Previous Thread
Next Thread
New Reply
Print Thread
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 175
TrewCelica
Member
TrewCelica Oct 23, 5:17am - #54950 

Member
2002 Toyota Celica GT

Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 175
Raleigh NC`
Evo vs. WRX

What do you guys think is the best overall car? Looks performance, upgrades available?
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,346
spaztikid
dikitzaps
spaztikid Oct 23, 5:19am - #54951 
dikitzaps
1974 Toyota Celica

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 5,346
LA
overall i would chose the STI...i think thats what you meant. IF not then i would chose an EVO over a WRX.

I would take the STI b/c of it's wider body stance, better looks IMO and more bhp.
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,454
Elec-FuYu
Specialist
Elec-FuYu Oct 23, 5:36am - #54952 
2003 Silver Toyota Celica
Specialist
2003 Toyota Celica

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,454
B.C. Coquitlam
i would say EVO...
there is a modded EVO engine putting out more than 800hp (6xx on wheel considering the 25% lost..)
but then i dont know about the STi engine's limits..

i think the STi's new look looks better than EVO
overall...maybe EVO? i don't know, i think the ACD and AYC should give you better corning ability over STi...

those are my thoughts smile~

I am a HID Maniac!!
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 170
chameleon
Member
chameleon Oct 23, 5:47am - #54953 

Member
2000 Toyota Celica

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 170
Michigan
If you read the Subaru boards, most STI owners admit that the EVO has a slight over all performance advantage from the factory in terms of handling and acceleration.

Comparing an EVO to an STI is like compairing an RSX to a GTS. The RSX technically has a slight advantage, but when it comes down to it, it's really going to be a drivers race.

I personally like the looks of the EVO better than the STI.

I personally like the boxer engine that the STI has better than the traditional engine in the EVO.

For what it's worth, I drive a 1991 Subaru Imprezza wagon as a winter beater and it has over 250,000 miles on it and it still runs like a champ. In fact, I still average 25mpg from the engine, and it doesn't leak/burn any oil/fluids. Mitsubishi's in general tend to be a little more problematic when you modify them for more power. It's not to the point where they would be considered unreliable, but you just seem to have more problems with a souped up Eclipse or 3000GT for example, than you would with a souped up Honda/Toyota/Nissan. So I would say that Subaru probably has a slightly more reliable engine, but Subarus are known for having weak transmissions, so it has the disadvantage there.

Basically, each car has little advantages and disadvantages, but over all, the two cars are pretty much equal IMO.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,030
RevMonster
Masta OC
RevMonster Oct 23, 6:45am - #54954 

Masta OC
2003 Toyota Celica

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,030
Orange County, Ca
I'd take the WRX over the Evo. I'd take the STI over anything under 40g's.

Basically, you have to look at the quality of the base model the cars are built on. The Lancer is by far the least appealing car on the road. The base model Impreza is still a car of good quality.

Appearance-wise, even when you totally rip the Lancer apart to turn it into an Evo, it still seems too long, too narrow, and a little bit clumsy.

I'm just a crosshair
I'm just a shot away from you
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,295
Steven
ECelica Staff
Steven Oct 23, 7:26am - #54955 
2001 Spectra Blue Mica Toyota Celica GTS
ECelica Staff
2001 Toyota Celica GTS

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,295
Riverside, CA
STi all the way. I will never own a mitsu.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 896
element_celica
Senior Member
element_celica Oct 24, 8:18am - #54956 

Senior Member

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 896
Michigan
sti! more power, looks more aggressive imo.
also i read somewhere(nc.org post) that brand new evo's already had rust on them confused which is not cool.

rip celi...
95 240sx
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 196
Doppelganger
Member
Doppelganger Oct 24, 2:40pm - #54957 

Member
2000 Toyota Celica GT

Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 196
Fort Wayne, IN
For straight-line acceleration, the STi wins. In the curvies, the Evo wins. Just depends what you want.

Of course, you have to consider looks and reliability too.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,549
JBing
Pizza Geek
JBing Oct 24, 4:57pm - #54958 

Pizza Geek
2002 Toyota Celica GT

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,549
Detroit
The STI just demands respect. The EVO may have similar performance but they pick the ugliest car in the entire line up to build up. thumbsdown

[Linked Image]
FS: 19" ADR M Sports
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 106
RAWGTS
Member
RAWGTS Oct 24, 5:05pm - #54959 

Member

Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 106
Stockton, CA
I think it comes down to personal preference. Test drive them both and decide what YOU want. I would never buy a car or do modifications based soley on what "a bunch of people think".
RAW

'03 GT-S w/ Action Package. AEM CAI. TWM SS. Pivot Adj. Shift Light. Veilside Ti Teardrop Exhaust. Intrax Springs. Hotchkiss Sway Bars. APR Front Strut Brace. APR Canards. ADR Flite 5 Wheels w/Bridgestone 225/40/18 SO3 Pole Position Tires. Autometer Cobalt guages.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 35
Sleeping_Celi
Member
Sleeping_Celi Oct 24, 6:04pm - #54960 
2002 Carbon Blue Toyota Celica GT
Member
2002 Toyota Celica GT

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 35
If ya look for the bang for the buck the evo is hella better. Subaru is overcharging. the STI beat the evo by .1 in the 1320. so why should you pay 6-9 thousand more??? The evo has more modding abilities
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,295
Steven
ECelica Staff
Steven Oct 24, 8:53pm - #54961 
2001 Spectra Blue Mica Toyota Celica GTS
ECelica Staff
2001 Toyota Celica GTS

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,295
Riverside, CA
You should pay more for an STi because they're limited to far less produced per year than the EVO.

Originally Posted by Sleeping_Celi
If ya look for the bang for the buck the evo is hella better. Subaru is overcharging. the STI beat the evo by .1 in the 1320. so why should you pay 6-9 thousand more??? The evo has more modding abilities
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 22
TeaQBD
Member
TeaQBD Oct 25, 2:46am - #54962 
2000 Black Toyota Celica
Member
2000 Toyota Celica

Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 22
Pittsburgh, PA
Originally Posted by RevMonster
I'd take the WRX over the Evo. I'd take the STI over anything under 40g's.

Basically, you have to look at the quality of the base model the cars are built on. The Lancer is by far the least appealing car on the road. The base model Impreza is still a car of good quality.

Appearance-wise, even when you totally rip the Lancer apart to turn it into an Evo, it still seems too long, too narrow, and a little bit clumsy.


The EVO shares zero parts with the Lancer, I wouldn't look at it in that sense at all. Both of these cars are purpose built for the WRC and have features you would not be able to get aftermarket. Overall, I would say the EVO is more nimble but the STI is better looking and both are cars that would kick our Celica asses easily.
Join the conversation - Register now or Sign in to add your comment


Moderated by  isaac 

Customize Your Toyota CelicaPrivacy Policy · About · Contact
CelicaHobby.com is an independent Toyota Celica enthusiast website. CelicaHobby.com is not sponsored by or affiliated with Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. in any way. The Toyota and Celica names and logos are trademarks owned by Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.
© CelicaHobby.com, 2001-2016