last gen STI vs. new WRX vs. Corolla GR vs. Evo??

[jflogerzi]

Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83

What makes you say you’d stay away from Evos and STIs? Just curious what your personal experiences are with them.

No direct but in-direct with ppl I knew. Maybe cause I am just getting older, but I would not want to daily them. Gas Mileage and comfort with modern safety features are not great with either.

[fredzy]

Speaking of safety features, the GRC comes standard with all the fancy safety claptrap. Radar cruise, lane keep assist, pre-collision braking, blind spot monitor etc. I've never cared for any of it but now that I've got it and coexist just fine with it, I appreciate it. My wife will be driving the car a lot with the kids in it, so it's a big plus for that.

Without breaking out into a review, I can't imagine anyone coming from an STI or EVO being disappointed in the feel of the car or the performance. Despite being stiffer and sharper it is surprisingly way more refined feeling vs. my stock 15 WRX. Much more enjoyable to drive as a daily. It's hard to imagine then, how different it would be vs. EVO and STI. My seat time in both over the years was limited.

So if you want a car that's so 'because racecar' that it's hard to live with this won't be it. When you want to rip though, it rips. It's very clear that every dollar they put into it was to make it a good car to go fast in. Super easy to drive.

[DeeezNuuuts83]

Originally Posted by jflogerzi

No direct but in-direct with ppl I knew. Maybe cause I am just getting older, but I would not want to daily them. Gas Mileage and comfort with modern safety features are not great with either.

I appreciate your honest response. But with that being said, my guess is that the people you knew maybe had modified vehicles (which to be fair is likely going to account for a large chunk of the ones for sale these days, if not the majority of them). Though feel free to correct me, if my assumption is off.

I don't know how old you are, but like I said in my prior post, I'll be 40 this year, so while I'm not old, I don't consider myself part of the younger crowd anymore, so I do look at it from a different perspective than when I was half my age and both the Evo and STI were months from their US debut and the background of my computer screen as a college student. It's definitely not a "great" daily driver, but it's still an easy daily driver, in my opinion. The stock suspension is fine, it has plenty of interior space and a big trunk, and if you can control yourself, the mileage is decent. City driving is going to be mediocre at probably 19-20 mpg, but highway will be closer to 25, give or take. I managed to hit 31.89 and 32.24 mpg on successive weekends -- both of which were my personal bests, but clearly not indicative of "normal" highway fuel economy. You can see my Fuelly account (though I stopped updating it a few years back):

https://www.fuelly.com/car/mitsubish...uuuts83/213105

So that's the perspective from an Evo IX owner. The Evo X is more livable, in the sense that it's a little more comfortable, flatter torque curve, better interior amenities and more modern safety features, though its trunk is smaller due to the battery being moved there, though there's still a decent amount of space. And then of course the STI is even more comfortable than the Evo, just at the cost of handling, as it's almost universally been second place from a performance perspective. That's not to take away from it as a car, it's still a great option that just has some trade-offs, but it might be the perfect car for a lot of people. Just maybe not for people who want to go to the track.

The ones that did get modified, particularly with aftermarket springs or coilovers, are going to be the ones that aren't comfortable to drive. But stock or near stock is going to be fine, in my opinion.

Again, not trying to come off as biased, but I just wanted to give that personal insight.

[jflogerzi]

Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83

I appreciate your honest response. But with that being said, my guess is that the people you knew maybe had modified vehicles (which to be fair is likely going to account for a large chunk of the ones for sale these days, if not the majority of them). Though feel free to correct me, if my assumption is off.

I don't know how old you are, but like I said in my prior post, I'll be 40 this year, so while I'm not old, I don't consider myself part of the younger crowd anymore, so I do look at it from a different perspective than when I was half my age and both the Evo and STI were months from their US debut and the background of my computer screen as a college student. It's definitely not a "great" daily driver, but it's still an easy daily driver, in my opinion. The stock suspension is fine, it has plenty of interior space and a big trunk, and if you can control yourself, the mileage is decent. City driving is going to be mediocre at probably 19-20 mpg, but highway will be closer to 25, give or take. I managed to hit 31.89 and 32.24 mpg on successive weekends -- both of which were my personal bests, but clearly not indicative of "normal" highway fuel economy. You can see my Fuelly account (though I stopped updating it a few years back):

https://www.fuelly.com/car/mitsubish...uuuts83/213105

So that's the perspective from an Evo IX owner. The Evo X is more livable, in the sense that it's a little more comfortable, flatter torque curve, better interior amenities and more modern safety features, though its trunk is smaller due to the battery being moved there, though there's still a decent amount of space. And then of course the STI is even more comfortable than the Evo, just at the cost of handling, as it's almost universally been second place from a performance perspective. That's not to take away from it as a car, it's still a great option that just has some trade-offs, but it might be the perfect car for a lot of people. Just maybe not for people who want to go to the track.

The ones that did get modified, particularly with aftermarket springs or coilovers, are going to be the ones that aren't comfortable to drive. But stock or near stock is going to be fine, in my opinion.

Again, not trying to come off as biased, but I just wanted to give that personal insight.

I guess it really depends how much "Track Driving" will be required. Its hard to strattle that line. I am turning 38 this year, but I a have fully embraced the dedicated track car mantra which is paid for clean and clear. It something happens, oh well and rebuild it. I get my fun out on the track. DD I love my truck and drive like a grandpa now

[DeeezNuuuts83]

Originally Posted by jflogerzi

I guess it really depends how much "Track Driving" will be required. Its hard to strattle that line. I am turning 38 this year, but I a have fully embraced the dedicated track car mantra which is paid for clean and clear. It something happens, oh well and rebuild it. I get my fun out on the track. DD I love my truck and drive like a grandpa now

It does, but what makes these cars pretty good swiss army knives is that they can do pretty much everything pretty well without needing much modification. So you can have just one car and it be everything. It may not have the no-compromise focus of a dedicated track car, but it's a very persuasive option for people who don't have the luxury to have two vehicles or just don't want to have more than one car. There are a lot of people who track their DDs. Obviously they could get more out of it by having it just as a track car (and possibly no longer being concerned with being smog legal or being streetable), but one thing that kept me from getting a second car as a DD was that I didn't want to be in one car and in a certain moment wish I were in the other. It happened a lot when I'd be with my girlfriend and taking her Corolla somewhere, if we were going on a longer trip. If the absence of Toyota-like fuel economy is the price, it's not that big of a deal in my opinion.

I'm curious though about how cars like the GR Corolla and even the Civic Type R drive. I don't doubt that they're quick, but the real question is how does it feel from the driver's seat.

[fredzy]

Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83

I'm curious though about how cars like the GR Corolla and even the Civic Type R drive. I don't doubt that they're quick, but the real question is how does it feel from the driver's seat.

Someone coming from old school EVO/STI, my guess is

GRC: feels a bit sterile and dull, super dialed though. Then you push it and

CTR: same, but feels less sterile and dull when driven normally, interior makes it more exciting to be in

[Stephen W.]

Originally Posted by ScoobsMcGee

A Focus ST would be a good lower cost alternative to a GR. A Focus RS for similar prices to an Evo X if the ST isn't enough.

My wife had a 2007 Focus ST. It was barely a step up from a standard Focus. Noway it's an alternative to a GRC. Run, I say RUN away from an RS. Wife's dealership sold four over the three years they made them and all had major problems.

Originally Posted by jflogerzi

No direct but in-direct with ppl I knew. Maybe cause I am just getting older, but I would not want to daily them. Gas Mileage and comfort with modern safety features are not great with either.

Quit now, you're just digging yourself a bigger hole. Evos and STi's are "WOT mobiles". People don't buy them for their fuel economy or plush ride.

I have hundreds of thousands of kilometers in STi's. (A 2006 sedan, 2011 hatch and a 2016 sedan.) We were the first registered owners for all three. The two sedans delivered a great driving experience stock right out of the box. The Hatchback would have cost us thousands $ to make it as good as either of the sedans. Shame too as I really liked the added space and available rally car inspired add-ons.

[jflogerzi]

Originally Posted by Stephen W.

My wife had a 2007 Focus ST. It was barely a step up from a standard Focus. Noway it's an alternative to a GRC. Run, I say RUN away from an RS. Wife's dealership sold four over the three years they made them and all had major problems.



Quit now, you're just digging yourself a bigger hole. Evos and STi's are "WOT mobiles". People don't buy them for their fuel economy or plush ride.

I have hundreds of thousands of kilometers in STi's. (A 2006 sedan, 2011 hatch and a 2016 sedan.) We were the first registered owners for all three. The two sedans delivered a great driving experience stock right out of the box. The Hatchback would have cost us thousands $ to make it as good as either of the sedans. Shame too as I really liked the added space and available rally car inspired add-ons.

I don't think I am digging any hole. Everyone has an opinion and are entitled to it.

[ScoobsMcGee]

Originally Posted by Stephen W.

My wife had a 2007 Focus ST. It was barely a step up from a standard Focus. Noway it's an alternative to a GRC. Run, I say RUN away from an RS. Wife's dealership sold four over the three years they made them and all had major problems.

When the person is looking at an Evo, which isn't much of a step up from a Lancer in terms of amenities, a Focus ST isn't quite so unreasonable. The two people I know with them each have well over 100k miles each and no drivetrain issues, which is why I suggested it. I specifically call out drivetrain because they are at the point where things like bushings are starting to wear. The person with the car dealing with bushings has 189,000 miles on it. I just asked.

I know the Focus RS had a head gasket recall, but haven't heard anything other than that. That could be the issue the dealership you mentioned referenced. However, I don't care enough to look up more than that. If the guy asking the question wants to consider them, great. If not, okey dokey.

[Veloist]

Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83

I'm curious though about how cars like the GR Corolla and even the Civic Type R drive. I don't doubt that they're quick, but the real question is how does it feel from the driver's seat.

I have a 5-6 paragraph write-up comparing the GRC to the new Civic Type R because my neighbor just got one and let me drive his. Haven’t bother posting it here but if anyone is interested just say the word.

Basically the new Civic Type R is the more dialed-in driver’s car…it’s more precise and visceral but only by a margin. This refers to steering, handling, shifting, and engine response. You have to exploit that small difference by driving the car harder. Around town, they feel equally good and driver-oriented.

[DeeezNuuuts83]

Originally Posted by Veloist

I have a 5-6 paragraph write-up comparing the GRC to the new Civic Type R because my neighbor just got one and let me drive his. Haven’t bother posting it here but if anyone is interested just say the word.

Basically the new Civic Type R is the more dialed-in driver’s car…it’s more precise and visceral but only by a margin. This refers to steering, handling, shifting, and engine response. You have to exploit that small difference by driving the car harder. Around town, they feel equally good and driver-oriented.

Sure, why not. I am totally not a buyer of either car but am still curious about how they drive.

[Veloist]

I originally posted this in the GRC groups so had to modify it a little to neutralize perspective

FL5 dashboard is lower and shorter (distance relative to windshield) than the GRC, which are favorable traits in a driver-oriented car. The driving position & seat height to the dashboard is perfect—very driver-oriented. The seats are super-bolstered and way more aggressive than the GRC’s.

The GRC has a high dashboard and you feel like you are placed inside the car rather than it feeling cockpit-like. Seating position is high. But it’s still a good distance from pedals.

Driving
FL5 feels precise and dialed-in. Steering weight in +R felt similar to the GRC in Normal mode—light and briefly numb off-center before the wheels respond. GRC in Sport mode feels heavier off-center.

Both have very progressive steering feel (sharper or more load in the turn the more feel) In general you get more feedback & weight in the FL5 (+R mode). The turn-in is sharp and you can feel the lower center of gravity in the FL5. Powering through a turn with throttle feels so good, like threading a needle. The GRC isn’t too far behind in terms of steering response, and I think the GRC will respond particularly well in tighter turns because of the shorter wheelbase.

The K20C1 engine is responsive and refined. It revs with a nice linear and responsive feel. The revs dropped immediately during a gear change—a similar trait with the G16. Turbo lag isn’t as evident compared to the G16 though. I only shifted at 4K, but as a passenger, the owner took it to redline and it had a very strong pull. Apparently it has some torque steer compared to previous Gen. But it’s not detrimental…in fact it probably gives the car more character lol.

The FL5’s shifter has very short throws and is precise, smooth, and quick (aka slick). You don’t feel as much “thump” compared to the GRC’s shifter, which is a little more mechanical as a result of the thump and notchiness (hello Lotus Evora). Clutch uptake in the FL5 is good and the bite is low but not as easy or apparent to get out of first in the GRC which has that feature where it adds like 200 rpm for you.

The ride in +R mode was quite similar to the GRC’s suspension setup. I wouldn’t say it was significantly harsher. Just a tad firmer. I was telling my neighbor that I could probably tolerate +R mode for a lengthy period.

FL5 is a little quieter at low RPM’s than the GRC but the FL5 also has piped-in audio which helps keep the engine sound-feedback consistent. The turbo noises are louder in the GRC though especially the whoosh when coming off the throttle. Also the GRC idles louder. The bass-heavy exhaust at low RPM’s is notably louder inside too.

Some obvious stuff to consider…the FL5 also has more trunk space, more rear leg room, and an arm rest. It feels substantially bigger on the road especially because you see a much bigger hood looking out and it’s wider.

I really like both cars and really admire the engineering of the FL5 and Type R’s in general. I wish I could have both! By definition, the FL5 is the more dialed-in, driver-oriented car. But the GRC isn’t far behind at all. I’d say the GRC is about 87-92% as driver-oriented compared to the FL5, and most of the difference would be at higher-performance driving. The FL5 delivers the experience with some finesse and gives you a well-positioned dashboard and seat. On the other hand, I find the GRC more immersive since it is a little louder around town and has the louder turbo noises and beefy gearbox.

What I get from both cars though is the desire to drive them more. And both give me the desire to drive them on a track or twisties. So they both succeeded in that regard.

[Arthur-A]

Civic is FWD, so meh..

[wbradley]

I've had my 2018 STI since Oct 2017, and it will just reach 50K kms (36K miles) shortly. It's primarily a winter car so even the original tires aren't worn. It sits on the driveway, seldom moved most of the time.
Regards to reliability, knock on wood, zero problems.
Downside: I'm averaging 12L/100km. My 2015 WRX averaged 9.9 L/100 km
Also, it requires 91 fuel. I'd say it's a pretty heavy gas burner using over double what my wife's Prius used to burn with regular fuel at around 5.6 L/100 km. So if you find yourself commuting 50 miles per day, jt will add up.
The plusses: insane resale value (maybe not a plus for you now though)
The front and rear LSD put it in an entirely different and handling class compared to a WRX. I've had two of them. Also, the transmission is bulletproof and the centre adjustment is unique, though I don't use it personally. And Brembos, don't need to sell you on them.
As a gauge, how much do you like it in stock form? If it needs a tons of changes up front, don't buy it. Try to find a car.that you already like everything about as-is, stock. There, I went and said it.