"No offense, but i think you should go with the EVO.

What makes the STI great goes FAR beyond what you consider to be important criteria. If you choice between the STI and the EVO depends on ridiculous measurments such as 0-60, then you just don't get it.

Sorry."

Your not sorry so don't say it. Numbers help quantify the over all performance of a vehicle, whether they be performance specs, engineering spec or output specs. What is really important is the driving dynamics but since most of us won't even get to ride in an STI model for some time the information available is not going to be visceral but numerical.
That said, Your right. The original posting was done by a child or a half-whit who would not know what to do with real performance if it bit frey51 on the but.

 

97itr153, I didn't mean to suggest you SHOULD be sorry only that you are not. And to aswer your question, and I know was rhetorical, they'ed be pretty far off the mark.

frey51, the reason you are getting so much sh*t is because of a really dumb statement, or maybe just a poor choice of words with

"...if it wont beat the evo from the line to line without the evo pulling in front then I dont want it."
That suggests you have questionable priorities. To put it nicely.

Basically you are saying ‘if I can’t be able to say my car is faster than yours I don’t want it.’ That's defiantly childish. So whatever you say after the statement I quoted is negated by that original statement. Unless you deny you meant it and if you did I doubt many would believe you.

 

GO with the evo. Subaru people are mean, LOL!

1/4mi subaru seems faster on paper. No one know which one will win in the quarter just yet.

 

Who the hell are any of you to tell someone they dont get it. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the desire for performance may just eb different in all of us.

While it is true that if you want red light to red light performance, you might choose another car. But maybe the EVO and STI are more fun to drive and the only thing that can make the diff is the 0-60.

It is not a dumb question and not aked poorly either. This individual has a certain personal interest and he is persuing information to make an intelligent decision based upon his personal desires. Those desires might be fastest all wheel drive he can afford. Who knows? Maybee all of the other cars that should be better choices 0-60 (not that there are many) just aren't fun or affordable or well built or whatever.

Can anyone "get it" when this individual is just that, an individual with a mind of their own and desires of their own? Can you ever "get it". Just like I don't "get it" when people are rude online or feel they have to respond to a post by calling it stupid (see other forums at this site). If you don't have something constructive to say, then don't say anything.

Of course it is your right to respond. That is what America is all about. Being free. Free to think as you wish, speak as you wish, believe as you wish, and even be an idiot if you wish. Take away any of those and you are no longer free. Still, you might choose to be nice.

As a response to the original poster (and here is some of my constructive part for those of you who don't "get" what I said above), I might have said, I, too, am curious about that. Of course you know that there are a few cars out there that are faster 0-60 and 1/4 mile (not that I would want one of them). Nor would I want to spend $30,000 on an STi car and get dusted at a stop light by an EVO since the overwhelming majority of my races will be in that situation.

It doesn't take losing too many of those to start to feel less impressed with your vehichle.

"Get it" now?

 

You guys are forgetting something,....the STI we are getting will most likely have a 7000 rpm redline. Now if you have done your homework you know that "EVO" magazine, a U.K. based publication stated, that the UK sti ,( 261 hp version) needed to rev to 7500 rpm to get to 62 mph (100 kmh) in second gear. The UK STI (261 hp) did it in 5.2 seconds. Our car(300hp) will most likely have to go to third gear to reach 60 mph, causing a .5 second difference. JUST THEORY,..but think about it,...no-one knows the redline yet,..it's not in any of the pics, and no-one who went to the auto show has said what's on the tach, other than a 9000 rpm tach.

The standard WRX reaches 60mph in second gear,which is why it has a great 0-60 time. NOW,.... the EVO (car) has a what?
5 SPEED TRANS,...meaning it will reach 60 in second gear, and it weighs less than a stock WRX (227 hp) and has 44 more hp.

So if we get a 7500 rpm redline( which that 2.5 big-*** crank wont like spinning up-to) then we will have a fast STI (300hp)
on paper,...if we get a 7000 rpm redline, the STI wont be fast on paper, of course we all know ,..IT RULES,..but the magazine are gonna really play this up. Did I loose anyone?

944 turbo guy.

P.S. the "EVO" car will have a 7500 rpm redline, this months Sport Compact tested it at 4.3 zero to 60..................hhmmmnnnn

 

Hey enigma, Yes its is a dumb question (because of it's intent) and Yes it is asked poorly (because of it's grammar). Your statement does not take into account the original comments or the whole gist of the criticisms leveled. Your argument is full of holes.
The problem with the original post, I won't even waste my time stating because I already have, however here it is yet again "...if it wont beat the evo from the line to line without the evo pulling in front then I dont want it." the idiocy is only compounded by frey51's second posting in which frey51 contradicts the original statement which serves as an admission of 'yea that was a dumb thing to say'.- because frey51 says he is more concerned about back road twisties and rallying.
Furthermore, stop flag waving and preaching about how people are free to be idiots in AMERICA. We all have the right to think and vocalize what we want but that doesn't mean I have to be nice to people who say stupid things. And YOU might want to keep that in mind because your hypocrisy is showing when you say "If you don't have something constructive to say, then don't say anything. " I thought this was AMERICA genius.


This Post Has Been Edited For Cruelty But Not For Content.

 

Andersonwrx said
> Your argument is full of holes.

Really? Let's see if breaking this down into small chunks will help.

Andersonwrx said
>"...if it wont beat the evo from the line to line without the evo pulling in front then I dont want it."

I said
>>It doesn't take losing too many of those (0-60 and 1/4 mile "races")to start to feel less impressed with your vehichle.

Andersonwrx said
>the idiocy is only compounded by frey51's second posting in which frey51 contradicts the original statement which serves as an admission of 'yea that was a dumb thing to say'.- because frey51 says he is more concerned about back road twisties and rallying.

frey51 said (second post)
>>>I just want to know which car will be better suited for a even combintion of *** kicking on and off the pavement.

I said
>>Those desires might be fastest all wheel drive he can afford. Who knows? Maybe all of the other cars that should be better choices 0-60 (not that there are many) just aren't fun or affordable or well built or whatever.

(Apparently he wants everything. Awesome twisty car and straight line. Sounds good to me. You may not be able to find the perfect car but it doesn't hurt to want it. At $30,000+ I see nothing wrong with being a little demanding about it either. That is a lot of money.)

Andersonwrx said
>Furthermore, stop flag waving and preaching about how people are free to be idiots in AMERICA. We all have the right to think and vocalize what we want but that doesn't mean I have to be nice to people who say stupid things.

I said
>>Of course it is your right to respond. That is what America is all about.

Andersonwrx said
>And YOU might want to keep that in mind because your hypocrisy is showing when you say "If you don't have something constructive to say, then don't say anything. " I thought this was AMERICA genius.

I said
>>Of course it is your right to respond. Still, you might choose to be nice.

Andersonwrx said
>Furthermore, stop flag waving and preaching about how people are free to be idiots in AMERICA.....I thought this was AMERICA genius.

Which is it Andersonwrx? Should I stop flag waving or is it America?

So, where was the "hypocrisy"? Looks like it follows "Andersonwrx said" and not "I said"

P.S.

Andersonwrx said
>This Post Has Been Edited For Cruelty But Not For Content.

I say.....mine didn't have to be.

 

Your response is good taken on it's own but you should really work on your reading comprehension skills.

First off You did say "It doesn't take losing too many of those (0-60 and 1/4 mile "races")to start to feel less impressed with your vehichle." and you are correct, but as should be obvious there will always be someone with a faster car. If you are lucky you can have one of the faster cars without having to purchase a new and better turbo or nitros kit or transmission, ect. every time one comes out. Then there is the whole drivability issue consider. It's great to aspire but you have to be realist. So while I agree in principle, trying to have the fastest car is is like trying to be the toughest guy, sooner or later some on will kick your butt and feel like a looser. The fist post was not about modifying but the same pricipals apply.

frey51's second posting completely changes the emphasis of what he was concerned about in the first posting ie. says nothing about the 1/4 mile times that he was so concerned about. Instead he places emphasis on handling stating "I want to get into rallying, and their are places that do scca solo and actuall rallies around by house so I have the means to do it." That is when he reffers to what you quoted out of context "I just want to know which car will be better suited for a even combintion of *** kicking on and off the pavement." So, yes it is contradictory.

You then say "I said
>>Those desires might be fastest all wheel drive he can afford. Who knows? Maybe all of the other cars that should be better choices 0-60 (not that there are many) just aren't fun or affordable or well built or whatever."
You are absolutely correct but that is not the criteria laid out in the TWO postings, it is just the major facet of the first that , as I have already covered, is negated by the second.

Next you mention "You may not be able to find the perfect car but it doesn't hurt to want it. At $30,000+ I see nothing wrong with being a little demanding about it either. That is a lot of money." That is a great point. Unfortunately it's ambiguous because it does not address or reflect the statements frey51 has made.

"Andersonwrx said
>Furthermore, stop flag waving and preaching about how people are free to be idiots in AMERICA. We all have the right to think and vocalize what we want but that doesn't mean I have to be nice to people who say stupid things.

I said
>>Of course it is your right to respond. That is what America is all about. "

So we sort of agree, but you original point was that I should lay off because of this right and THAT is contradictory since I have the right to say what I want as well.

Then you wrote "Andersonwrx said
>Furthermore, stop flag waving and preaching about how people are free to be idiots in AMERICA.....I thought this was AMERICA genius.

Which is it Andersonwrx? Should I stop flag waving or is it America?

So, where was the "hypocrisy"? Looks like it follows "Andersonwrx said" and not "I said"

You just removed the middle part of my quote and by doing so changed the meaning. So either your not comprehending what you are reading, or if you do understand it you decided to change it to make it what you want instead of what it was.

Lastly you wrote about editing for cruelty 'you didn't have to' obviously you had to edit for somthing because it says you did at the end of your post so don't be to proud about it. I have to edit many of mine and the statment was intended as a joke. I have been having fun with this and in all honesty I hope you have to. If you are not why waste time on it.