prince_of_tokyo

the flat four burble has always driven me away from evos and towards scooby's... and also you can get 2 door scoobs, not the same with evos (unless you cut n shut like norris designs did)

scubaladdie

True..... I could take an HT lead off and it might sound like a Scooby lol

~DrEaM~

have had Evo 4 6 and 7.

they are fast, but missing the flat 4 burble

now driving a STI JDM twin scroll running decent power and no flat 4 burble.

tempted to go back to the 'DARK SIDE'

the EVO 8 MR in gunmetal grey looks so evil

alloy

Kev, we cant loose you again.....and your STI is looking

andythejock01wrx

C'mon Christmas is over, let battle commence !

(I'm enjoying this thread !)

Bone

I realise that not everyone out there owns a car or purchases them because they are an enthusiast and may make a choice based on what they have read, heard or purely on appearance without actually testing all the options,

HOWEVER, IF you took 1000 people from each significant city in england, (500 enthusisasts and 500 general consumers of motor vehicles) and offered them one of the latest Lancer evolutions or one of the lastest Imprezas what do you think the outcome would be?

Disregarding things like fuel, servicing etc I'm guessing that most people would pick the Mistubishi variant and by at least 70-30%! Does anyone actually believe more people would take the Subaru?

30% is more than generous and would cover those that prefer the burble or handling. The Evo is just 'better' in nearly every way.

Every test, be it TV shows, reports or magazines favour the Evo and no its not because its the FQ400 against the Sti, they often compare the ones that are even in power. AS i keep saying.

No doubt some one will pop up in a minute saying the Spec Z 555 Hyper galatic space shaped, marsh mallow scroll turbo tuned up will beat the standard 320 or 340.

Theres inferior and superior, which are you at the lights, on the twisties or on the track? Ignore the question mark.

reano

iTrader: (2)

OMG you are already biased in your question ? Who (except the rich) won't consider servicing, ongoing costs, etc? You also forgot to take out looks, daily driver, initial purchase price and ride quality to make it even more biased Next you mentioned about every test where they are in the same power band loler! Really? Spec C vs mitsubishi in same powerband? T20/25 vs ? Next you forget that even where the powerbands have been out like sti ppp vs FQ320 (20 bhp out) the people 'like topgear' preferred the Subaru loler or did you forget that?

Like I have said countless times you have to take cost into consideration or why don't we just compare the Mitsu with a Bugatti? With the money left over from just the initial purchase of an STI with like power (even if a Spec C) you can take the Subaru past the EVO performance. Please read threads again and see. Then the Mitsu has no more advantage just negatives. Higher running costs, looks, sound, ride quality, etc. If you want to say "Better Track Car" Then I refer you to the answers I gave earlier "Then go get an Ariel Atom or Caterham!"

Bone

The reason i leave out running costs is simply because most things being said are actually about the cars not the ongoing financial aspect of motoring. Scroll through this thread and you see things posted like, Handling, mods etc.

Which evos would the wrx Sti beat then? What Evos would the others beat? Tell me. List the MR Fq's say 300, 320, 340 and 400 and tell me which subarus would be each one, be it track/twisties or straight line. Go on lets laugh.

Just admit it, the Impreza is just so far behind.

Noticed that you didn't mention how you thought a survey/giveaway would end up. LOL. Perhaps thats because very few in there right minds would choose the Impreza if they had the choice.

Bone

And? Some peoploe on here prefer the Impreza but its still minority. What are the results of the track TIMES and board though? Thought so. Thats my arguement and interior, Sound and Look has already been concluded, keep up.

If you read my posts you would of seen that i said i prefered the Impreza in some ways just that its dissapointed it always gets a beating by the Evos.

banny sti

iTrader: (68)

Here bone knock yourself out, hoping for an unbiased response

YouTube - Lancer Evo 9 MR battle

Banny

Maz

iTrader: (34)

Well I've owned both and prefer the Impreza, and funnily enough the Impreza whilst dynamically inferior is still in my opinion a better car all round.

T-uk

as I said in my post , the evo is the faster car but it is not all about track times in road cars .


I think you must have used the same crowd as the last owner of JB's car used

scubaladdie

Just my opinion but I think the Evo 5 and 6 look far better than any Scoob except perhaps the P1.... sadly I can't say the same about the Evo 7 and 8

john banks

There is nothing I love more than responding to an argument that something is "bollocks".

Even an FQ360 has more power than 360 BHP and it runs a cat, standard induction and the factory boost controller, not a lot of top end boost or timing and very rich.

I have found that Dastek rollers seem to read similar to MAHA for flywheel power. In the spec I got the car in it did 370 BHP at Dastek - 3" exhaust, Walbro, HKS EVC V, Ecutek map. The boost was very soft, however this was claimed to be 394 BHP on Dyno Dynamics (which I think was optimistic for that spec).

Evo013.JPG @ Fotopic.Net

With airbox lid off and Dawes running more boost I did 399 BHP at Dastek with plain Optimax. The ECU had been remapped by the previous owner but had standard VVT, standard ignition timing, and the fuelling was very close to stock FQ320.

jbevo1.jpg @ Fotopic.Net

I would not claim 400 lbft on pump fuel with reasonable boost, but I maintain that being able to get an FQ320 near 400 BHP for £215 is reasonable. ECU remap cable £85, decat pipe £60, modify airbox lid free, Walbro £70. Can you tell me what else would be needed and why the above is deficient or are you just recycling what tuners have told you?

Which dyno do you tell me I can't breach 360 BHP on with basic mods on a IX?

When some are claiming 420 BHP (which I do believe is a little high) with basic mods on a IX, I think 360 BHP would be fine on Maha, Dastek, Dyno Dynamics which seem to be commonly used rollers. On some of these rollers you might not always breach 400 BHP, but my claim was you'll be near it.

If it only did 360 BHP I would have bought an STI instead because there would be little point to the compromises that an Evo gives for daily use as T-uk points out. At the end of the day the choice between Impreza/Evo is preference.

I think about 340-350 BHP is a reasonable upper target on the stock UK STI turbo. Have you looked at the physical size and airflow data (compressor maps or datalogs) of this turbo against the Evo IX turbo?

Whilst we're here discussing what you believe is impossible, how did an US Evo do a 10.9x sec quarter mile at 129.x mph with no nitrous on stock turbo/ECU?

scubaladdie

Oh forgot the 9.... rapidly growing on me and the only car I'd replace my 6 with in a couple of years

Plenty peeps on the MLR with Evo 5's and 6's running 400bhp with nothing more than full turbo-back exhaust, induction, fuel pump, cams, EcuTek and boost controller....

Could be wrong but John will know better, but think the 8MR and the 9 with its Mivec head are even more tuneable?

john banks

Sam the Dentist (who regularly turns out approx 400 BHP Evo IXs on a variety of dynos) tells me that the difference in power between 8MR and 9 is due to the size of the compressor cover on the 9, the cams between 8MR and 9 are the same. I have not examined or tested this personally.

The intake cam advance goes to zero at peak power on the 9. So the torque on the 9 comes from MIVEC, and power from the slightly larger turbo. 8MR is very nice though even so.

PCM

Comeplete bollocks




First of all the standard exhaust is not good enough to carry 400bhp and a remap alone cost £500 and even if you did a DIY job you wouldn't hit no more then 340/350.

And am sure the injectors on an evo ix are maxed out circa 370bhp.

And i would love to test my 360bhp spec c against your so called 400bhp evo

Pcm

scubaladdie

Plenty of Evo's running 400bhp on stock injectors,stock intercooler,stock internals and, in the case of the 5,6 and 9, stock turbo...

Mind you, think I've seen a few classic Impreza's mapped by Andy Forrest running 400bhp on stock internals?

evo north

The evo 9 comes on boost sooner than the 8's, with the right mods they are defo making 400bhp, my car is an evo 8 weighing in at 1475 kg, i have run 6x quarters at 12.33 @ 112.7mph, at pod, shakey and york, the 9's are putting more power from the bigger turbo, i run at 1.64 peak boost, its all on stock engine, and bb turbo, 10.5t housing,
I would say its a personal choice between the scooby and evo, i wouldn't touch a uk scooby, i would only look at a spec c,

john banks

PCM, the FQ400 seems to manage OK with this exhaust. What specifically is wrong with it? 2.5" downpipe would apparently be a problem but it seems not when actually tested, there are back to back tests of 3" vs 2.5" downpipe and it seems to make 1 or 2 BHP difference at this level. I got 406 BHP out of a UK Scooby on unopened engine using a 3-2.5" downpipe and 2.5" midsection back exhaust.

The injectors on the Evo are about 565 cc. I am indeed now maxxing them out at about 400 BHP. If you run 370 BHP with them maxxed out it runs quite rich. This all fits with a typical 5.5cc/BHP which is hardly an odd figure to use for BSFC.

Why would a DIY remap be any worse than any other remap? It is the numbers that are in the map that is important, not what it cost you. Perhaps you can tell me how with a DIY map I'd manage to run about 20 BHP less than an FQ360 when I run a less restricted intake, more boost whilst keeping similar timing and running a little leaner, with a freer flowing exhaust?

I've not had the pleasure of a run in a Spec C. However, why would you expect to outdrag a car of very similar weight that has more power? It is not surprising that the Evo makes about 10% more power because the turbo, intercooler and injectors are all bigger. There is more fuel and air.

I'm not an experienced drag racer, but my previous Scooby which weighed 100kg less than the Evo but had virtually identical power on the same rollers ran 121 mph terminal speeds on the quarter mile in T-uk's more capable driving hands, and 119-120 mph in mine.

I don't mindlessly quote figures knowing I don't have the supporting data that I could back it up with. c.400 BHP is not controversial on an Evo IX.

GC8

PCM, you really are an arrogant little bollocks arent you?

Jamo

iTrader: (23)

marmski

Bone - Please grow the ability to listen to others views and understand them. No-one is saying the Evo or Impreza are bad cars (except a select few dissing the Impreza with little substance to base their well aired opinions on)

Like for Like comparisons:

Evo IX FQ320 vs Impreza WR1

Evo PS/NM = 330.4/415
Impreza PS/NM = 320/420

Evo 0-62 = 4.5secs
Impreza 0-60 = 4.25secs

Pretty even really... not alot here that any of us would notice (except perhaps the way the cars will transmit this speed to the passenger which could be a variable)

Evo VIII MR FQ400 vs Impreza T25

Evo BHP/lbft = 405/355
Impreza BHP/lbft = 415/420

Evo 0-62 = 3.5secs
Impreza 0-60 = 3.7secs

Again... pretty even really... if your gonna argue over being 0.2 second quicker to breaking our speed limits then please grow up.

As detailed in my previous post, the cars are too close for either parties to really have substance in calling one of them 'inferior' to the other. Having seen alot of tests between standard variants of both of these cars and then their lightweight counterparts (RS/Spec C) it isnt even clear which one of them is really quicker... infact it seems like variables outside the manufacturers control actually determine the winners. (track/weather)

Quite regularly you will see the standard fully loaded cars even finish above their lightweight equivilents.

The guy who started this post wanted a honest comparison... not an testosterone fueled arguement comparable to 'my dad is bigger than yours'.

As specimens of how much a car can actually do, both the Evo and the Impreza are excellent examples in their classes. Have a look round them both, and inside... then drive them and make your decision.

I prefer the Impreza and own an Impreza (hence why i post here and not Evo-net or whatever it is) but i look at these cars and appriciate the manufacturers achievements in both camps... choice and varying tastes are what make life soo beautiful.

Ant xx

evo north

well put, i own an evo 8, and have always stated that both have different qualities, i love them both , and you do need money to mod them both

scubaladdie

Lol

PCM

Not arrogant i just don't buy bull.

When i had my 9 Gt it was nice to ASSUME my car was running 400bhp but it never was.(I DONT GIVE A SH#T WHAT ANYONE SAYS NO 9 WILL RUN 400BHP ON THOSE MODS).I talked to all the major tuners and they all told me the same NR autosport,RC developments,CPP.....so you expect me to take your word over theres?

I have driven an fq400 and a 9gt back to back gives and trust me theres a massive difference.


Go have a blast in an fq400 and get back into your ix which you claim has 400bhp and then try and tell me otherwise.Until then anyone who claims 400bhp with those supporting mods is talking crap.

Its hard enough to take this in let alone the 2.75" vs 3" exhaust


Pcm

T-uk

I suppose they do have to make a living so you buy into the bull


one of the things that will make a fq400 feel quicker is the huge amount of lag , a bit like a scoobs character

john banks

I'm quite keen on not buying bull as well.

However, I've shown you dyno plots from two different dynos with 394 and 399 BHP in support of my claim of near 400 BHP. I've correlated the latter with a car that ran nearly identical power and did 121mph terminal on quarter mile with 100kg less to show that the dyno is reasonable. I've also shown that this dyno reads 24 BHP lower than another with the same spec of car. I have other data to show this dyno reads 31 BHP lower than a MAHA dyno on the same car. I've got realistic airflow and fuel flow data to support c.400 BHP.

To carp further I'd suggest you need to define your measurements and support your arguments. Meantime I will continue to assert that I can tune an FQ320 to near 400 BHP on three different brands of dyno with a fuel pump, remap, exhaust and modification of the standard airbox, and back it up with reports of others who can do the same.

I don't need to defer to the opinions of tuners as I've been one myself and moved onto other things. I will defer to proper argument only.

Rob_Impreza99

iTrader: (3)

I have owned both scoobies and Evo`s and i like them both, you can`t beat the sound of a scooby as the engine tones are unique and they give you the feeling that your in a rally car with the raw power.

The EVO for me has a better build quality and the power is delivered in a different smoother way, the turbo is a bit laggy in the lower gears on an evo but once you get mid range and upwards you don`t realise the speed you are doing sometimes because of the smooth delivery.

If you want a rally feel and the right engine tones then it has to be a Subaru, the evo doesn`t really have a significant engine tune which lets it down a bit as you don`t get the feeling that raw power is being delivered because of how smooth the delivery is.

They are both fantastic cars and both have a very different driving experience.

marmski

Im not overly into tuning, but i have a mate who has an MR FQ320 and i watched this perform 374BHP at Powerstation with only a decat and a BR remap. The Powerstation boys seemed pretty impressed with it too considering the lack of mods.