It didn't take long for Japan's journalists to get the new STI and EVO X side by side, and the results are now officially in. Tsukuba circuit regulars Kazuo Shimizu and Manabu Kawaguchi spent an afternoon thrashing around the notoriously twisty short circuit just north of Tokyo and here (drum roll please) are the best times they could ring out of the AWD rivals:
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X : 1:06:46
Subaru Impreza WRX STI : 1:05:95
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, 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.
Check out this 15 year rivalry of the EVO vs the STI as recorded at Tsukuba after the jump.
[Source: CAR Top magazine]
EVO / STI
2006 1:05:07 / 1:04:72
2005 1:04.88 / 1:04:17
2003 1:05:30 / 1:04:69
2001 1:05:17 / 1:06:56
1998 1:04:69 / 1:06:73
1996 1:07:00 / 1:05:92
1994 1:06:52 / 1:06:26
1992 1:10:90 / 1:07:99
Early Look: £1million Aston Martin One-77
Andrea Pininfarina killed in motorcycle accident
BMW owner tapes black car to white
Nissan confirms G37 Sedan, G37 Convertible and G37x Coupe
2009 Honda Ridgeline introduced early to internet
First Drive: HUMMER H3T
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy![In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG [w/VIDEO]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/08/amg-s63-1280-11_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG [w/VIDEO]
Project Track Slut Update: Prepping for the big 
Second Drive: Porsche Boxster RS60 Spyder
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Ligor @ Dec 5th 2007 2:11PM
still Ugly, but the STi has the Evo X beat since 2001
the Evo X looks a bit better IMO, and I'm still waiting for an Evo x vs. STi match by our press sicne teh STi from US has a totally different engine.
Jake @ Dec 5th 2007 2:14PM
Can't say it's much of a surprise. They've both been victimized by mass production. The companies followed the bell curve and went for a larger market at the risk of ostracizing their small but intrepid following. And look what happened.
I guess the true test will come when the STi goes at it in the WRC...
Apu @ Dec 5th 2007 3:51PM
The following of fanboys are armchair racers who can spout numbers like the ones above, but can't match any of them with their limited skills behind the wheel. None of these pro-driven numbers matter.
mxrz @ Dec 5th 2007 4:14PM
^ Amen ^
naggs @ Dec 5th 2007 9:36PM
you guys miss the point
the slower numbers are indicative of a dulling of both cars. just because some of the buyers will never track the cars is irrelivant
its safe to say that these cars have peaked, just as the m3 peaked with the e30 and hot hatches peaked back when their curb weight was closer to 2200 lbs than the now benchmark 3200 lbs.
they have gotten fat and soft with age and i am officially not interested anymore.
Louis Duran @ Dec 7th 2007 9:49PM
"the slower numbers are indicative of a dulling of both cars."
I'm gonna have to call bulls**t on this statement. The lowered times relative to last years models is measured in hundredths of a second. The difference could be explained by purely environmental factors. Also, if you are serious about autocrossing or rallying these cars, you would put them on a serious weight reduction program. Both Subaru and Mitsubishi know that most buyers aren't that serious about racing but want a fast street car.
PassingAlong @ Dec 5th 2007 2:14PM
As a world class sprinter once said:
"I thought I accounted for all the variables to make me faster today and then I remember I forgot to shave and take a leak."
PassingAlong @ Dec 5th 2007 2:14PM
As a world class sprinter once said:
"I thought I accounted for all the variables to make me faster today and then I remember I forgot to shave and take a leak."
MCS05 @ Dec 5th 2007 2:16PM
Very timely story. I did notice the new cars are not as fast around the track as their predecessors. I am ok with them being a bit softer. I am in my mid forties and have lost interest in a harsh ride. I am also certain the Cobb's, etc. can tighten these cars up for those who desire a track car. I need to replace a car in April and will drive both.
Mike @ Dec 5th 2007 2:24PM
It's also important to note that you can't really compare results from year to year since a few difference in track / air temperatures could account for that.
Jruhi4 @ Dec 5th 2007 2:19PM
Also, the engine in the '08 Subaru STI sits a full 10mm lower in the car than it did in the previous ('02-'07) versions, which lowers the Subie's center of gravity noticeably.
mark_welby @ Dec 5th 2007 2:27PM
That's only .39" . I'm sure it helps, but nothing dramatic.
Pete @ Dec 5th 2007 2:27PM
Which could possibly be offset by the fact that this new STi is a hatchback.
leather bear @ Dec 5th 2007 3:56PM
“Which could possibly be offset by the fact that this new STi is a hatchback.”
I’m guessing that this is strictly a marketing decision on Subaru’s part. Wherever a hatchback and sedan body are offered in the same model, the sales of the hatch usually far outstrips the the one with the trunk (except in the US, where the reverse is the norm; Golf/Jetta anyone?). Subaru probably wants the 5-door to get the brunt of the PR exposure by running it in WRC instead of the sedan, hence no 4-door STi.
As far as I’m concerned (unless you’re a regular auto-X or track day participant), the practicality of a hatchback trumps a sedan for everyday use.
NeoteriX @ Dec 5th 2007 4:31PM
"Which could possibly be offset by the fact that this new STi is a hatchback. "
Except it doesn't. The new center of gravity of the '08 is in fact lower based on data from the NTSHA. I do the math here:
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showpost.php?p=19561678&postcount=718
psarhjinian @ Dec 5th 2007 5:56PM
It might not. Hatchbacks can have better aerodynamic characteristics than sedans.
Of course, we're talking fractions of seconds on a variable track by professional drivers. I don't think most people will notice either way.
Me, I'd love either a Evo Sportback or WRX STi. Since the Sportback isn't likely to happen, that would leave the STi. Of course, since my making STi money isn't going to happen, either, it's a moot point either way.
JGuan @ Dec 5th 2007 9:08PM
Leather Bear
From what I understand, the new STI is a hatchback because Peter Solberg, from WRC, wants it to be a hatch. He wants the hatch design cause of its extra stability at high speeds when off roading. In order for his WRC car to be a hatch, the street production model must be a hatch to meet the homogulation rules. I don't doubt that the hatch version outsells the sedan worldwide though.
Jruhi4 @ Dec 6th 2007 8:15AM
JGuan is correct, plus the reduced rear overhang of a hatchback versus a sedan is a major plus in rallying.
s2d4 @ Dec 5th 2007 2:26PM
in terms of pace, the cars kind of just went back to the 1996 performance... some what sad since they both went backwards to more than 10 years ago...
Carlos @ Dec 5th 2007 2:28PM
That is really sad, I'll just have to look forward to stripping out the sound deading and the heat shielding to lower the weight out of the Evolution in order to achieve what the IX was.