• Dec 5th 2007 at 2:02PM
  • 42

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]

  • Lancer Evolution X GSR Seat
  • Lancer Evolution X RS Dashboard
  • Lancer Evolution X GSR Dashboard
  • Lancer Evolution X RS Seat
  • Lancer Evolution X ACD
  • Lancer Evolution X AYC
  • Lancer Evolution X S-AWC mode shifter
  • Lancer Evolution X MIVEC Engine
  • Lancer Evolution X Turbo Charger
  • Lancer Evolution X Chassis
  • Lancer Evolution X Front Disk Brake
  • Lancer Evolution X ENKEI Alloy Wheel
  • Lancer Evolution X 5M/T
  • Lancer Evolution X TC-SST
  • Lancer Evolution X TC-SST Shifter
  • Lancer Evolution X TC-SST Paddle Shifter
  • Lancer Evolution X Body
  • Lancer Evolution X Spoiler
  • Lancer Evolution X Difuser
  • Lancer Evolution X SRS Airbag
  • Lancer Evolution X MMCS
  • Lancer Evolution X Rockford
  • Lancer Evolution X RECARO Seat
  • Lancer Evolution X High Contrast Indicator
  • Lancer Evolution X BBS Alloy Wheel
  • Lancer Evolution X Colored Outlet 1
  • Lancer Evolution X Colored Outlet 2
  • Lancer Evolution X Leather Seats
  • Lancer Evolution X Eibach
  • Lancer Evolution X 2 Pieces Front Disk Brake


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

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 7 Years Ago
      Wow, over the years the battle favors the STI. I always thought the Evos were the faster cars on the track, and the STI was always the more livable but not quite as fast car. I seem to remember comparisons in the last few years always stating that, but this says otherwise.
        • 7 Years Ago
        It's usually the STI variants that are faster than the Evo in Japan, i.e. Spec C, s204, Type RA, etc.

        The USDM specs of these cars have the Evo clearly pushing more aggressive real-world power numbers. In a nutshell, Evo's are damn quick in America, but comparable to STI's in Japan.
        • 7 Years Ago
        That was my assumption as well. Perhaps those were drag numbers that we're referring to, as oppose to technical track figures.
        • 7 Years Ago
        my thoughts exactly
        • 7 Years Ago
        i think top gear consistently had the Evo as the quicker car. Then they brought on the MR-FQ's, which were just insane.
      • 7 Years Ago
      I assume this is a 2.0L STI and not a 2.5?
        • 7 Years Ago
        That's correct. It's the JDM rendition, and the USDM model is going to get a 2.5L block with a little more balls.
      • 7 Years Ago
      Half a second difference. Not bad considering the Evo's inferior power:weight ratio.

      I'm guessing it outhandles the STi.

      "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"

      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.

      Clearly, it's not the extra few hundred pounds that's doing it. It's that the (lighter) engine is 2" forward of where it normally is. That's what killed it.


      Anyway, for more info and discussion on this topic, check us out at http://www.evoxforums.com
        • 7 Years Ago
        i take it you driven the evo x
      • 7 Years Ago
      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."
      • 7 Years Ago
      As far as I know, the JDM (and USDM) Evo IXs and VIIIs have consistently beaten the JDM and USDM STis in the past few years. This was clearly shown in comparisons held by Best Motoring, Top Gear, Car and Driver and many others.

      Therefore I think that your sources of past year lap times should be checked, the Evo was then the clear winner.
      • 7 Years Ago
      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.
        • 7 Years Ago
        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.
      • 7 Years Ago
      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.
      • 7 Years Ago
      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...
        • 7 Years Ago
        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.
        • 7 Years Ago
        "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.
        • 7 Years Ago
        ^ Amen ^
        • 7 Years Ago
        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.
      • 7 Years Ago
      i can live without that half a second, but i CANT live eithough the looks of the Evo.
      • 7 Years Ago
      STi ugly? Perhaps, but I'm withholding judgment until viewing the thing in person. In some photos it looks bad a$$ and in others .. not so much. Hatchbacks rock.
      • 7 Years Ago
      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.
        • 7 Years Ago
        "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:

        • 7 Years Ago
        That's only .39" . I'm sure it helps, but nothing dramatic.
        • 7 Years Ago
        JGuan is correct, plus the reduced rear overhang of a hatchback versus a sedan is a major plus in rallying.
      • 7 Years Ago
      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.
        • 7 Years Ago
        mitsu has pulled completly out of WRC

        the evo is not competative against the smaller hatches and it was to expensive to develope a new model espically considering the homoligation rules

        the evo is no longer a homoligation special, it is designed to be a street car thru and thru. and it shows.

        rip evo, we hardly knew thee
        • 7 Years Ago
        I wonder if Mitsu will bring the new model to play in WRC or keep flogging the race losing current car?
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X