how much of that EVO max grip advantage is due to the tires? yeah agree EVO can take an S2000 around a track, but i'd hate to own an EVO and deal with mitsubishi dealers and warranty
i'd love to pick up a 3 yr old EVO out of warranty though

 

A lot of it has to do with its AWD, as well as how the structure of the frame was designed. The Evo's frame is far superior to the STI's.

 

That, I really don't believe.

 

An EVO owner is saying that the EVO's frame is FAR superior than the STi's, what's so surprising?

J/K...

I don't know about the whole chasis, but I know that the Spec C uses a different front sub-frame which is suppose to be alot better than the one that's used in the regular STi.

It's really no secret on why the EVO handles better than the STi. The EVO has wider tires, stiffer suspension, 22mm RSB stock, quicker steering ratio, longer wheelbase, and wider track front and rear.

 

Yes, but the US-spec STI comes with the Spec-C geometry already. That's the reason it has a 0.25" longer wheelbase than the regular WRX.

 

But it's still shorter and narrower than the EVO's. The Spec C still has a different front sub-frame, steering rack, suspension, and it's lighter.

 

i was seriously looking at an evo locally about 1 month ago, it was a 2003 with about 50 miles, sticker was around 30K and without any major negotiations the sales manager offered 25.5, i figured if you got serious you might get it for 25 flat or even high 24s.

 

i have defended the Evo a bunch of times.... i really like mine... i have no warranty issues and I honestly think that entire "mitsu is on a witchhunt for warranties" was blown way out of proportion.

they apparently voided a handfull of warranties due to auto-x or abuse.....just like other manufacturers had.... but somehow the internet turned the Mitsu story into a huge fiasco.

I have about 13k miles on my Evo now.... i have been debating getting coilovers, wheels, exhaust, but haven't yet.... still almost totally stock (mr taillights).

 

It seems to me that alot of people are confusing "easier to Drive" with "better handling". I initially thought my heavily modded S4, was a better handling car then my S. I have since had more seat time. And have completely changed my point of view. Whatever way you look at it, A AWD car will understeer long before a RWD.

Basically, the way i look at it, its easy to do your best in an EVO and even hit the cars limits.. The Awd is obviously quite forgiving, and will ignore your mistakes, and even provide you with a comfort to push the car further.

The S2k obviously has a huge learning curve, one that i haven't fully grasped yet, and possibly never will. The S always seems like it can go a little further, and turn in is always available (if you can control the up coming drift =) ).

Basically, i am the opposite of you guys who went from rwd to awd... I came from the land of "expected Understeer". Understeer is predictable, and easy to deal with. Hence, some drivers will naturally feel empowered.

IMO, take any experienced driver, any real RACE car driver, Present him with both as an option, and Im fairly certain the majority would go with the RWD variant.

On a track, this is a drivers race guys.

 

i am faster around a track in my evo than i was in my stock S2000....

not that auto-x is the ultimate answer, but the nationals are soon and there should be some Evo's there to compare against the S2000 times.? You would have to assume there are some damn good drivers of both cars.