DARKMAZ8

It was a figure of speech.

I'm done with this thread anyway....have a nice day.

globi

Actually, I do think this is very interesting. I wondered why a STS Civic is as fast or faster than a completly stock Evo (no competition tires).
Most of all in order to take advantage of AWD on dry roads a car has to be extremely powerful (or high power to mass (weight) ratio). A stock WRX is probably not powerful enough to take full advantage of AWD on dry roads. If it was 200 lbs lighter and had RWD only, it might be faster just because it has a better rubber and power to mass (weight) ratio and reduced drivetrain loss.
Also, aerodynamic drag doesn't matter at all in autox (a same sized but heavier car with the same power to mass ratio has equal aerodynamic drag and could therefore be faster on a track).

Chrisbert

There is a reason why Mitsu gives such a lengthy warranty. It is because their quality in the past has caused them to market in such fashion as to rebuild confidence in their buyers.

evilbada1

who the hell cares?

There are things I like about evo, sti and rx8 and there are some things that i don't like about them. I still like the 8 the most because of the looks but performance wise, evo and sti > rx8 period. AWD seems like a little cheating to some people but there are ups and downs of having AWD and RWD. Instead of arguing which car is better, just live with the fact of what each car comes with.

And just to make sure,,
rx8 handles much better than 350z

AbusiveWombat

Actually the problem is not the 50/50 torque split. The '03 EVO has a 50/50 split and in medium to high speed corners it's very neutral. A 50/50 split on a front heavy AWD car has a natural tendacy for oversteer. The reason is that all 4 corners have the same size tires, and with more weight on the front, the front tires have the best traction. With equal power distributed, the natural tendacy of the car is oversteer because the front tires have the most traction. It's the manufacturers that set the suspension up for understeer because the general public can't handle oversteer. One of my buddy's has a 2002 WRX with the only mod being springs and that thing is very easy to oversteer...almost too easy.

Red Devil

To get back on topic a bit. (I already weighed in that I'd take a Subaru over a Mitsu.)

As far as the argument of EVO/STI vs. RX-8 at the track, I recently rode in a Vishnu modded EVO (+~100hp) with Ohlin coilovers at the track. To say the least, the car was incredible and had no problems chewing-up a Z06 (not the new one), Viper, Lotus Espirit, Porsche Boxster S, you get the point...

That same weekend I also had the opportunity to ride with a RX-8 that only had sway bars. Was the 8 as fast as the EVO? By no means. But was the 8 slow? Nope, the 8 passed M3's, C5's and Boxsters. And this was not a tight technical course. In fact, one of the Vette owners came over to take a look at the 8 afterward because he was sure it had more than the advertised 238hp. He was quite surprised when he found out the car was basically OEM.

So while the EVO was fantastic, after seeing what the 8 can do relatively stock, I have no doubts that an 8 can be made to track just as fast as an EVO. It may take more money, but I firmly believe they can be an even match.

BlueEyes

It's really a terrible idea to judge the performance of a car by what you pass on the track. There are so many **** poor drivers in fast car, driving slow, it's unreal. It's a hollow bragging right, not a indication of car performance.

Ike

There's no doubt all 3 cars are great handlers, I've never claimed otherwise. Once you start talking modding a car there's no point in bothering. With enough money all sorts of cars can be made to outhandle the Evo, RX-8, and STi. But stock for stock the Evo and STI are a step above anything else in their pricerange when it comes to handling and overall performance, and it's silly to call AWD a handicap when it comes to those cars.

Red Devil

I personally don't see AWD as a handicap. And I agree, once we're talking about modding it does negate the argument a bit. My point was more that both the 8 and the EVO have competent enough chassis' that I don't see one having a clear cut advantage over the other.

As for what cars either the EVO or 8 passed at the track, granted driver is the key, but supposedly people were grouped in their like drving ability/class. And during that weekend, drivers were moved up and down into one of the four classes based on how they were performing. It's not an absolute, but it certainly wasn't a free-for-all either.

BlueEyes

Yeah, that grouping is based on how they are performing. Not how their car is capable of performing. Which is what I said. You could have someone driving an F1 car in a class getting passed by the 8. Could the F1 car destroy an 8? Obviously. Could it be slow in the hands of a terrible terrible driver? Most definitely. Those groups are to keep drivers of similar speed together, not cars and not ability.

PoLaK

iTrader: (1)

Man i would hate to be ur wife/girlfriend you never let an argument go do you.
Anyway isn't there a few guys out there that take the WRX and convert them to RWD drivetrains?

I haven't heard of something like this with an STI but has anyone done this to an STI? and though it would be a long shot was it stock?

btw here is a quote by IkeWRX from december of 2003
and from earlier in this thread

Moostafa29

Someone sure did their research.

BlueEyes

I don't follow Polaks two quotes. What do they have to do with each other? besides the fact that they both mention oversteer, I don't see that anything else is the same. One is about, from my understanding, a tiny little autocross track, with tight corners, and the other some undisclosed corner.

Steiner

PoLaK...those two quotes may appear similair taken at their face value, but they're actually very different. There is no such thing as a "good racing line" in autocrossing.

The grownups are talking now. Come back later when you can contribute.

PoLaK

iTrader: (1)

About that quote all i really did was a search for "importance of oversteer" and to my utter ***** and giggles Ike came up as the 2nd post in the 1st thread

Well I wouldn't go that far to say there is no good racing line in autox, I do know what you mean though, but the principal in auto-x is the same as road racing, a corner is still a corner whether your in North Korea or South Korea increase your radius in the turn so you can make the straightaways longer and have a higher exit speed.

A tight auto-x is not very different from a tight 1-2 or 1-2-3-4 section on a road course, the more tight sections you put on a road course the smaller the difference in the time split between an rx-8 and STI gets. Different horses for different races I suppose you could put it.

I'm not here to argue the fact that 8 does better on auto-x's then the STI and worse on all but a very select few road corses of which I don't even know the name, but RWD's superiority when it comes to racing line and weight transfer under heavy breaking. As well as AWD's easier to drive fast factor because of increase stability while cornering, and RWD's lack thereof and requiring greater driver skill to perfect.

If your going to use a AWDvsRWD comparos on road coures do the WRX not the STI as the dyno's and Power to Weight ratios are virtually the same and 1/4 miles times are seperated by 1/10th of a section, and since you can't call the Rx-8 anymore "purpose built" for track racing then the WRX.

Any clarification on RWD conversions on WRX's and STI's?
And BTW digital dmg i deleted all of ur posts here make one more asinine comment and I'll ban you.

Steiner

A valid point but a "WRX vs. RX-8" comparison is mucho OT for this thread, albeit very interesting to me at least.

The JGTC Cusco Impreza is the only one I know of...



But there are some Evo tuners in the US who switched an Evo to RWD for drifting purposes IIRC.

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=161278

Here's a video of it...

http://www.dcalledesign.com/RMR_RWD_Evo.wmv

PoLaK

iTrader: (1)

odd didn't know the cusco WRX was RWD interest though unless of course its only because AWD is outlawed in the JGTC?

I only bring up the point because of this thead on NASOIC that i got after a quick AWD vs. RWD comparo http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=391425

Ike

That's cute Polak, but if you had just read my response on this thread it would have saved you some time.

"The STI and the Evo don't do so well in autox, very few AWD and turbo cars do. Yes it does have something to do with lack of understeer, but even more to do with gearing and the nature of turbo engines. Autox is a silly way to evaluate a cars performance IMO. Find me a racetrack with a slalom, and a layout where you never get out of second gear, with multiple 15-20moh turns and I'll think it's a valid way of evaluating performance cars. Wait, no I won't, I'll just think that racetrack is a waste of space... Autox has it's place and it can be an indication of some of the capabilities of a car, it can also be fun, but that's it."

The only serious RWD Impreza I can think of is the Cusco JGTC car. It's RWD because AWD is banned in the JGTC, clearly that's because it's a handicap and has nothing to do with an AWD dominating the series to the point that other manufacturers were bailing out.

As for other RWD Imprezas, the others that I have seen are most from guys messing around and just pulling parts of their drivetrain out.

Here's a little video for you in case you've forgoten, enjoy.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...10711702&q=wrx

Ike

You've been searching for some evidence of what you thought was me contradicting myself since 11-12-2005, @ 11:58 PM haven't you? Poor little guy, and all that time there was a perfectly good explanation in this thread. You need a break, go get yourself some milk and cookies!

Ike

I'm just messing with you Polak, don't take it too seriously, I'm really not that big of a dick. Wait... yes I am

Digital_Damage

Finally something we can all agree on.

snizzle

At least you know it, most people are in denial about that sorta thing....now go get yourself some milk and cookies as well for admitting it

RotarySoldier

I have question for you guys. I have been thinking about getting one of these two cars. I would primarily be using it as a daily driver, but most of my friends drive FDs so I am sure I will drive the car hard a “few” times a month. If this was the case do you think that any minute difference between the two cars (STI Understeer ect) will even be an issue? Or is does that make even more of a, which car do you like better thing?

I have driven both and the only differences i could find were the Evo felt a little easier to drive and the seats were the most comfortable seats i have ever sat in.
But the STIs interior aside from the fact that it was blue was a lot more appealing. The Evo interior was cheap. The big problem was i wasnt aloud to really "DRIVE" either of the cars.

I have also heard that the reason the Evo has a better warrenty is due to the fact that it has more problems and that the cost of up keep is hier? anyone know if this true?

RotaryRider36

Just to add my two cents to the topic. Somewhere on page one, an individual stated they wernt sure of the difference between the mr and regular evo. The usdm MR has a six speed transmission as oppossed to the rs and standard evo's 5 speed. It also has an aluminum roof for lightened weight and better weight transfer. This is suppossed to yield slightly better handling over a standard evo. The Mr also uses Bilstein suspension for better handling, yet a somewhat more comfortable ride. Instead of using the rs and standard evo's enkie wheels, the mr uses lightweight BBS wheels carried over from the 8 mr. The final major difference b/w the MR and regular evo, is that addition of the vortex generator, which are pointed fins placed between the roof and rear windshield for aerodynamic purposes.

As for the question regarding why the old subaru 2.5 rs's came with a hoodscoop when they did not have an intercooler. Its simple. It was purely for aesthetic purposes. Subaru was testing the american market to see if there was a high enough interest in importing the famed wrx. By selling the same car here at least visually, consumers could purchase the car that they identified with but could never attain for so many years. Subaru's idea obviously paid off, when you consider the success of theolder 2.5 rs, and the eventual importation of the wrx and STI. FOr the record, while I support the EVO 100%, without subaru having tested the waters here with the 2.5 rs, I doubt very much that either the wrx, sti, or evo would ever have come to the United States. So cheers to Subaru for taking that risk.

Ike

We weren't sure of the differences between the Evo VIII MR and the Evo IX MR. not the differences between the MR, GS, and RS.