And...I'm....
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 14,275
Likes: 12
From: Virgnia
Originally Posted by smithchaiyakan,Dec 18 2008, 10:11 AM
X haters we have already proven at the tracks again again... enough said about that this isn't a evo vs STi thread... But like I said congrats new car is always fun!
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
From: Stock
Originally Posted by smithchaiyakan,Dec 18 2008, 07:11 AM
X haters we have already proven at the tracks again again... enough said about that this isn't a evo vs STi thread... But like I said congrats new car is always fun!
the two cars are REALLY close in numbers but they do it in almost the opposite way and there are comparisons with the STI being faster at certain tracks and vice versa. The sti is still faster 0-60 and in the quarter...
For me it all came down to what I need, If I wanted a sweet track car I'd go with an Evo IX MR but I need something practical and something without the wing and 'racing' look. The practicality of the 08sti for the daily driver far out weighs the benefits the 1.8 seconds of X's AYC at the track - the trunk if you've seen it is about the size of an s2000 trunk. Its almost like a trunkless sedan, both cars a great but they are great in almost the opposite ways
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,158
Likes: 2
Originally Posted by Nine,Dec 18 2008, 09:50 AM
I think you're trying a little too hard.
any plans to mod?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
From: Alexandria, VA
[QUOTE=Nine,Dec 18 2008, 12:35 PM] OH man trust me I know I was about a second away from pulling the trigger on an Evo X MR...
the two cars are REALLY close in numbers but they do it in almost the opposite way and there are comparisons with the STI being faster at certain tracks and vice versa.
the two cars are REALLY close in numbers but they do it in almost the opposite way and there are comparisons with the STI being faster at certain tracks and vice versa.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,986
Likes: 0
From: Bel Air, MD
Originally Posted by smithchaiyakan,Dec 18 2008, 09:33 PM
No doubt but 40K up for a Mitsubishi Evo is way too much for the MR even though it comes with a nice sound system, wheels, and aero kit... For mid 35k Sti was the better buy.
Faster in 1/4... 2 different engine 2.5L v.s classic 2.0...
These are like you said two different cars compared to the older models
Faster in 1/4... 2 different engine 2.5L v.s classic 2.0...
These are like you said two different cars compared to the older models
That said. The base 2.5RS Imprezza destroys the base Lancer in comparison.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
From: Alexandria, VA
Originally Posted by 9000revolutions,Dec 18 2008, 06:10 PM
Previous year STI's still had the 2.5H engine The 2.0H engine was not an option for the STI. The WRX had the 2.0H engine and the RS had a 2.5H non turbo engine. You can't use the WRX model in a comparison test with an Evo.
That said. The base 2.5RS Imprezza destroys the base Lancer in comparison.
That said. The base 2.5RS Imprezza destroys the base Lancer in comparison.
Still you can't compare ///If the EVO made a 2.5L engine then the number changes.
For the 2.5RS, the lancer never had a chance with the 2.0 4g63 stock...
Two different types of car once again
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Izn Trbl
California - Central California & Sacramento
27
Nov 2, 2010 12:06 AM
trentor
Texas - North Texas S2000 Owners
10
Nov 24, 2008 07:06 AM