Evo vs STI - which is better? - GoFuckYourself.com

SoBeGirl Video · 08-18-2003, 08:49 AM

http://www.dodgeboy.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=195

Which one do you want? 300 hp, all wheel drive. They are comparing these rice rockets to Porsche and Ferrari and they are less than 30 grand. Technology.

Kapitan Ivanov · 08-18-2003, 08:50 AM

Nice!

chowda · 08-18-2003, 08:51 AM

http://gofuckyourself.com/showthread...t=subaru +evo

Niki · 08-18-2003, 08:58 AM

EVO is better (stronger, faster, better for a race car) .... STi is more user friendly

... · 08-18-2003, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Niki
EVO is better (stronger, faster, better for a race car) .... STi is more user friendly

EVO is on par with the STI overseas.

As I said in a previous thread about these two cars, the American version of the EVO lacks all the traction features that make the EVO a great car.

USA STI is the same as it is overseas.

TheViper · 08-18-2003, 09:00 AM

They are both junk. Try driving one above 120, it sucks.

Solution = BMW E46 M3

Little bit more expensive but way more solid.

exspamr · 08-18-2003, 09:08 AM

similar performance, ill take the evo because it looks way better...
i was excited when i heard that subaru changed the front end on the wrx until i saw that they made it look worse... the previous wrx that never made it over here looked great too bad they only gave us the 2.5rs with that design

Roald · 08-18-2003, 09:14 AM

$30k for an Evo or an Sti is nuts, over here we have to pay about 50k euros for a new one

Niki · 08-18-2003, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheViper
They are both junk. Try driving one above 120, it sucks.

Solution = BMW E46 M3

Little bit more expensive but way more solid.

M3 isn't 4x4 ... you don't know what are you talking about

puresexnow · 08-18-2003, 09:18 AM

Here in OZ the WRX's have a reputation for weak gearbox's and clutches...

In Japan you'll see almost none of the big tuners using Subaru's extensively due to the poor engineering in comparison to the other AWD turbo cars available.

It is commonly said that subaru AWD tech is based on 80's FWD hybrid stuff... and the lumpy boxer sound that everyone loves is caused by exhaust manifolds that are so very different in length...

2cyls have to reach all the way across the other side of the bay, while the other two are little shorties... stick a tuned length exhaust manifold on them and the boxer sound disappears almost completely.

The STi is better than a WRX for sure... but against an EVO? not a chance...

raceman · 08-18-2003, 09:19 AM

Ive driven both of them and they are both very good cars, I think the EVO has the edge as an all rounder but that is just my opinion.

Ive seen some tuning companies produce 700 bhp from an EVO engine and in that chassis its awesome.

RACEMAN

High Quality · 08-18-2003, 09:23 AM

Well I drove around in the evo 8 all weekend. The handling around hill country in austin is totally superb. It has some weakness in the lowend but once that 19lb turbo kicks on, hang on, and the hiss is something to be remembered too

.

Plus if you really want to get into it, the STI costs more and broke rally rules (2.0L limit, it has a 2.4), and is SLOWER in all offroad tests.

Evo for me comes out ahead, even tho its slightly slower than the STI in the 0-60. Handling is a big thing to me but it might not be to you. Plus, you can't even put a radio in the STI. That is weak.

TheViper · 08-18-2003, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Niki
M3 isn't 4x4 ... you don't know what are you talking about

I am not talking about traction but about quality. And I do know what I am talking about. I have driven the STI and the EVO 7. So bite me

However, if you would have to choose between those 2 cars, I think the STI is more a daily driver than a EVO VIII is. The EVO's rider is harder, harsher, and begs to be driven hard.

But honestly. 280hp out of a little 4 cylinder (for the EVO), expect good maintanance costs if driven hard.

Also, the EVO has more turbo lag (I drove one with 330hp, could be the cause).

exspamr · 08-18-2003, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheViper

I am not talking about traction but about quality. And I do know what I am talking about. I have driven the STI and the EVO 7. So bite me

However, if you would have to choose between those 2 cars, I think the STI is more a daily driver than a EVO VIII is. The EVO's rider is harder, harsher, and begs to be driven hard.

But honestly. 280hp out of a little 4 cylinder (for the EVO), expect good maintanance costs if driven hard.

Also, the EVO has more turbo lag (I drove one with 330hp, could be the cause).

i would hope that the m3 is better quality. it costs way more... thats kind of a silly comparison

Morgan · 08-18-2003, 09:44 AM

I have put 5,000 miles on my EVO VIII and loving every single one~!!! The STI is also a great car but I decided to choose the EVO.

Morgan · 08-18-2003, 09:50 AM

Oh, and M3's are very nice cars. I agree that the quality maybe higher but when it comes to performance, close but no cigar...

Evo beats M3 on:
- Braking
- 0-60
- 0-100
- 1/4 mile
- Top speed (same)
- skidpad

not to mention the AWD.

Roald · 08-18-2003, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ganjasaurus

Very nice car dude, only thing I would change are those rims though

Morgan · 08-18-2003, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by QuaShe

Very nice car dude, only thing I would change are those rims though

I kinda like the wheels, they are high performance enkei's. even came with brembo brakes and yokohama advans!!!

Roald · 08-18-2003, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ganjasaurus

I kinda like the wheels, they are high performance enkei's. even came with brembo brakes and yokohama advans!!!

They seem a bit too small under the car, what size is it? 18s? Also the Brembo brakes are top noth.

Morgan · 08-18-2003, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by QuaShe

They seem a bit too small under the car, what size is it? 18s? Also the Brembo brakes are top noth.

only 17", ya they are pretty small. but they are light as hell...

ya, brembo 4 pot front/ 2 pot rear... I think sometimes I have more fun stopping as fast as I can than I do flooring it.

SoBeGirl Video · 08-18-2003, 12:10 PM

Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2003 12:46 am Post subject: yea... but the srt-4 is undertuned

This is interesting. Is it true? Mostly about that 4 wheel drive. Does that mean then that once rolling, the SRT 4 is just as fast?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My Srt-4 has a 2.4 litter while the evo has a 2.0 . that means that the evo was Highly tuned... for it to have that much power If you give each car a intake or chip or (any upgrade) ... which car is going to produce more horsepower and torque... I am highly sure the srt-4 will, due to its gigantic 4 cylinder engine. Stock on Stock... -------give the Srt-4 wider tires or just throw on some street radials... and youll have a Evo Killer..... the only reason the evo is faster is because the srt-4 has 205 tires and front wheel drive, (lots of wheel spin) while the evo has 235 all wheel drive (little or no wheel spin)... by the way.. the all wheel drive will rob horse power on the high speeds which also means the srt-4 will go faster.. and yes dodge has a 7 year warranty, while mitsubishi has a 3 year warranty. Oh yea, Domestics ultimately put out more torque at lower rpms then aisian cars..(thats what I meant by out torquing)... And yes... The srt-4 is cheeper by 10 grand... next throw that 10 grand into mods for the srt-4 ... Im sure that will put you in the 10 second quarter miles if not faster..

Morgan · 08-18-2003, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SoBeGirl Video
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2003 12:46 am Post subject: yea... but the srt-4 is undertuned

This is interesting. Is it true? Mostly about that 4 wheel drive. Does that mean then that once rolling, the SRT 4 is just as fast?

"and yes dodge has a 7 year warranty, while mitsubishi has a 3 year warranty."
"The srt-4 is cheeper by 10 grand... next throw that 10 grand into mods for the srt-4 ... Im sure that will put you in the 10 second quarter miles if not faster.."

-- No, the evo has a higher top speed.

-- I got the 5 yr. warranty. and besides that he claims, add 10k to make the srt4 as fast as an evo= void warranty and a fast neon which will last about a week of driving hard, lol. My car blows up, they fix free.

-- and no chance your going to get that car in the 10's with that amt. of $

SoBeGirl Video · 08-18-2003, 12:58 PM

Yea you are right. 10s are frikin fast. I don't think there is any production car that does 10s. Maybe the viper?

Morgan · 08-18-2003, 11:35 PM

the 03' viper is badass!!!... no 10's never, but 11.77 isnt bad.

0-60 mph: 3.9 sec
0-100 mph: 8.3 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.77 sec @ 123.6 mph
Skidpad: 1.05g
Top Speed: 190 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 97 ft
Slalom Speed: 70.4 mph

it beats my 2.0L 4cyl..... hehehehehe... barely....

Roald · 08-18-2003, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ganjasaurus
the 03' viper is badass!!!... no 10's never, but 11.77 isnt bad.

0-60 mph: 3.9 sec
0-100 mph: 8.3 sec
Quarter Mile: 11.77 sec @ 123.6 mph
Skidpad: 1.05g
Top Speed: 190 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 97 ft
Slalom Speed: 70.4 mph

it beats my 2.0L 4cyl..... hehehehehe... barely....

I recently read an article about a Nissan Skyline doing 0-60 in 2.8 sec. Imagine the power kicking in your back when you accelerate

jchennav · 08-19-2003, 12:04 AM

If you want sub-3-second 0-60 times, a motorcycle is the best choice. However, the insurance per year will cost as much as the bike itself

.

Given the dealer markup on the Evo and STi (one dealer was asking $45,000 for the STi), I'll take the M3 (with the sequential M gearbox for the L.A. traffic).

wargames · 08-19-2003, 12:21 AM

08-18-2003, 08:49 AM	#1
SoBeGirl Video So Fucking Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Planet earth Posts: 2,493	Evo vs STI - which is better? http://www.dodgeboy.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=195 Which one do you want? 300 hp, all wheel drive. They are comparing these rice rockets to Porsche and Ferrari and they are less than 30 grand. Technology.

08-18-2003, 08:50 AM	#2
Kapitan Ivanov Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: Thank you for posting! You will now be taken to your post. If the administrator has selected to moderate all posts in this forum, you will be taken back to the forum and your post will be displayed presently. If you opted to post a poll, you will now Posts: 1,000	Nice! __________________ Ivanov:Never posting again. (666)

08-18-2003, 08:51 AM	#3
chowda Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Gooch city Posts: 9,527	http://gofuckyourself.com/showthread...t=subaru +evo __________________ Someone finds you... 2007 PS: Nationalnet is the best host I've ever had. And i tried alot of them.

08-18-2003, 09:14 AM	#8
Roald SecretFriends.com Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: IMC Headquarters Posts: 27,887	$30k for an Evo or an Sti is nuts, over here we have to pay about 50k euros for a new one __________________ WE ARE BUYING PAY SITES! CONTACT ME ClubSweethearts \| ManUpFilms \| SinfulXXX \| HOT * AdultPrime * HOT Paying webmasters since 1996! Contact: r.riepen @ sansylgroup.com \| telegram: roaldr

08-18-2003, 09:19 AM	#11
raceman Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Now offshore on an island paying a heluva lot less tax than you suckers Posts: 1,064	Ive driven both of them and they are both very good cars, I think the EVO has the edge as an all rounder but that is just my opinion. Ive seen some tuning companies produce 700 bhp from an EVO engine and in that chassis its awesome. RACEMAN __________________ "ILLEGITIMIS NON CARBORUNDUM" <-- "DON'T LET THE BASTARDS GRIND YOU DOWN" General Joe Stiwell ICQ: 213-684-158

08-18-2003, 08:58 AM	#4
Niki Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 1,476	EVO is better (stronger, faster, better for a race car) .... STi is more user friendly

08-18-2003, 09:00 AM	#6
TheViper Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: the streets. Posts: 2,560	They are both junk. Try driving one above 120, it sucks. Solution = BMW E46 M3 Little bit more expensive but way more solid.

08-18-2003, 09:08 AM	#7
exspamr Registered User Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,427	similar performance, ill take the evo because it looks way better... i was excited when i heard that subaru changed the front end on the wrx until i saw that they made it look worse... the previous wrx that never made it over here looked great too bad they only gave us the 2.5rs with that design

08-18-2003, 09:18 AM	#10
puresexnow Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 300	Here in OZ the WRX's have a reputation for weak gearbox's and clutches... In Japan you'll see almost none of the big tuners using Subaru's extensively due to the poor engineering in comparison to the other AWD turbo cars available. It is commonly said that subaru AWD tech is based on 80's FWD hybrid stuff... and the lumpy boxer sound that everyone loves is caused by exhaust manifolds that are so very different in length... 2cyls have to reach all the way across the other side of the bay, while the other two are little shorties... stick a tuned length exhaust manifold on them and the boxer sound disappears almost completely. The STi is better than a WRX for sure... but against an EVO? not a chance...

08-18-2003, 09:23 AM	#12
High Quality Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 5,741	Well I drove around in the evo 8 all weekend. The handling around hill country in austin is totally superb. It has some weakness in the lowend but once that 19lb turbo kicks on, hang on, and the hiss is something to be remembered too . Plus if you really want to get into it, the STI costs more and broke rally rules (2.0L limit, it has a 2.4), and is SLOWER in all offroad tests. Evo for me comes out ahead, even tho its slightly slower than the STI in the 0-60. Handling is a big thing to me but it might not be to you. Plus, you can't even put a radio in the STI. That is weak. __________________ RecurCash.com - Averaging $38/sale with 60% revshare in the first 4 months alone! Convert your TEEN traffic today @ better than 1:500 guaranteed. ICQ me: 18287590!

08-18-2003, 09:44 AM	#15
Morgan Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2002 Location: Corona Del Mar, CA Posts: 10,520	I have put 5,000 miles on my EVO VIII and loving every single one~!!! The STI is also a great car but I decided to choose the EVO. __________________ PornstarPlatinum.com \| TransErotica.com

08-18-2003, 09:50 AM	#16
Morgan Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2002 Location: Corona Del Mar, CA Posts: 10,520	Oh, and M3's are very nice cars. I agree that the quality maybe higher but when it comes to performance, close but no cigar... Evo beats M3 on: - Braking - 0-60 - 0-100 - 1/4 mile - Top speed (same) - skidpad not to mention the AWD. __________________ PornstarPlatinum.com \| TransErotica.com

08-18-2003, 12:10 PM	#21
SoBeGirl Video So Fucking Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Planet earth Posts: 2,493	Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2003 12:46 am Post subject: yea... but the srt-4 is undertuned This is interesting. Is it true? Mostly about that 4 wheel drive. Does that mean then that once rolling, the SRT 4 is just as fast? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My Srt-4 has a 2.4 litter while the evo has a 2.0 . that means that the evo was Highly tuned... for it to have that much power If you give each car a intake or chip or (any upgrade) ... which car is going to produce more horsepower and torque... I am highly sure the srt-4 will, due to its gigantic 4 cylinder engine. Stock on Stock... -------give the Srt-4 wider tires or just throw on some street radials... and youll have a Evo Killer..... the only reason the evo is faster is because the srt-4 has 205 tires and front wheel drive, (lots of wheel spin) while the evo has 235 all wheel drive (little or no wheel spin)... by the way.. the all wheel drive will rob horse power on the high speeds which also means the srt-4 will go faster.. and yes dodge has a 7 year warranty, while mitsubishi has a 3 year warranty. Oh yea, Domestics ultimately put out more torque at lower rpms then aisian cars..(thats what I meant by out torquing)... And yes... The srt-4 is cheeper by 10 grand... next throw that 10 grand into mods for the srt-4 ... Im sure that will put you in the 10 second quarter miles if not faster..

08-18-2003, 12:58 PM	#23
SoBeGirl Video So Fucking Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Planet earth Posts: 2,493	Yea you are right. 10s are frikin fast. I don't think there is any production car that does 10s. Maybe the viper?

08-18-2003, 11:35 PM	#24
Morgan Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2002 Location: Corona Del Mar, CA Posts: 10,520	the 03' viper is badass!!!... no 10's never, but 11.77 isnt bad. 0-60 mph: 3.9 sec 0-100 mph: 8.3 sec Quarter Mile: 11.77 sec @ 123.6 mph Skidpad: 1.05g Top Speed: 190 mph Braking, 60-0 mph: 97 ft Slalom Speed: 70.4 mph it beats my 2.0L 4cyl..... hehehehehe... barely.... __________________ PornstarPlatinum.com \| TransErotica.com

08-19-2003, 12:04 AM	#26
jchennav Registered User Join Date: May 2003 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 72	If you want sub-3-second 0-60 times, a motorcycle is the best choice. However, the insurance per year will cost as much as the bike itself . Given the dealer markup on the Evo and STi (one dealer was asking $45,000 for the STi), I'll take the M3 (with the sequential M gearbox for the L.A. traffic).

08-19-2003, 12:21 AM	#27
wargames Kliris Join Date: May 2003 Location: ca Posts: 10,423	__________________ ICQ 212-115-582 Email Steve at Vas Media Group .com