Is it worth it?

Home  \  Asian Imports  \  Is it worth it?

whats up guys? I was just wanting to get some opinions on something. Is a 2005 or 2006 Mitsubishi Lancer Evo worth it's price tag? At the first of the year I am starting a new job and while I will keep my 944 I am thinking about selling my truck and getting another car. So far my options I want are the Evo, or a Dodge SRT-4 (I know there is a big price differnce there but I DON'T THINK I would mind paying the extra cash for the Evo). So what do you guys think? Which would be the better value?

posted by  chris945

Neither...I like them both, but I'd take an Impreza WRX over both. For the price of an SRT-4...I'd take an RSX-S :2cents:

posted by  chris_knows

you mean wrx sti, right?

i'd probably take a wrx over an srt-4, but not over an evo. :wink2:

though i'd say an evo looks more agressive, the sti is cheaper, and i'd get an 05 sti over an 06 sti, or an 05-06 evo...

posted by  pik_d

Eventhough the STI is faster in the 1/4 miles as well as being cheaper? :wink2:

posted by  Pythias

maybe the comma is misleading...

i'd get an '05 sti before getting an '06 sti (my god, the front is taken right from a suzuki forenza)

i would ALSO get an '05 sti over an '05-'06 evo.

if the miscommunication is my fault, i appalogize. :thumbs:

EDIT: oh, and 1/4 mile times really dont matter much to me... i'd rather know 0-70mph times, even though noone ever does those, so 0-60 will have to do. :mrgreen:

simply because i want to be able to get up to highway speeds as quickly as possible, since i travel to and from small towns via the highway often. aka: stoplight -> ramp -> merging in very little time is something i do quite often.

posted by  pik_d

Evo looks better, handles the same, and is quicker in the 1/4 mile. I'd say its better than the STi/STI and definitely better than thr SRT-4.

posted by  PontiacFan27

No its not, I went through this already :banghead: the STI is .3 seconds faster. Looks is a personal preferance, not a statistic. You should be able to differentiate between the two.

Go and learn. http://www.car-forums.com/talk/showthread.php?t=18618&page=3&pp=15

posted by  Pythias

Depends one where you get the times from. Different drivers yield different results in different track conditions and in different cars. For instance, my issue of Road and Track(December,2005), sitting right next to me states that the Evo runs the 1/4 .1 second faster than the STI, does 0-60 .4 seconds faster, 0-100 1.1 second faster, does the slalom .8 mph faster, and brakes faster.

posted by  PontiacFan27

Whats the 1/4 mile time of it?

posted by  Pythias

13.5 for the Evo, 13.6 for the STI

posted by  PontiacFan27

Wow big difference from my motor trend times, which were faster.

posted by  Pythias

Well my other source says that the Evo is .3 seconds quicker. It depends where you look. I prefer R&T for acceleration stats because all of their drivers follow a specific launch procedure for all cars. They also dont speedshift, so thats why their times are usually a bit slower than other mags.

posted by  PontiacFan27

dude... how is that news to you?
http://www.car-forums.com/talk/showpost.php?p=156308&postcount=24
the SAME thread as what you linked to... look at the 1st sentence. same exact thing that you were just told now by pontiacfan27.. :banghead:

posted by  pik_d

And when I posted the times and pics from my magazine did you argue that road and track said this? NO you didn't, dude.

posted by  Pythias

yea, because i had already told you this. why should i have to bring up arguments already made and that you acknowledged?


your exact words in reply to what i said:

posted by  pik_d

Your right thats my fault. So whose time's are right?

posted by  Pythias

the way i see it... since all we have are two times for each, i'd say the faster ones are right. the evo is only .2 seconds, so i see no problem saying that 13.3 is the "correct" one. only problem is that the sti ranges a freakin .6 seconds difference, which is a lot... that's may be the difference between making an extra shift along the way... but we dont know.

hmm, i was browsing some sti forums, and one member says he's gotten 12.98 @ 105.78mph on is evo IX. it's possible that the people at motor trend and road & track arent, or cant, drive the cars to the limit. since such in the case, i'd be inclined to say that using speed/handling as a way to determine between the sti and the evo is POINTLESS for road driving.

pythias, what's it say about the interiors of the cars in that comparison? here's what road and track says on the matter:



given that, i'd say that i'd rather be found in the drivers seat of an sti then an evo.

posted by  pik_d

Damn its sad when we have to compare comparisons, lol.
Interiors? It says nothing really, it mostly talks about track times and improved things.

posted by  Pythias

well, i guess he could do it the old fassioned way and test drive both cars... :eek: of all the things i should mention. :mrgreen:

posted by  pik_d

SRT-4 all the way!

posted by  newyorker

got anything to back up your opinion that the srt-4 is a better value then an evo or sti? comeon now, havnt you learned anything? for it's price, the srt-4 may be a great car, but it's not really comparable to the evo or sti.

posted by  pik_d

you know, i dotn think a single person answered the mans question...

he asked was it worth the price hike between the 05-06 EVO and the SRT4, didnt ask for a long lists of the comparisons between magazies and 1/4 mile times.

if you want a nice, quick, sporty car, SRT4 all the way, if you dont mind shelling out 10k more, the Evo is the next best bet (or STi depending on preference)

posted by  ride3k

:stupid:

posted by  Pythias

Your Message