HarmanMotive STI Vs. HarmanMotive EVO Video
11-18-2008 | 06:05 PM
#1
Thread Starter
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,024
From: In Mother Russia...
Car Info: ...zeh car drives you!
HarmanMotive STI Vs. HarmanMotive EVO Video
Torque TV Head 2 Head Battle: Harman STI vs. Harman EVO
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/H...-Vs_198100.htm
Something is either not right...or...Subaru REALLY needs to do something about the STI...This is getting embarrassing...
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/H...-Vs_198100.htm
Something is either not right...or...Subaru REALLY needs to do something about the STI...This is getting embarrassing...
Last edited by LxJLthr; 11-19-2008 at 12:19 AM.
11-18-2008 | 07:08 PM
#4
General Pimpin'
iTrader: (7)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 23,019
From: Knee deep in beer. subabrew crew, ca.
Car Info: MY04 aspen wrx wagon.
Launch is very important in 0-100-0 and quarter and the launches were crappy in the sti.
I think with a better driver they'd be a lot closer... 4 seconds? WTF?
But what does this really say? Where the tires the same? What kind of work was done to the brakes on each?
Interesting to see what you can do with basically a streetable car though. Cool video.
For evo vs. sti... I think it just fuels the fire which is good. Doesn't surprise me that the evo did a bit better on the track. The quarter and 0-100-0 did surprise me though.
I think with a better driver they'd be a lot closer... 4 seconds? WTF?
But what does this really say? Where the tires the same? What kind of work was done to the brakes on each?
Interesting to see what you can do with basically a streetable car though. Cool video.
For evo vs. sti... I think it just fuels the fire which is good. Doesn't surprise me that the evo did a bit better on the track. The quarter and 0-100-0 did surprise me though.
11-18-2008 | 07:21 PM
#7
Thread Starter
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,024
From: In Mother Russia...
Car Info: ...zeh car drives you!
But still...assuming the numbers are correct...the Evo was 200 lbs heavier, 100 tq down and $13k cheaper to boot...and still won. I cannot decide if the chassis and suspension geometry is really that inferior or they were not telling something...
11-18-2008 | 07:55 PM
#9
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 969
From: Solano County
Car Info: 06 WRX LTD 4eat
the new sti doesnt launch very good. it bogs. ive seen both of these cars in person at the track and that evo is the faster, more capable car. as for the brakes on each the evo and the sti are both running stoptech big brake setups. for more info on the cars check out harmanmotive.com
Last edited by wrxchase; 11-18-2008 at 08:03 PM.
11-18-2008 | 10:17 PM
#14
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 277
From: Fremont
Car Info: '05 STI
There's something wrong about the power numbers they showed is the only real explanation. I'm assuming that the driver was roughly consistent. The 0-100-0 should have been much more in the STi's favor with that much of a power and weight advantage. I would have liked to see them do a 20-100 roll time to show that the STi was in fact lighter and more powerfull..because I don't think it was.
11-18-2008 | 11:33 PM
#15
Registered User
iTrader: (17)
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,448
From: Oakland/Alameda
Car Info: WRX --> RX-8--〉E93
i really think its the driver.
it took sti almost 17 seconds to reach 100 MPH. 4 seconds to 60 already and the car does not take a another 10 seconds to get to 100. its BS.
it took sti almost 17 seconds to reach 100 MPH. 4 seconds to 60 already and the car does not take a another 10 seconds to get to 100. its BS.