I don't think it is in the same "market"... it is probably a nice well rounded car.... fairly comfortable, fairly quick, pretty good looking, no turbo lag, etc......

but it doesn't have a chance against the Evo or STI.


and....what's with thinking the STI is all that much faster than the Evo? I am not sure but don't you need to switch to 3rd just to hit 60mph..... most magazines have the times almost dead even....but for some reason you always make it sound like the STI just romps the evo.... most qtr mile times I see in comparisions are within .1 or .2 of each other in the Qtr mile and almost all have a trap speed difference of 1-2mph..... hardly a romp....

after 100mph the STI definately pulls away from the Evo, but who cares at that point?

 

magazine racing time....

road and track

Evo - 4.8 to Sixty
STI - 4.9 to Sixty.

Evo - Qtr Mile - 13.4@103mph
STI - Qtr Mile - 13.3@103mph

That is an ASSKICKING!!!!!!!!!!

 

It'll be interesting to see the first full test of this heffer.

I say 6.2 to 60 and a 14.7 @ 95.

 

Scot

Its a matter of simple numbers. The Evo is luck to hit 13.4, the Sti is lucky to hit 12.9 as far as all of the "real" times I have seen including your own. That

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by steve c

 

Stock R32's have been hitting 14.4 in the 1/4. With those stats I don't see it in any way but the price, compared to the STi and Evo. In performance it's closer to the WRX. I think the person that gets one wants a solid all around car with a better ride, nicer amenities at the sacrifice of full out performance. I'd get one if it was $5k less.

 

There are 13.9 time slips stock, maybe better, but that's what I've seen so far. It probably requires a drivetrain unfriendly launch, but the same thing can be said for the super low time slips for the other cars. Slower than and EVO or STI for sure, but to say that it's 30K price tag is out of whack doesn't make any sense. $28k for a Lancer? $32K for an Impreza? The platforms of the other cars are no more or less worthy of their price than the R32. For some people, the nicer interior, more understated exterior, and 3.2L/6 will appeal vs. a turbo-4 and a big wing.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rudyr

 

Not sure what you are talking about... lucky to hit 13.4 and the STI to get 12.9..... there are lots of guys saying they are 13.0-13.2 with their stock Evo's..... If I ran at the right track, my 13.4's would easly be 13.1 or 13.2 with proper elevation and weather....

I have not seen much for STI's since I don't visit those boards too often, but the times I did see were about par with the Evo....

good driver vs good driver same track, etc..... the STI may win by .1 in the Qtr mile.... whoppee......

[QUOTE]Originally posted by y2ks2k
Scot

Its a matter of simple numbers. The Evo is luck to hit 13.4, the Sti is lucky to hit 12.9 as far as all of the "real" times I have seen including your own. That