Test drove an EVO 8 (?) last night

Chris Landi · **Joined:** Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:31 pm **Posts:** 579

Matthew Fortner wrote:

They are both slow:

Mitsubishi Evo RS 2005
5-60mph 6.4 sec Car & Driver
20-40 mph 2.6 sec AutoWeek
40-60 mph 2.8 sec AutoWeek
60-80 mph 4 sec AutoWeek

Subaru STi 2004
5-60mph 6.4 sec
20-40 mph 2.0 sec AutoWeek
40-60 mph 2.3 sec AutoWeek
60-80 mph 3.1 sec AutoWeek

Logged and averaged runs from my RX-7
5-60mph 5.75 sec
20-40 mph 1.7 sec AutoWeek
40-60 mph 2.1 sec AutoWeek
60-80 mph 2.6 sec AutoWeek

Those numbers are the slowest ones I've see. Also, the biggest factor in the straightline aspect of their performance is missing...the launch.

0-60 for the STi: 4.8 seconds. One mag got as low as 4.64 (can't remember which one but I seem to think it was C&D)
5-60 5.84 seconds
http://www.car-videos.net/performance/v ... 169&ID2=70

With exhaust and electrical tuning both the STi and EVO become low 4 second 0-60 cars. I don't know what a 3rd gen rx-7 is but I assume it's the mac-daddy twin turbo. If so..

http://www.car-videos.net/performance/v ... 69&ID2=198

Kevin Allen · **Joined:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:42 pm **Posts:** 3479

Quote:

What bugs me about the EVO and increasingly more cars (not sure about the STi) is the chassis dynamics are characterized by software.

I don't really care what characterizes which on a car, as long as it's fun to drive. And an STi is REALLY, REALLY, EXTREMELY fun to drive.

Ashraf Farrag · **Posted:** Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:36 pm

That second link supports the FD3S or the Mustang is a better car where it really counts:
In both cases, the car other than the STi had the faster lap times.

The STi is a fine vehicle. Saw 'em on track at VIR as well as two EVO's this weekend. I'd take either one.

Hmm. This sounds like an excuse for me to test drive both platforms since I have no vested interest in either manufacturer and give an unbiased local report on which hackmobile is the best.

Regards,
--Ashraf

Matthew Fortner · **Joined:** Sun Mar 21, 2004 12:21 am **Posts:** 384

Kevin Allen wrote:

I don't really care what characterizes which on a car, as long as it's fun to drive. And an STi is REALLY, REALLY, EXTREMELY fun to drive.

I guess I'm just old fashioned. I'd prefer to have a naturally balanced chassis than computers sorting it out. I'm not saying the cars are not fun to drive. Both the EVO and STi are hands down fun as hell.

Matthew Fortner · **Joined:** Sun Mar 21, 2004 12:21 am **Posts:** 384

Straight from the source:
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons ... page4.html

6.4 secs for a rolling start did not surprise me given the larger single turbo set up and lack of the traction advantage at launch. I hate 0-60 times anyway. I want to know how quickly I can accelerate while moving ...exiting a turn.

Chris Landi wrote:

Those numbers are the slowest ones I've see. Also, the biggest factor in the straightline aspect of their performance is missing...the launch.

0-60 for the STi: 4.8 seconds. One mag got as low as 4.64 (can't remember which one but I seem to think it was C&D)
5-60 5.84 seconds
http://www.car-videos.net/performance/v ... 169&ID2=70

BriceJohnson · **Joined:** Thu Apr 13, 2006 7:33 am **Posts:** 2230

Todd Breakey wrote:

There was a guy that showed up to the first Sanford event this year in one. The only memoriable thing about him was his insistance that his Evo was an STX car, not STU! :roll:

Sorry for the stupid question, but what makes an EVO an STU car instead of STX? Its tires and wheels are ok (8" wide, 235's stock), the engine is a 2.0 boosted. . .

Is there a specific exlusion of it from STX?

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:23 am

Matthew Fortner wrote:

Straight from the source:
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons ... page4.html

6.4 secs for a rolling start did not surprise me given the larger single turbo set up and lack of the traction advantage at launch. I hate 0-60 times anyway. I want to know how quickly I can accelerate while moving ...exiting a turn.

Do C&D, et al left foot brake at the start of the 5-60 runs? I bet most turbo cars go faster from 5-60 if you are holding both the go and stop pedals to maintain 5mph than they do if you just coast at 5 mph then mash the gas.

If I have a turbo car and I'm concerned about lap times, you can bet I'll be left foot braking out of any tight corner.

Scott Johnson · **Posted:** Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:24 am

BriceJohnson wrote:

Is there a specific exlusion of it from STX?

You got it.

Jason Mauldin · **Posted:** Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:12 am

scottjohnson wrote:

If I have a turbo car and I'm concerned about lap times, you can bet I'll be left foot braking out of any tight corner.

Until you learn that you can't brake well without vacuum.

Generally a quick snap of the clutch is all it takes to build boost. (and break trannies/axles/etc.)

Graham Jagger · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:53 am **Posts:** 1718

From the C&D article:

The plodders call this sort of action sociopathic scofflaw road rage. We have a shorter term for it: fun.

That's funny. So all STi and Evo owners are sociopaths. Seems reasonable :lol:

I like the look of the EVO MR better. But it would appear that the STi is the better overall car. Mitsu doesn't help their cause with their warranty issues either :wink:

Todd Breakey · **Posted:** Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:43 pm

BriceJohnson wrote:

Todd Breakey wrote:

There was a guy that showed up to the first Sanford event this year in one. The only memoriable thing about him was his insistance that his Evo was an STX car, not STU! :roll:

Sorry for the stupid question, but what makes an EVO an STU car instead of STX? Its tires and wheels are ok (8" wide, 235's stock), the engine is a 2.0 boosted. . .

Is there a specific exlusion of it from STX?

That was this guy's argument also. However, it is on the exclusion list and rightfully so. Most people don't read all of the rules. (Not a slam against you Brice, just a fact that most people don't want to read the SCCA Solo rule book. It can get rather boring.)

BriceJohnson · **Joined:** Thu Apr 13, 2006 7:33 am **Posts:** 2230

Todd Breakey wrote:

BriceJohnson wrote:

Todd Breakey wrote:

There was a guy that showed up to the first Sanford event this year in one. The only memoriable thing about him was his insistance that his Evo was an STX car, not STU! :roll:

Sorry for the stupid question, but what makes an EVO an STU car instead of STX? Its tires and wheels are ok (8" wide, 235's stock), the engine is a 2.0 boosted. . .

Is there a specific exlusion of it from STX?

That was this guy's argument also. However, it is on the exclusion list and rightfully so. Most people don't read all of the rules. (Not a slam against you Brice, just a fact that most people don't want to read the SCCA Solo rule book. It can get rather boring.)

Hehehe, and I'm sure a lot of M3 owners would like to argue that their car should be STX legal as well. . .

Kevin Allen · **Joined:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:42 pm **Posts:** 3479

I was baffled by how a magazine could get a 5-60mph time of 6.4sec for an STi (see above). So I decided to test the 5-60 time of my STi tonight on the way home from work. Full tank of gas, about 100 lbs of stuff in the car in various places, and yes the washer reservoir was full. :lol:

(it's totally stock other than a few bushings and a pair of crash bolts in the front)

Did 3 runs for each test, down a level straight about 1/2 mile long with a good turnaround spot at each end of the straight; did runs in each direction. 5mph is not indicated on my speedometer, so I just went from barely moving. Each number is an avg of 3 runs, and all results were +/- a tenth in each group

5-60 times:

starting in 1st gear = 5.5 sec

starting in 2nd gear = 5.9 sec

starting in 3rd gear = 6.8 sec

:shock:

Chris Landi · **Joined:** Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:31 pm **Posts:** 579

^^^ The STi's 5-60 time is a little misleading...damn gearing. If started in 1st you have two shifts to hit 60 since 3rd is required.

Kevin: What are you using to measure your times? And, Can I borrow it?

Graham Jagger · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:53 am **Posts:** 1718

Chris Landi wrote:

^^^ The STi's 5-60 time is a little misleading...damn gearing. If started in 1st you have two shifts to hit 60 since 3rd is required.

Kevin: What are you using to measure your times? And, Can I borrow it?

1001, 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005 ... and a half.... :wink:

THSCC Forums

Test drove an EVO 8 (?) last night

Who is online