I've been getting more interested in the car and all of it's capabilities, but seeing the 5mph to 60mph time in C&D of 6.7 seconds really turned me off. So, basically to get a solid 0 to 60mph time, you need to dump the clutch hard. How long will it last at that point? The Sti had a much better 5-60mph of 5.8 seconds and 0 to 130mph time 4 seconds faster than the Evo. That's pretty dramatic in my book.

It's still a given that the Evo handles a bit better and looks better IMO, but the acceleration performance isn't as breathtaking as I originally thought....

 

not sure if that is a typo or not, but the car definately does need to be driven at 3000rpm or higher to get it going. What difference in acceleration the Evo gives up, it makes up for in braking and handling. So far every magazine has the Evo winning on the track.

both are nice!

 

you think that's bad, the s2k in C&D that ran 15's was like 1.5 seconds slower from 5-60 than previously tested s2k.
Essentially proving they had a hog.

5-60 is nice because it doesn't really involve the launch or driver skill. just 1 shift

AWD cars have great launching, but without the launch the are just 4 bangers off boost.
That's why when you race an awd turbo car at a light you roll just a bit before nailing it.
=D

being off boost is kind of like being off vtec, you can get around but it's no fun.

-Ed

 

Most AWD cars (except for the Skylines, Porsches, and Lamborghinis...cars with good AWD systems that are more like RWD most of the time) have shitty roll-on acceleration. If you take the launch out of the equation, they really are not too impressive acceleration wise due to the AWD sucking up a lot of power. This is evident through their trap speeds in the 1/4 mile, as they are on average 5-6 mph slower than they should be.

Combine a turbocharged 4-cylinder and AWD, and you have relatively shitty low-speed roll acceleration.