evo8 MR or wrx STi? Options

[RyCeCuBe]

2 different cars w/ very similar bite. now i'd like to see what the 6th genners think..if you had to choose, which 1 would it be? and why?
EDIT: US specs

This post has been edited by RyCeCuBe: Feb 20, 2005 - 5:45 PM

[Mr_E]

Depends what spec the WRX and Evo are.

I'd take a UK Spec Evo 8 over a UK spec STi.
I'd take a US spec STi over a Evo 8.
I'd take an Evo FQ340 over just about everything.....

[LewFX]

I neighbors friend of mine has the evo, ordered it through mitsubishi, has "connections" and it looks nice and they say its hella fast.

[Digndoug]

STI cause mitsu are junk

[95gtschick]

sti... because i've wanted one forever

[crazycel18]

id go evo mr but ive wnated an eveo forever

[brianforster]

sti because mitsubishi didn't learn how to build a crank case even after the tragedy that is the vr4 happened.

[macavely]

Evo but not the MR .... its just that much after the other evos .. i don't think its worth the extra cash .. with that extra cash u can make an RS a bit faster... if u know what to do with it...

[97sccelica]

i'd take the STI

there's something about a car running factory boost levels over 20psi that i dont like.

[SlowCelica94]

EVO. Mitsu has some little bugs due to poor quality, but nothing I'll lose sleep over. The subby has a horrible tranny and doesnt like to hold to warranty. But neither does.

[Bigmeanbulldog55]

I'd take the STI. The STI has a 60/40 torque split making it drive more like a RWD. I know the EVO has better track numbers, but I still like the RWD feel that the STI (at least I think it would) would have. And the STI looks better. Just my opinion though.

[RyCeCuBe]

too bad, i can't say i testdrove both of em...woulda made the decision easier huh? anybody here who has drove both and can give is more insight?

[97sccelica]

EVO. Mitsu has some little bugs due to poor quality, but nothing I'll lose sleep over. The subby has a horrible tranny and doesnt like to hold to warranty. But neither does.
[right][snapback]248378[/snapback][/right]

STI does not have a transmission failure rate anywhere near that of a normal WRX

yes, both love voiding warranties, but in most cases, they are in the right. my WRX is probably making 325 crank hp now. a 45% increase in power puts plenty of extra stress on every part of the drivetrain

people say mitsu has reps go to 1/4 mile tracks and take down licence plates of EVO's that are racing just to void warranties. i find that kinda funny

RyCeCuBe

it depends on what you want. STI feels like it has more power, due to the torque and the bigger displacment. EVO handles better

IMO, the interior of the evo looks and feels cheap(except the seats)

other than that, the cars are designed to compete with eachother, and are based off of race cars with specific requirements

This post has been edited by 97sccelica: Feb 21, 2005 - 1:43 AM

[Supersprynt]

I've driven a regular Evo, not the MR. In Car&Driver the MR slightly outperformed the STI. But I'd take an STI a helluva lot faster than an Evo.

[97sccelica]

I've driven a regular Evo, not the MR. In Car&Driver the MR slightly outperformed the STI. But I'd take an STI a helluva lot faster than an Evo.
[right][snapback]248831[/snapback][/right]

to quote motor trend:

"IS 22 FEET WORTH $7000?"

they tested all three Evo models for the march 2005 issue.

at willow springs, the MR came out 22 ft ahead of the RS and 15.5ft ahead of the normal evo8

im all for buying the cheaper car and modding it with the extra money. stage 4 is comming, but not before a gearset.

This post has been edited by 97sccelica: Feb 22, 2005 - 2:23 PM