Mitsubishi EVO vs. WRX STi
- Thread starter tosugrad
- Start date
I like my Evo...it is a very precise car and has quite a bit of thrust when the turbo spools up....I considered the Subaru, but the Evo was much more sharp in terms of handling, and I like the Recaro seats more as well.
For me, both have more than enough power than I would ever use. So it comes down to looks. I like the looks of the EVO much better so I would go that route.
osugrad97 said:
Drive the Evo and you will realize it has nothing to do with a standard Lancer...
There are articles comparing these two cars against each other in the June issues of both Car and Driver and Road & Track. The former slightly preferred the Evolution, while the latter came as close to a tie as you can. If you're serious about buying one of these two cars, I strongly suggest you read both articles before deciding:
Car and Driver
Road & Track
Car and Driver
Road & Track
Meeyatch1 said:
Then how come it's not in your sig?
Jason, Mitch's Evolution is for sale, in case you're interested...
I WOULD GO EVO!
As my relatives in Swiss used to say- WRX = Farmer's Car
http://www.red-suns.com/webarticles/index.htm
As my relatives in Swiss used to say- WRX = Farmer's Car
http://www.red-suns.com/webarticles/index.htm
nsxtasy said:Then how come it's not in your sig?
It will not allow me more room on the sig....
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=592
Here's the Road&Track article.
One thing i had heard about from the evolution forums was that they had a really thin paint and there were several places that chipped rather soon. If you happen to go for the Mitsu consider getting stoneguard or something of the sort to prevent this from happening. Also I had the opportunity to take a look at and sit in both cars at the dealer and the STI didn't look like it was built as well. The side skirt fitment was just a bit tacky - just something that stood out to me and I thought I'd mention. I'm not sure which actually has better build quality. One last thing... the evo uses a higher boost (~19lbs on a 2 litre vs. the sti's ~14lb on a 2.5 litre), perhaps engine reliabilty/life is affected by this? Best of luck with your purchase, they both look like a blast to drive!
Here's the Road&Track article.
One thing i had heard about from the evolution forums was that they had a really thin paint and there were several places that chipped rather soon. If you happen to go for the Mitsu consider getting stoneguard or something of the sort to prevent this from happening. Also I had the opportunity to take a look at and sit in both cars at the dealer and the STI didn't look like it was built as well. The side skirt fitment was just a bit tacky - just something that stood out to me and I thought I'd mention. I'm not sure which actually has better build quality. One last thing... the evo uses a higher boost (~19lbs on a 2 litre vs. the sti's ~14lb on a 2.5 litre), perhaps engine reliabilty/life is affected by this? Best of luck with your purchase, they both look like a blast to drive!
Meeyatch1 said:It will not allow me more room on the sig....
Yeah right, Mitch. You are ashamed to own a non-Honda product aren't you?
Buy the Evo.
My 15 year old son and I went out a month or so ago and drove a new Evo, and I was really quite impressed with the performance and handling. I felt that it was slightly quicker than both my '91 NSX and my '02 Boxster S, and that the handling was superb. The car I drove had 1800 miles on it, so during the test drive I got to really push it, and thought it was a blast.
I ended up buying a very rare (1 of 16 built) 1987 Porsche Turbo Look Cabriolet since I felt that the Evo would probably depreciate to the low 20's in a year, and that the Porsche wouldn't.
The dealer was willing to sell me any of the 4 cars he had for $29,812, which was MSRP less $1000. They were asking MSRP plus $3000 ($33,812).
My 15 year old son and I went out a month or so ago and drove a new Evo, and I was really quite impressed with the performance and handling. I felt that it was slightly quicker than both my '91 NSX and my '02 Boxster S, and that the handling was superb. The car I drove had 1800 miles on it, so during the test drive I got to really push it, and thought it was a blast.
I ended up buying a very rare (1 of 16 built) 1987 Porsche Turbo Look Cabriolet since I felt that the Evo would probably depreciate to the low 20's in a year, and that the Porsche wouldn't.
The dealer was willing to sell me any of the 4 cars he had for $29,812, which was MSRP less $1000. They were asking MSRP plus $3000 ($33,812).
Meeyatch1 said:Drive the Evo and you will realize it has nothing to do with a standard Lancer...
They both have a crappy interior... thats about all the similarity.
Meeyatch1 said:It will not allow me more room on the sig....
Bump the Accord
NetViper said:
I sat in the EVO...the seats a good...well bolstered
Similar threads
