Impreza or Evo

[Theos92VR4]

WRX. I own a mitsubishi (3000gt vr4) and unless you do it yourself, the maintenence costs are equal to that of a mercedes. Parts are also very expensive. Subaru's are much more reliable and parts are cheaper. Build quality also is 10x better than the evo. I test drive both the evo and the wrx sti when I was looking for a fun daily driver. The wrx is lengths ahead. Had the insurance not been $3300 a year I would have probably bought the wrx... But I bought a c5 corvette instead. $900 a year insurance and better performance than the evo and wrx, and 10k cheaper FTW!!

[92accordcb7ex]

i say evo because its very very well rounded and because ive heard from alot of subi owners that the bug eyed subi was one of the worst designed impreza's.

[Nurega]

I would get an Evolution 8 or 9. The Evolution X, I've read, became too computerized and less raw, though I have never driven one personally. The Evolution 8 that I was able to take a spin in had incredible steering and suspension; it was the first car that I evinced ZERO body roll in. It was quite a delight to drive, save for the outrageous turbo lag.

That said, I wouldn't own it for more than 2-3 years. They are notorious for high maintenance, and with that crappy interior/stiff ride, it would really be limited to a weekend toy.

[DarkHusk11]

Dont know performance wise but looks deff an impreza. I really do not like any Mitsubishi's

[PUMASTi]

STi's suck balls.

The EVO vs a regular Impreza, I don't even think I've heard of anyone compare the two.

[toycar]

WRX. I own a mitsubishi (3000gt vr4) and unless you do it yourself, the maintenence costs are equal to that of a mercedes. Parts are also very expensive. Subaru's are much more reliable and parts are cheaper. Build quality also is 10x better than the evo. I test drive both the evo and the wrx sti when I was looking for a fun daily driver. The wrx is lengths ahead. Had the insurance not been $3300 a year I would have probably bought the wrx... But I bought a c5 corvette instead. $900 a year insurance and better performance than the evo and wrx, and 10k cheaper FTW!!

Funny you say what you do. What exactly is it about your 3000gt that has to do with an evo?

The 2.0 4g63 motor was used in so many cars, for twenty years. It's only downfall is the maintenance. Which is about the same as any other Awd turbo car.

The sti suffered from design flaws -as I mentioned the 100mm cylinder bore is a bit much, and they frequently blow through headgaskets.

My opinion is that the twenty years the 4g was being used speaks for itself. Most people don't know shit about keeping a dsm on the road, and that's why they get such a bad wrap.

I'm curious though why you would ever compare a 3000gt vr4, to an evo. Not even remotely similar platforms, I think the only thing they have in common is being made by Mitsubishi.

[Madpol]

Well, the Evo is a far better performer than the regular Impreza, and it has a bit of an advantage over the WRX. Compare Evo and STi, and it is much more even.

However, the Evo wasn't available in the US until 2003 with the release of the Evo VIII, and the STi wasn't available until 2004. If you're limited to 2000-2003, then the 2003 Evo is really your only worthwhile option (the next closest thing is the 227hp WRX)

wow so you guys missed out on the EVO 1,2,3,4,5,6 and 7??
and before the EVO line there was the Mitsubishi Galant VR4 where the 2L engine started from about 1986 i think it was then the Galant VR4 EVO about 1990-91 and before them there was the Mitsi lancer which came out with a 1.6 turbo and was a 3 door lift back and before that there was the Tredia and Cordia turbos.
over here WRX Impreza's are a dime a dozen where as the EVO is a rare sort also the repair bill for a Subi is stupid high and the fact that Subs arnt that reliable where as an EVO is just about bullet proof.
HP gains out of an EVO is alot easier i know a guy that had a 1200hp evo 3 running in the 7's bracket all with out NOS....1200hp out of a 2L engine is nuts.
IMO the EVO 3 is the best platform as its lighter than the others and according to fact sheets the HP's seem to drop off from the EVO 5 on wards. the EVO 4 being the highest and is damn good looking and 5 isnt to bad but then they start to lack in the looks department and actually start to look hideous untill the EVO X.
i owned an EVO 1 that had alot of work done to it with 2 extra injectors, Race radiator, Hybrid turbo and some internal work in the engine, Race clutch, Front centre and rear LSD's, Blitz intercooler and a few others. it was running about 17psi on the road and was pushing about 300hp DAMN it was fun.

so all in all EVO has my vote hands down

[deevergote]

Yeah, we didn't get the Evo until the VIII. Sucks we only got 2 years of the 4G63 models before they switched engines. The new X is cool... but it doesn't have the same charm as the older ones, IMO.

The 4G63t is a work of art. That motor is fantastic. We got our share of them in the Galant VR4, Eclipse, Talon, and Laser. The maintenance is definitely the killer, though. Those cars (and now the Evo is meeting the same fate) eventually fall into the hands of kids that don't know how to maintain them properly. They get modified and pounded on until they blow.

STi's suck balls.

The EVO vs a regular Impreza, I don't even think I've heard of anyone compare the two.

STis suck balls? Do you get your balls sucked daily? (and in your MR thread... "inline four"? )

Funny you say what you do. What exactly is it about your 3000gt that has to do with an evo?

The 2.0 4g63 motor was used in so many cars, for twenty years. It's only downfall is the maintenance. Which is about the same as any other Awd turbo car.

The sti suffered from design flaws -as I mentioned the 100mm cylinder bore is a bit much, and they frequently blow through headgaskets.

My opinion is that the twenty years the 4g was being used speaks for itself. Most people don't know shit about keeping a dsm on the road, and that's why they get such a bad wrap.

I'm curious though why you would ever compare a 3000gt vr4, to an evo. Not even remotely similar platforms, I think the only thing they have in common is being made by Mitsubishi.

I think that's all he was comparing. Mitsubishi, turbo, AWD, and generally abused by owners that don't know how to properly care for such a car. Both are somewhat complicated electronically as well... well, for the Evos we got here, anyway (the older ones were dirt simple, and that was their charm.)

But yeah, the 3000GT's engine wasn't nearly on par with the 4G63. I mean, it was well made, and had tons of potential... but the 4G63 is one of the most celebrated Japanese motors of the last 20 years.

The EJ found in the STi actually has 20+ years of history as well. Almost all 4 cylinder Subarus dating back to the old Loyale used some variant of the EJ motor. I agree it's not really the greatest design as it is in the STi... but I wouldn't doubt that a good deal of the failures are due to abuse and improper maintenance (the same goes for their "fragile" transmissions... they're not drag-race cars!)






The funny thing is that in this thread, assuming we're talking about USDM cars... we're limited to discussing the very first year of the Evo 8, and the bug-eye WRX. The year range he gave us doesn't extend to the newer Evo, or the USDM STi.

[Tippey764]

Yeah, we didn't get the Evo until the VIII. Sucks we only got 2 years of the 4G63 models before they switched engines.

How do you get 2 years?

[Zato]

Well, the Evo is a far better performer than the regular Impreza, and it has a bit of an advantage over the WRX. Compare Evo and STi, and it is much more even.

However, the Evo wasn't available in the US until 2003 with the release of the Evo VIII, and the STi wasn't available until 2004. If you're limited to 2000-2003, then the 2003 Evo is really your only worthwhile option (the next closest thing is the 227hp WRX)

i guess i am going to get the evo then , the question would now be what generation would be best i seen 9,8,7 generations (exclude 10 am paying cash and i dont got 30k to pay for a 10).

[deevergote]

There is no 7 in the US, unless it is a gray market import. Your choices are 8, 9, and 10. My advice would be to pay for one that was meticulously maintained, unmodified, and never abused. It's going to be difficult to find, especially if you're looking for a low price. If you buy one that was beat to death over the past 6-7 years, the chances are good that you may end up spending a fortune fixing everything that breaks on you... to the point where you'd probably be better off buying a new one!

How do you get 2 years?

Whoops. I meant two models (8 and 9...)

[HondaB18]

i keep hearing high maintenance but i see none of those people have them

not that much, more than honda yes by no means a vw

insurance is the big thing most people have issues with

Funny you say what you do. What exactly is it about your 3000gt that has to do with an evo?

add to the fact that a 3000gt is not even similar to the maintenance cost of a mercedes. and after he mentioned parts for subaru is cheaper i knew he doesn't know his ish

[deevergote]

Also true. Subaru has some of the most expensive parts out of all the non-luxury Japanese makes (Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura most likely come with a higher cost for their exclusive parts.)

The 3000GT DOES have a hell of a maintenance cost, though. It's a super-complicated car, and many of the parts are exclusive to that one sub-model... The car was quite expensive when it was new, and they aren't exactly a dime a dozen. If you can't fix one yourself, you'll be paying a good amount to have a mechanic repair it for you. I love those cars, but the cost of ownership deterred me (not to mention, finding one that's in good condition is tough, and the good ones still aren't cheap!)

It's probably cheaper to own a 2002 Mercedes E Class than it is to own a 1996 3000GT VR4.

[AccordWarrior]

X2

The 2.5L motor that comes in the STI frequently likes to blow head gaskets. I personally think the motor design is to blame.

100mm bore on a 4 cylinder?

WTF?

Since when? The 2.5RS in the late 90s had issues, but I've never heard of the HG being a weak point on the STi. Sure, the 07+ had ringland issues due to a bad OEM tune to comply with emissions, and the 04-07 models had issues with the oil pickup cracking, but I've never heard of the STi motors popping head gaskets.

i say evo because its very very well rounded and because ive heard from alot of subi owners that the bug eyed subi was one of the worst designed impreza's.

The only problem with the early models was the transmissions were comparatively weak. Nothing the 6MT swap wouldn't fix.

The pricey parts in the STi are the brakes. The mounting bolts tend to seize up and it's impossible to remove them without damaging the calipers.

[HondaB18]

maintenance cost for a mercedes has pricier parts and higher labor cost, going by the book

take for example a simple oil change, around my area it would have cost me 120 dollars for my c-class (that is entry level, prices increase much more) would have cost me 35 dollars for my evo. i know intervals are not the same but even at twice the interval it would be cheaper

than there is clutch change, 120/hr * 8 hours labor = 960 + 1600 (clutch kit) = 2560 at mercedes. i forgot the exact amount but i was quoted much cheaper for a dealer job for even the costliest mitsubishi

repair and service cost may cost a lot but as for maintenance, not remotely the same as mercedes