Originally posted by 95ProLeila
* BANG FOR BUCK
-
IF (EVO RS $ < STI $) AND (EVO RS # < STI #), THEN (EVO RS B.F.B.* > STI B.F.B.)
* BANG FOR BUCK
-
By # you mean acceleration numbers, not hp right?
Comment
-
lol ... I meant weight... sorry about that.Originally posted by LexComment
-
Subaru AWD > Mitsu AWDOriginally posted by ThatCarGuy
STi > EvoComment
-
Meh, I stand by my choice... the STI just felt like wet noodle compared to the evo when test driving...Originally posted by 95ProLeila
besides... Who would want a car thats name stood for "sexually transmitted infection"
Comment
-
Love your car man. But I would trade in my 1.5L, 92HP pro for a car named herpes in a heartbeat my friend. Just give me the 300HP + and I would give a crap what the car is called. Ha. I can almost taste the horsepower.Originally posted by ThatCarGuyMeh, I stand by my choice... the STI just felt like wet noodle compared to the evo when test driving...
besides... Who would want a car thats name stood for "sexually transmitted infection"
But I love the look of the Evo a whole lot more than that of the STI although you really cannot lose with either.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 95ProLeila
what kinda crack are you smoking?
the looks better
its faster
it doesnt cost as much
it doesnt cost as much to fix
and its faster
even the regular 8's were faster then the sti when they came out, so lets not even start talking about the evo 8 MR
theres no comparison
but im with the sanman
i'll take either of them anyday!!!1997 U-13 Nissan Altima
Comment
-
The MRs were WAYYY too expensive... I can barely afford the payments on the RS, which didn't even come with a radio...
Last edited by ThatCarGuy; 07-18-2005, 03:36 PM.Comment
-
I think the evo's are teh ****, but after the problems with my dads mistu eclipse Gt, and the clutch problems I always hear about with evo's I think I'll keep my distance, but nonetheless they are bad ass.
Comment
-
what the hell are you talking about?Originally posted by T4TURBOwhat kinda crack are you smoking?
the looks better
its faster
it doesnt cost as much
it doesnt cost as much to fix
and its faster
even the regular 8's were faster then the sti when they came out, so lets not even start talking about the evo 8 MR
theres no comparison
but im with the sanman
i'll take either of them anyday!!!
they're both around $30K, the Evo might be faster in a straight line, but the STi will put up better track times. What numbers are you using to say the STi costs more to fix. Looks are totally subjective, and the Evo has no DCCD.Comment
-
Oh great, another evo / sti argument
Just to get the facts straight
Evo Handles Better then Sti
But Sti is faster, straightline wise
But again, both are really close
Oh and to clear things up
Sti Spec C > Any EvoJoe H
2000 Chevy Impala
3400 3.4 Liter V6
Fun Times
Fenderwell Intake w/ K&N Cone,
U-Bend Delete, Resonator Delete,
Flowmaster 40, Hi-Flow Cat, Optima Redtop
Comment
-
WRONG!! http://www.autocar.co.uk/FirstDrive_....asp?RT=212051Originally posted by Vash00es
since the spec c doesnt come to america, this is game.
its faster than a Pagani Zonda or Carrera GT to 60Last edited by ThatCarGuy; 07-18-2005, 05:19 PM.Comment
-
^^^ HA HA HA HA EVO's rule!!!! ......but i love sti just as much....and sti are not faster in a strait line1997 U-13 Nissan Altima
Comment
-
evo doesn't have a 6 speed does it?Comment
-
The MR gets a 6Originally posted by 95ProLeila
"Discontent is the first necessity of progress."
-Thomas A. Edison
"There is a fine line between ballin' on a budget, and dreamin' on an empty wallet."
*Junked* 92 mx3, BP swap- milage whore, beaten up and down the east coast
*Junked* KLZE powered 323 on Megasquirt 1
172.60HP & 156.93 TQ with only headers and short ram intake. back under the knife for a BPT swap.
New Daily stock 1.6L 1999 Mazda Protege LXComment
Comment