I assume they used the GSR.
People are just angry because its slower than the 9, and most people who complain are 9 owners anyways.I'm sorry but .5 seconds is not enough to make the Evo a worst car or the STi the clear winner. Personally, with a test like that I call these cars even. Half a second can be chalk up to driver error or many other things. People need to stop acting like these numbers are written in stone just cause thats the lowest SOMEONE ELSE could put down. Doesn't matter if they are professial or not they're still human which makes them fowlible.
Half a second difference. Not bad considering the Evo's inferior power:weight ratio.Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X : 1:06:46
Subaru Impreza WRX STI : 1:05:95
Huh? How on earth is that "proven"? They changed 9000 things about the X...what makes them assume that the engine placement is the culprit? Morons.So there you have it. The new engine placed further forward in the engine bay of the EVO X than in the EVO IX has indeed proven to be a handicap,
In the case of the STi, the last sentence negates the sentence immediately preceding it. Wow, these guys are mental scholars.while the STI's "wheel at each corner" longer wheelbase plus new double wishbone rear suspension has proved its worth.
Neither car is quite as quick as its immediate ancestor though.
You and me both. I guess S-AWC is playing it's part?I am actually surprised at the time gap between the 2 even though STI has a 200-300lb advantage.
Agreed. Besides that, one simple mod could easily make up that time difference.I'm sorry but .5 seconds is not enough to make the Evo a worst car or the STi the clear winner.
It might be a lil slow but .5 seconds isn't alot. People are disappointed like the car took a giant leap backwards. there's nothing wrong with X, both cars have there strengths and weaknesses. I was going to buy the IX SE but I like the X more. People are only listening to the things they want to, I just got finish reading this discussion on EvoM and some idiot was talking smack til someone pointed out that the IX was slower then the 06 Sti in the above comparison then he didn't believe anything on the list... from what I can tell EvoM is filled with a bunch of cry babies.
Already have...but I'm only one man, so help a brotha out!The admin should go to evom and invite the cool people
Agreed, out of the all the forums I visit daily, I have to say EvoM has the most hate. Even when the G37 came out, which honestly was another disappointment to some, G35 owners didn't bash it nearly as much as X gets bashed on EvoM. People simply went ahead and bought another car, they didn't stay on the forum whining and crying about what an disappointment it was...Im so glad that im not the only one tired of the haters on EvoM. Really, its not that the majority of Evo owners hate the X, its that the 15 or so that do, post in every single post about the X several times, giving that illusion. They burt out sentences like "the Evo X is the worst car ever made. Its so slow, Mitsu failed!!" Yet both EvoXs where fractions of a second behind the IX on the track, and even beat it on the twisty course. So in the end, Its fractions behind the IX, but better handling, better looking, safer, and more livable when im not at the track?? Im sold!
More on topic: as the history shows, STi has always beaten the Evo on that track. Whats great to see is how close it is. STI is basiclly working off of old technology. The potential and limits of that format can be predicted. The EvoX on the other hand is all brand new, and to me that is exciting. If its that close in the stock form, what can it really do?? if this was the IX, we would all know because its all been done. But those who get the X will be pioneers and part of this Evo's deveolpment. That is the essance of tuning, jumping into the unknown and trying something that has never been done to see what the car can do.
So let's take a statistical analysis of this as well as some real-time matchups that I've been to. According to the Tsukuba records, in each of those years, the Evo was beaten by it's STi counterpart. On the average, by about the same half second as seen in the 2008 results. OK cool. Noted.EVO / STI
2006 1:05:07 / 1:04:72
2005 1:04.88 / 1:04:17
2003 1:05:30 / 1:04:69