BELLOTARU

but both of them are slower than their ancestors.




Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X : 1:06:46
Subaru Impreza WRX STI : 1:05:95

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

EVO X vs STI - Tsukuba Lap Times - Autoblog

T5NYW

iTrader: (4)

Very nice find

Tony

GazTheHat

Finally, the STi trounces the Evo on track.

Mikkel

Interesting. Also, the classic... thought it was supposed to be lighter and therefore quicker than the newer STi?

MrRA

Finally??? There are plenty of BMI vids on youtube where the STI beats the Evo around the track.

T5NYW

iTrader: (4)

I agree

BELLOTARU

I think 2006 is the last truth impreza. with EVO the last is the IX.

P.D.- both of them are heavier than their ancestors.

why subaru haven´t called new impreza with another name?

Raul

spufus

iTrader: (2)

Interesting that a decades development has only shaved 1 sec off the lap time.

Mark'sWRX

I suppose, there's a decade's worth of extra safety (i.e. weight) too.

So a 2005 model is the fastest..... That's the last of the 2 litre models with the latest suspension?

Mikkel

What's your problem mate? Use words instead of your childish little images to express yourself.

T5NYW

iTrader: (4)

I have edited my post, sorry you seemed to think that I was insinuating that you were "Stupid" it's just a Smilie

Tony

Mikkel

No problem. That's what it seemed to indicate which I didn't understand why. I honestly thought the classic was supposed to be quicker?

DazW

iTrader: (1)

& a decades worth of tyre development

T5NYW

iTrader: (4)

Thanks

I was agreeing with you, on another forum simular smilie has "I agree" on the banner

I was also suprised that it wasn't.


Tony

Gutmann pug

Trounces