that too often people compare cars and talk about their likes and don't talk about their dislikes. If looks are one of your dislikes mention that as well.

It's quite obvious we don't see eye-to-eye on what you like in a performance car (as i thought the STi was), and im starting to think this whole forum is of the same opinion. As such, lets leave it at that shall we?
.
.
.
Thats fine, point taken. As aforementioned, your bang seems to be quite different to mine.

Don't quit now, I'm hooked on this discussion. I certainly have nothing more than a bit of free time invested in the choice of a new STi. And the truth is I probably won't keep the car past warranty. So what in your mind makes the EVO 7 stand out against the STi? Anyone else out there who has owned one and wants the other, lets here from you too.




_________________
"Now we play 'the waiting game'...awww, waiting game sucks! Let's play Hungry Hungry Hippos!" -Homer Jay Simpson

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: STiWant1 on 2002-04-22 08:12 ]</font>

 

[danc]

"Danc, i think you should stop playing with boy-racer cars like the wrx and evo, i think you'd be much suited to the style, class, refinement of a BMW M3 or something. I purposefully didn't mention "performance" as an M3 trait, because i have no idea how you personally classify "performance" in a car.
"

I make a cogent argument about your failure to resolve which is a better car because it's an impossible thing to do, and you return with a personal, immature, ridiculous jab.

At this point, you're just an EVO troll on ignore.

 

[STiWant1]

Danc, it appears to me that you would deny anyone the right to say the EVO is better in any way or with any set of criteria.

On 2002-04-21 11:36, danc wrote:
You can't win an argument that the EVO is the better car, unless you specifically list all your criteria. And that will be meaningless to anyone who disagrees with your choices.

I would ask you how anyone could "win" an argument if the criteria were laid out and then categorically dismissed by the opposing argument. Yes the criteria could be agreed upon, but a battle for consensus would ensue. Rather lets get someone to make some strong points and then back them up from their own experience.

Danc you also wrote:

One objective criteria could be fastest in a straight line on tarmac. EVO wins. Add some money to the Subaru, it'll win. So is your criteria stock performance?

Please save the modded car performance argument for later. I don't disagree that there is a big market for doing all nature of beastly things to autos today, but let's save the "with a little money my car beats yours" argument for some other time.

One more thing you said,

It seems your mission was prove to the unwashed masses of us hanging out here that the EVO is the better car. And with the last post, you seem resigned to failure in that mission.

Frank, you really do need to come back with a strong argument with specific points from your experience. We can read all the magazine articles we want, but I want to have an actual dialogue with someone who has experienced both. Come on, this is getting interesting.

 

[danc]

"Danc, it appears to me that you would deny anyone the right to say the EVO is better in any way or with any set of criteria."

?????

Please re-read my statement (that you even quoted)...

"You can't win an argument that the EVO is the better car, unless you specifically list all your criteria. And that will be meaningless to anyone who disagrees with your choices."

If he lists his criteria, OF COURSE he can say it's a better car, according to THAT criteria.

?????????????????????