Nice comparison of the Subaru STI vs. Pontiac GTO. Nice write up, but also includes a good video.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=105773?tid=edmunds.h..insideline.promo.2 g.*

Not a bad writeup but they seriously need to get some people that have a clue how to drive...

Not a bad writeup but they seriously need to get some people that have a clue how to drive...

like you :rolleyes:

Same mission? I completely disagree. The GTO was never meant to be an all out racer. It was made so that GM's performance oriented division could have something that could at least be called, well, performance oriented. The GTO certainly makes great sacrafices for comfort and driveabililty. It's also just a nearly 10 year old Monaro redesigned with a new engine...

Why do you say that Ike? They clearly picked the Subaru...

Same mission? I completely disagree. The GTO was never meant to be an all out racer. It was made so that GM's performance oriented division could have something that could at least be called, well, performance oriented. The GTO certainly makes great sacrafices for comfort and driveabililty. It's also just a nearly 10 year old Monaro redesigned with a new engine...

Why do you say that Ike? They clearly picked the Subaru...

I think I know why he said that! I'm not sure but I'm pretty sure I have seen test numbers for the GTO with the 6.0 liter getting low 13s maybe even high 12s. The STI I know for fact can get high 12s to low 13s in the 1/4 mile but they could only muster 14seconds on both these cars. I think Ike has a valid point when an average driver can take an STI and get about 13.5s and they only pull off 14.1s.

Helen Keller could have pulled off better 1/4 mile times in those cars. The only thing that should cause 1/4 times like that on those cars is 5,000 feet of elevation.

Edmunds is notorious for slow times. They drive it like they own the cars, i.e no clutch drops. They always get slow times, pretty much on every car. You just have to take it in context that they will all be slower then times seen elsewhere.

Edmunds is notorious for slow times. They drive it like they own the cars, i.e no clutch drops. They always get slow times, pretty much on every car. You just have to take it in context that they will all be slower then times seen elsewhere.


Actually I'd just say they can't drive or it was 100 degrees and 2 miles high in elevation...


"The clutch can withstand full throttle dumps without a whimper and doing so will drop-kick you from zero to 60 in just 5.8 seconds."

That's slower than a stock WRX with a decent driver.

Actually I'd just say they can't drive or it was 100 degrees and 2 miles high in elevation...


"The clutch can withstand full throttle dumps without a whimper and doing so will drop-kick you from zero to 60 in just 5.8 seconds."

That's slower than a stock WRX with a decent driver.

Could be. I think they are based in LA, and a few weeks ago it was 100+ degrees. Not to mention if it was Palmdale that they were doing their accelerations tests at it very well is 1,000's of feet above sea level & hotter than Hades. Best I ever did there in my 911 was 13.9 (same with my friends M3) & we were racing Z06's that were doing 13 flats. Different tracks can give different results. Palmdale (which is where they might have done the tests as LA only has a few 1/4 mile tracks) happens to be skewed on the worst side.

I don't know of any publications that use dragstrips to do their testing so I'd be surprised if Edmunds did it that way. But it's possible.

I was helping my dad shop for an SUV last night and so we figured we'd take the GTO out for a spin since I had pulled up in the RX8. It was a new 05 with the 400HP LS2 and all I can say is..... WOW. The torque is amazing. Didn't get a real feel for the handling of the car but I did get to let it rip a couple of times.... nothing like Amercan muscle.

Too bad i'm under 25 and male :D

Yeah, it's best to ignore the times Edmunds gives. If my STi can only run a 14.1, then that means my RX8 can only run a 15.4.