Actually, I've seen a few SRT4 rally cars. They have a section for 2WD rally cars. They did pretty well too. However, I'm sure that rally racing wasn't a priority when they designed it.

 

Just some notes:

1) The Impreza was created from the get-go to be Subaru's new WRC car.

2) Prodrive receives something like 15 JDM Imprezas (so the rally car is really based off of the same car that Subaru sells), but then they strip it down to the frame and build it back up. So, you really can't compare it to the STi, especially since the WRC transmission costs $80K

3) There seems to be some confusion as to the cars being used in WRC. Subaru -> Impreza, Mitsubishi -> Lancer, Citroen -> Xsara, Ford -> Focus, Peugeot -> 206 (2003) and 307(2004), Hyundai -> Tiburon, Skoda -> Octavia (2003) and Fabia(2004). Hyundai and Skoda have pulled their teams for this year, leaving only Subaru, Mitsubishi, Ford, Citroen, and Peugeot.

4) Calling the STi and Evo grocery-getting econoboxes is ignorant, especially considering that they both beat the RX-8 in every performance category.

 

3.) We were talking about recce cars




Renesis, that was a great post, welcome to the forum!

 

With the exception of the SRT4, I don't think $30k EVOs and STIs can be considered "economy" cars.
Also, there is a $10k difference between the Lancer and the EVO.
AND, the STI is based on the WRX, which was not an economy car to begin with.

 

The WRX is based on the Imprezza which is an economy car.

Again, They are based on economy cars. A car is only as good as its foundation. They are **** poor quality cars, its a fact. Sure they are fast, but a weed wacker can be fast.

 

But, as people have repeatedly stated, the Imprezza was designed to be a quick car. It just happens to not cost a lot as well. Does that make it an economy car? This is a very exaggerated example, but that's like calling a Ferrari an economy car because you happened to buy one for $20K.

 

Sorry, the imprezza is subaru's answer to the honda civic/toyota corolla. yes its an economy car.

You can polish a piece of **** but in the end it still stinks.

 

Yes, they are in the same price range, but one can CLEARLY see the performance difference between it and the other stated cars. Like I said, if Ferrari priced the 360 Modena to compete with the Civic would it be an economy car?

 

2QT2bSTR8 . . .

Yes, you're right. The Evo and the STi suck, despite both putting over 270 ponies to the ground through three-diff AWD systems. They are both simply fuel-economy cars with incredibly responsive and versatile suspensions. They are nothing but polished turds that could humiliate damn near any street car they come across in damn near any test you care to come up with. "A car is only as good as its foudation"--the Evo and STi have different powerplants, drivetrains, suspensions, brake systems, and interiors than the Lancer and Impreza. What "foundation" are you talking about? If a car's "foundation" means its "badging" to you, you have some seriously messed-up concepts of automotive engineering.

By your logic:

Supra = Celica = "economy car" = turd
M3 = 318i = "economy car" = turd

Peace
policy

 

Ok, listen to me.

Forget about ferrari's. The Imprezza hardly has any performance gains over a Civic SI or Sentra SE.

All im saying is the EVO/STI are based on econoboxes. Its a fact.

 

I never said the EVO/STI suck. They are great cars. Its all about what you want. For the car to be in the low 30K price range they had to skimp on something...Hence...they took an economy car and put in a high power engine and better suspension components.

Anyway you look at it, they are not built from the ground up as these high power performance cars. They are NO different than the SRT 4.

 

What if the econobox varieties were actually based on the high performance models?

Consider cars like the MR-2, Supra, 300ZX, Skyline, 3000GT, and Eclipse.

Subaru introduced the turbocharged WRX and several naturally-aspirated versions of the Impreza at the same time. The US simply didn't import the high performance models until recently.

The standard Lancers have been around since the 60's, and have since then had a bit of involvement in motorsports (rally racing). The Lancer Evolutions have been around since the early 90's - and just recently began importing to the United States.

In other words, the "high performance" models are not as much of an afterthought as you make it sound. You shouldn't deny a vehicle's proven performance based on what other models offer.

Regardless, if your budget is right around $30k for a new car and all you want is performance, then the WRX/EVO will work out fine. Without a doubt, certain creature comforts will be hard to come by at this price.

 

Peace
policy

 

Sti came first, wrx and 2.5RS came second. STi is not based on any economy car. And our 8s are cheaper and slower, any other excuse is just to make you feel happier about your purchase.

 

people can compare all day long and say this and that and whatever, but if you really think about it, how many "coupes" are out there with 4 doors? I like the EVO and Impreza's as well, I have a lot of respect for lots of different vehicles but have yet to see anything that is a fair comparison to the 8, all the comparo-s I've seen are with vehicles that cost more (i.e G35 etc.) or vehicles that have totally different drivetrains/door layout. Not to mention that the 8 is offered in automatic, is there an auto EVO or auto STI? I know a lot of folks on here diss autos (stick vs. auto, that argument is older than the earth it seems) but at least it's available. I guess in my case I really don't care if my 8 is not the fastest thing out there, it isn't slow by any means and it is a blast to drive, unless someome else is paying my car note I could really care less what someone else thinks about my ride. Just because something is fast doesn't make it good, buy what you like and grin while you drive it, and if somebody else doesn't like it etc. who gives a rats-****?! end ramble here.....heh

 

True- as a Protege MP3 owner, I really appreciate the handling and cornering power of my car- even as I approach four years of ownership. I still enjoy driving it. But- I WOULD like a car with a better ride and some luxury touches to it, plus fewer rough edges. And a little of the prestige factor, which we all appreciate, even if we won't acknowledge it.

For the price, the RX-8 is a great choice. One of these days......

 

The WRC Evolution is the same basic car as the production RS spec Evo (stripped down version of standard Evo). The WRC version uses the same 4G63 engine and body shell/Chassis. Here are some specs on the 2004 Evo WRC car: http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/mot...rc/lancer.html

The older Evos (Evo VI and back) are Group A and Group N cars which is consider near production rally cars, there are some good info about Evo's rally history: http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/fe...evo/index.html

Here are some FIA rules on

Group A : http://www.rallycars.com/Cars/Cars_Background3.html
Group N: http://www.rallycars.com/Cars/Cars_Background5.html
WRC: http://www.rallycars.com/Cars/Cars_Background4.html

 

Here is a good definition of what the word homologation means: In order for a vehicle to be able to take part in FIA approved races it has to be produced to a minimum number of units by its manufacturer, 5000 for the GroupN class, 2500 for the GroupA class and 200 for the now extinct GroupB. These units have to be similar, in aspect and mechanically, to the ones that will effectively take part in racing i.e. if the racing vehicle has a 4 wheel drive transmission so must also have the homologation base vehicle. Certain mechanical and electronic parts that are present in the racing vehicle must also be present in the homologation base unit. If modifications are required to the competition version then a new series of street going vehicles that include them will have to be produced. These cars were bred by racing for racing.

 

that was an expression

 

Wrong. As I said before the Impreza was designed from the get go for the STi version. STi was built from the ground up. The lesser versions are detuned STIs.

By your rationale an IS300 is basically an econo car. All it is is a Toyota AS200 compact sedan with a souped up interior and a weak 6 cylinder. The AS200 has a little 4 banger and cloth interior.

 

Good stuff Hanzo! Those are the kind of information I was looking for. Here are some of the interesting points from the WRC class page:

This class of cars was thus introduced to allow any manufacturer to take part in the WRC with equal chances to success. The WRC class cars have to be produced to very limited numbers in order to get the required FIA homologation. Production numbers can be kept below 50 units (better still than back in the old Group B days where 200 units had to be produced). The typical WRC class car is based upon a large volume production model to which a manufacturer can modify or add the following:

* Modified front and rear suspension layout and attachment points

* Add-on turbocharger even if the production car does not have one

* Modified transmission and additional transmission tunnels in order to fit a 4x4 transmission even if the production car is 2 wheel drive. Consequently differentials and gear box are free.

* Modified engine intake and exhaust systems

* Modified engine position (the engine can be relocated by a maximum of 20mm as compared to its original position and can be tilted by 20° around the crankshaft axis)

* Modified wheelbase (±20mm) and track widths (1550mm max)

* The maximum car width allowed is 1770 mm

* Minimum length of 4000mm

"A better argument in favor of WRC cars is the fact that manufacturers have to produce only 50 units to get the FIA homologation hence less financial involvement is required. "

"The limited production numbers of WRC class cars reserves them solely to competition. No street legal, "homologation specials" are needed which means, of course, that you cannot buy one."

Oh... and it's interesting to know why Toyota stopped competing in the WRC:

"Toyota introduced the Corolla WRC in the 1000 Lakes rally 1997. The company was absent, officially, from the WRC since their exclusion for cheating in 1995 when they raced the Celica GT4 in the Group A class."

It's also interesting to see Mitsubishi using the size limits to the max:

WRC version dimensions from http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/mot...c/lancer.html:

OVERALL LENGTH 4360 mm
OVERALL WIDTH 1770 mm
WHEEL BASE 2600 mm (that's more than +- 20mm)
FRONT TRACK / REAR TRACK 1550 mm
WEIGHT 1230 kgs

Street-going Evo 8 dimensions from http://www.mitsubishi-motors-euro.com/:

Overall length (mm) 4,490
Overall width (mm) 1,770
Wheelbase (mm) 2,625
Kerb Weight (kg) 1,470

Here is the STi's from http://www.subaru-global.com/lineup/...i/data_sheet/:

Overall length (mm) 4,415
Overall width (mm) 1,740
Wheelbase (mm) 2,525
Track Front (mm) 1,490
Rear (mm) 1,480
Kerb weight (kg) 1,450

It's still not clear how much from the WRC car's DNA are these cars getting. But it is safe to say that from this page: http://www.rallycars.com/Cars/Cars_Background5.html and the earlier link to Prodrive, I think these cars are more of the street going versions of Group N rally cars than a WRC car. The fact that these cars are competitive enough at their current setup (as in their Evo8 / STi incarnations) to compete in a rally race tells me that these cars are more on the race-bred than your typical econobox, despite the looks of them.

 

Thanks for your two cents . . . should I keep the change?

Peace
policy

 

Yes, these cars are more less Group N cars made for the street and people who run small racing team operations that wants to race for cheap.

 

whats up guys, just doing some market research and I ran into this "debate." Well lets see, I think out of everyone, I should have the authority of discussing "Turbocharged Econoboxes" and the RX-8. Lets see... I pre-ordered my RX-8 and bought it last August 2003, after I test drove it and the Evo8. Now, I just SOLD my Rx-8 and purchased an Evo8... what a relief and I am very satisfied to say the least.

A little about my RX-8 ... GT package with 6speed transmission and GReddy exhaust. Great car, comfortable leather, very cramped feeling and a joy to drive and floss. Doors were unique but annoyed me... rear wheel drive is fun for drifting... engine sucked ***, fairly slow car. I saw the BestMotoring with the G35, 350z, Evo, STi, RX8, DC5 Integra (RSX Type R), and the Miata. To my horror, the rx8 came in 2nd to last, beating only the Miata on the track... horrible I was like sad for like 2 days after watching that video posted.

I am not great authority on cars, but I know the fast ones when I drive them, the rx8 is not relatively fast. I have driven things from G35s, evo8s, modded wrx's, turbocharged rsx's, etc. etc. Thing is the RX8 is a crappy *** aftermarket support vehicle and the rotary engine is to say the least, weak. Not only that is that MAZDA pisses me off, I buy their car, they recall it 2 weeks later, engine isnt as fast as it is supposed to be, LAUGHING stock of the crowd! Hey Justin! ur car got recalled... it was a big JOKE! ENGINE RECALLED. TRANSMISSION RECALLED. PASSENGER AIRBAG RECALLED. 3 strikes ur out in my book, thats when I put it up for sale... not only that but it has terrible gas mileage. I had mechanical problems and problems driving this car with so many "issues" - so I decided to sell. Believe me, I pushed the car to the limit and I know its strengths and weaknesses, and the car is a decent car, but not as much as my prospect and current car, the EVOLUTION 8.

Evo8 I have driven about 1500 miles on, and raced. This thing is really fast. I can take on ZO6 Corvettes, BMW M5 and M3s, STis, S4s, S2000s, SRT4s, no problem ! Only problem is not driving too fast. I would highly recommend this car, it handles beautifully, I thought the RX8 handles well, this car handles better! I thought AWD sucked and the car was ugly at one point, but hey looks I am willing to sacrifice over the overall performance of the car. Its an excellent buy. Evo8 is pretty, but the RX8 has crazy curves and unique designing. The unique rotary engine, well thats another story. Also, unless you have experienced Turbo... you dont know what you are missing! I used to have the same closed minded approach to other cars - especially the wrx which is not pretty at all, until I took a ride in my friends GReddy sponsored, crazy *** WRX... wow that thing flies, with upgraded everything it inspired me to take a look into the evo8, and it out performs many cars that are true sportscars, the ones with pricetags that are equivalent to small house. Lets say the evo8 can outperform the Aston Martin on the track, thats incredible to say the least. Believe me my boss has a "ferrari killer" - 2004 mercedes-benz e55 amg that thing is FAST. v8 supercharged engine, and he says the evo8 is fast LOL. A high 11/12 sec car costing $100000 + or my 4 banger turbocharged car that cost $27000... choice is easy my friends. You cant always get ALL you want, but I am happy with the evo8, cuz in the end the rx8 had sweet interior, but interior is not going to cut it! Sure you can have leather this, heated that, but the evo8 is bare bones yet it doesnt bother me. In fact, women LOVE the evo8 more than the rx8, every lady that rides in the evo8 is impressed, as compared to the rx8... I once took a model for a ride and she liked the car, but it wasnt like WOW!... evo thats another story. So thats my story... I have more details, but the evo8 and sti your dubbed "TURBOCHARGED ECONOBOXES" will smoke the rx8 anyday, and cost about the same. Not only that is TURBO... and a proven engine that has been around and race bred. The Renesis simply stated is INNOVATIVE yet plain under developed as far as for performance. Take this into consideration!

 

Originally posted by Efini 8

What made you decide to choose the RX-8 over the Evo8 in the first place?

There was a video here with a S2000, G35, WRX, Miata, RSX, and RX-8. In the video that you saw, was it the 350Z, Evo, or STi that won?



First runs for a redesigned motor with limited production capacity will always have crappy aftermarket support. It's hard enough locating a used Renesis motor, let alone obtain a crate motor for R&D.



Frustrating as they may be, recalls happen. I haven't heard of an engine recall for the RX-8, but perhaps you're referring to the hp mixup. An overstated horsepower rating is not unique to the RX-8, let alone Mazda itself. The previous model Miatas had the same problem (stated at 155 but was actually 14x) but for whatever reason that car didn't take as much heat from general public as the RX-8 did. The passenger airbag unit itself was not recalled - it was a section of the wiring harness that needed to be corrected. The transmission was not recalled either - it was a heat insulator that was part of the transmission area that needed to be replaced. Both of these were recalled as preventive measures for failures that might happen under certain conditions.



Perhaps pushing a car to its limits tends to accelerate the wear on critical components, in which case it soon becomes time to get another car.



The rotary engine definitely IS another story. Bad choices are made by the buyers - the car did nothing wrong.



A true sportscar does not require a huge price tag. I would consider the EVO a true sportscar. Many truly expensive luxury sports cars tend to be very heavy. In the case of the Aston Martin, the EVO is nearly 1000 pounds lighter. With that in mind, you will need several thousand dollars worth of modifications to keep up in a quarter mile against a modern 600cc motorcycle pushing around 100hp.



You couldn't convince your millionaire buddies to choose an evo over whatever they're driving. People who own or drive those have a totally different agenda.



I think the ladies would be much more impressed by a MBZ C230, which has an msrp comparable to that of the Evo and the RX-8. Plus, it's supercharged!



I agree completely. The RX-8 was not built with the intent of being a pure sports race car. I had not seen any Mazda advertising showing a race-spec RX-8 prior to purchasing the vehicle, and I'm not sure where such high expectations from disgruntled customers have come from.

Most people who defend relatively new technologies such as the rotary engine will tell you just that. The power output from the current rotary engine is roughly 50% more than the previous naturally-aspirated model. However, if you're looking for the torque and power of a turbocharged piston motor, a naturally-aspirated rotary is certainly not the place to find it.

Regardless, congratulations on your newly-acquired evo8. Any paper-printed specs page could have told you that a 14psi turbocharged 2.0l i-4 rated at 271hp@6500rpm and 273lb-ft@3500 with 4wd and a curb weight of 3175lbs would have a sportier feel than an RX-8.

To each his own.