.RJ Wrote:...and what does a used Evo go for?
Looks like low to mid 20s with under 50K miles.
2017 Mineral White BMW M240i Cabriolet
2014 White Platinum Pearl Explorer Sport
Living in the Alamo City.
210
Werent they $26-$28k new?
(09-25-2019, 03:18 PM)V1GiLaNtE Wrote: I think you need to see a mental health professional.
when i was looking at them last year i saw a few for low 20s, but they were '05s. you might be able to find one in the teens now though.
EVOs hold their value very well, KBB value for a 2003 "Good" EVO with 38k miles is still $22,500, and yess they started off at $26-28k As far as the clutch is concerned, yes its the week point, they put a shitty clutch in the car so that the TC or Tranny wouldnt go to hell first, however its meant to be the weak link. Most problems in evos involve guys takin off the launch/Rev limiter, puttin in a heavier clutch and then doing a 7k clutch drop, that doesnt sound good in any car.
Im thinkin of goin up to Maryland and checkin out a 2005, these came with the LSD in the front and the ACD unlike previous years. Plus its $24k with 19k miles, KBB on that car is still like $27k. Anyone wanna ride???
The STi, gotta stay loyal, nothin against the STi, but i like the styling of the EVO more and i hope to track this car a little, but not much as it will still be under warranty and my DD. i dont like tracking something alot that im gonna be drivng everday. The EVO is comfy enough to be a DD, seats are amazing and all the lil "Squeaks" that are common are fixable.
As far as my car is concerned, i dunno how much i can get for my car, ive seen RS/GS turbo cars go for good money $10k, but then ive seen some go for less than what i paid for my bottom end. im hoping to atleast get $7k for it, its a stretch but ill hopefully find someone.
what i know: evo is faster around a track, but more reviewers prefer the sti. evo is better looking IMO.
I Am Mike
4 wheels: '01 RAV4 (Formerly '93 Civic CX, '01 S2000, '10 GTI, '09 A4 Avant)
2 wheels: '12 Surly Cross-Check Custom | '14 Trek Madone 2.1 105 | '17 Norco Threshold SL Force 1 | '17 Norco Revolver 9.2 FS | '18 BMC Roadmachine 02 Two | '19 Norco Search XR Steel (Formerly '97 Honda VFR750F, '05 Giant TCR 2, '15 WeThePeople Atlas 24, '10 Scott Scale 29er XT, '11 Cervelo R3 Rival, '12 Ridley X-Fire Red)
No longer onyachin.
Mike Wrote:what i know: evo is faster around a track, but more reviewers prefer the sti. evo is better looking IMO. STi won Touring2 last year at the National Runoffs. On a technical track.
First and Third place.
highest placing EVO was 5th or 6th IIRC
both great cars, but I laugh at the magazine "tests"
most magazine tests i pay attention to are the ones that do long term tests, like the car and driver test on the 03 EVO. as far as performance tests, ill pay attnetion to the ones in SCC every now and then, but half the time they have 2 diff drivers so the tests cant be accurate.
Heres a spec comparison of the 06 STI and EVO MR
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0512_rally_cars/specs_price.html">http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sed ... price.html</a><!-- m -->
I work with a guy who has an 06 MR and has already wrecked it :? 1st gear plus too much boost got the better of him.
1996 BMW 328is white │ 89 BMW 325i track car │84 BMW 325e for sale!│Past: 94 Honda Del Sol S, 2003 Toyota 4Runner V8 Limited, 1996 BMW 328i
e30/e36 parts for sale... PM me
Car and Driver is retarded. I don't take those magazine tests seriously either. It's all about the driver, and both the STI and EVO can be driven amazingly or horribly. With the same driver, the EVO does slightly edge out the STI in a road course, but I wouldn't say the STI's performance is "laughable" compared to the EVO. They're very much similar cars in terms of performance.
I personally like the fit and finish of the STI better. Every EVO I've been in has a craptacular interior aside from the seats.
Posting in the banalist of threads since 2004
2017 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD Premium
Past: 2016 GMC Canyon All Terrain Crew Cab / 2010 Jaguar XFR / 2012 Acura RDX AWD Tech / 2008 Cadillac CTS / 2007 Acura TL-S / 1966 5.0 HO Mustang Coupe
2001 Lexus IS300 / 2004 2.8L big turbo WRX STI / 2004 Subaru WRX / A couple of old trucks
It's also a nice bonus that SOA reps don't come out to AutoXs and track days, take down your license plate and / or VIN number and flag your car for voiding warranty work like Mitsubishi does. That's always something to consider if you're serious about tracking your car.
Posting in the banalist of threads since 2004
2017 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD Premium
Past: 2016 GMC Canyon All Terrain Crew Cab / 2010 Jaguar XFR / 2012 Acura RDX AWD Tech / 2008 Cadillac CTS / 2007 Acura TL-S / 1966 5.0 HO Mustang Coupe
2001 Lexus IS300 / 2004 2.8L big turbo WRX STI / 2004 Subaru WRX / A couple of old trucks
almost every person says the interior is shitty except those who have previously owned a Mitsubishi. lotta people say the eclipse interior is shitty, but i love it. Loved the EVOs interior as well, simple yet functional
white97dsm Wrote:almost every person says the interior is shitty except those who have previously owned a Mitsubishi. lotta people say the eclipse interior is shitty, but i love it. Loved the EVOs interior as well, simple yet functional  Yeah it's like living in a trailer. When you upgrade to a double wide, it seems a lot nicer than it actually is.
Posting in the banalist of threads since 2004
2017 Mazda CX-5 GT AWD Premium
Past: 2016 GMC Canyon All Terrain Crew Cab / 2010 Jaguar XFR / 2012 Acura RDX AWD Tech / 2008 Cadillac CTS / 2007 Acura TL-S / 1966 5.0 HO Mustang Coupe
2001 Lexus IS300 / 2004 2.8L big turbo WRX STI / 2004 Subaru WRX / A couple of old trucks
:lol: haha....i honestly dont see whats so shitty about it, guess i have on blinders
EVO vs STi, both great cars. I personally like the STi a bit more (before the current ugly-ass rendition) just as an overall car. However I understand Justin wanting to stick with the DSM thing. Personally, I haven't REALLY liked a single Mitsubishi product's interior yet, but the EVO definitely has the best one I've seen so far
D_Eclipse9916 Wrote:Hahahah Sti is laughable compared to the EVO in track performance. Get the Evo. Laughable?
Evo 8 MR vs 2005 STi, with both cars on the same tires:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.caranddriver.com/features/9052/why-do-these-similar-cars-feel-so-different.html">http://www.caranddriver.com/features/90 ... erent.html</a><!-- m -->
Personally, even as a Subaru fanboy I'd rather have the Evo IX because it's 100x better looking (fixes the rhino nose on the Evo 8), and the variable valve timing is apparently quite awesome. Red, with black and white TME stripes and white wheels.
But to say that the STi is laughable compared to the Evo is just silly.
john
2006 Evo MR #7 STU | 2016 Focus ST #7 GS daily | Class of '01 and 4 year owner of The Original Mr Spoiler Wing | project:BDR
from what ive read a big diff in the two cars are the stock tires, which gives the EVO a lil bit of an edge, but giving them the same tires....... you see what happened. Im pretty sure they are equal in the 06 models, although the 06 STi has more HP as usual it is also heavier, where the EVO MR has less power but remains lighter. I think they would balance out and become pretty equal. But the EVO still has better tires from the factory.
2006 STi: 3351
2006 Evo RS: 3219
2006 Evo: 3263
2006 Evo MR: 3285
2006 Evo w/ sunroof: 3338
I didn't realize the STi had gained some poundage...
2006 Evo MR #7 STU | 2016 Focus ST #7 GS daily | Class of '01 and 4 year owner of The Original Mr Spoiler Wing | project:BDR
yeah, nor did i till Shea pointed it out, from what he said it just keeps gettin fatter. Oh and that EVO with the sunroof, the weight also includes a leather interior and how ever many pounds a infinity sound system adds.
Justin, watch out for those EVOs...they're fun, but one wrong step and they'll bite you in the ass, as seen here
http://www.bigboosting.com/rustydyno.wmv
I guess they don't like being tied down. Keep your DSM's happy people :o
|