Technologue

1.0 mph

better.The previous Evo sounded like a vacuum that’s sucked up a sock.The new one has a much throatier rasp akin to a dog expelling kibble. Adding MIVEC meant revising the cylinder-head casting and gasket.The new casting,along with longerthreaded spark plugs,better resists heat. Stronger alloy pistons and new rings are said to reduce oil consumption by about 10 percent.There’s also a new bell housing cover designed to reduce interior noise.

To feed the higher-output motor,the fuel pump is able to deliver a seven-percentcapacity increase over the previous one. Shifting six gears got easier and more precise due to Teflon-lined shift cables and a better shift-stroke stopper.The clutch has received a wide-angle damper to quell vibration noise.Aerodynamically,there are subtle revisions.A new front fascia resulted in the deletion of the triangular grille splitter and more cooling for the intercooler below.The carbon-fiber rear wing is now hollow to reduce upper body weight,and the uprights that support it are body colored. Dealer-installed options (neither of which was on our tester) include a front air-dam extender and a rearwing wicker bill that claim to reduce lift and drag. Rooftop vortex generators remain standard but are now body colored.

In the Subaru camp, mechanical changes are fewer and less evident.The open planetary center differential is now controlled electromechanically, and its default front/rear distribution ratio has been changed from 35:65 to 41:59. A torque-sensing mechanical limited-slip device replaces the previously hydraulically controlled unit to speed reaction of the torque distribution.The Tribeca’s steeringangle sensor has been added to the array of electronics that direct the operation of the STI’s center differential. In manual mode,the diff can still be progressively locked in any of six positions up to a 50/50 distribution. Carbon-reinforced synchronizers smooth shifts into forth,fifth,and sixth gears.

Aero tweaks come at the expense of looks—or is that vice versa? The new airplane-inspired front fascia is said to be slipperier and more efficient, which allowed a smaller hood scoop to be fitted. A new STI-specific roof vane spoiler borrows the Evo MR trick of pulling the airflow down against the rear glass to allow clean air to act on the rear wing, thus increasing its effect.No word on how much extra downforce is made,but we assume it’s up from the previous 2005 STi’s 50 pounds at 100 mph.Tucked under the rear bumper,the new diffuser actually helped us vacuum our slalom course,producing a dusty roostertail as it flew past.

Have all the hours Mitsubishi and Subaru engineers spent tweaking and fiddling with these cars made a difference?

Not really.

Racing teams will appreciate the help where WRC Championship points are won and lost within tenths of a second.In the real world,however,both the MR and the STI are still supremely capable and entertaining and only fractionally more so this time around.We’d still bet money on either one against a Lamborghini or Ferrari on the right track.Yes,those hard-core Evo

0.01 g

or STI fans who spend hours in their respective online forums might feel a nuance here and there,but neither one has leapfrogged the other.In fact,the Evo and STI perform closer than ever before.

Overlaying this year’s best lap onto last year’s, the 2006 Evo MR’s lap time improved by 0.63 second. The gain appears to come from that 10-horse increase over last year’s.The graph of each of the acceleration zones shows a slightly steeper incline with the 2006 MR.The new car’s top speed on the back straight increased to 99.6 mph,where the old MR achieved 96.9 mph.Analyzing the lateral and braking g-loads each car produced is an exercise in subtlety.A node here and a blip there differentiate old from new,but all in, they’re indistinguishable from one another.

Last year,our early build-2005 STi tester felt slow compared with other examples previously tested.With over 1600 miles on this year’s STI, it had been broken in properly and produced all the power it should.As a result,the lap time,comparing last year’s to this,improved to a greater degree compared with the two Evos.The speed trace for nearly the entire lap for the 2006 STI is higher than last year’s car.

The result is a 1.6-second-quicker lap time and a 2.8-mph-higher top speed.The improvement in corner exit speeds,where the new center differential may have shown an advantage,couldn’t be measured.Last year’s car was more apt to rotate into a tailout counter-steering slide. This year, though that technique is still possible,it requires more effort and commitment to make it happen.The former STi trait of nosing into a corner when the throttle is lifted (and drifting out when the gas pedal is mashed) seems to have gone away with the old center diff.Too bad,because it was one of the things to point to as a divergent trait between Evo and STi.The new STI is just a hair more neutral than its predecessor. As with the Evos,the STi versus STI g-loads are only slightly different and can’t be viewed as conclusively better or worse.

Only after combining the best laps of the 2006 Evo and 2006 STI do marked differences become evident. Analysis shows the Subaru slightly more “chuckable”than the Mitsubishi,exhibiting a number of higher g-load spikes than the Evo,which shows smoother curves.This is further supported by a particular set of esses where the STI enters at a higher speed and spikes the g-load prior to the exit.The driver reported more confidence throwing the STI because he knew it would reward him with a lurid slide.

The Evo,on the other hand,did what it was designed to do—remain neutral. In fact,when it’s pushed beyond what the tires can maintain,the Evo merely goes wide of the intended path,all four tires giving up simultaneously. Whatever’s attempted— lifting or matting the gas pedal,tugging at the steering wheel,over-committing to a corner—the Evo just sticks and goes.Do the same in the STI,and there’s always oversteer in reserve.The only time the Evo oversteered on command was in the slalom where the center differential’s “Gravel” setting proved more useful (and quicker) to rotate the car for each successive cone.

On the racetrack,it was less useful than the “Tarmac”setting.In the end,the Evo IX MR was 0.39 second quicker around the racetrack than the Impreza WRX STI.

Ready for that winner thing?

No doubt,the Mitsubishi is a dedicated, well-sorted track machine—and so is the Subaru.Which is more fun is a different story.With performances so close,it boils down to brand preference, aesthetics, price,and personality.

It’s impossible to pick one over the other based solely on the test numbers. Evolutionists will always be so, and Subaristas will remain loyal,as well.While it’s certain neither one of these cars will wind up on display at the Guggenheim,the Subaru just looks weirder this time around. The new,more feminine grille,even in its smaller-than-Tribeca scale,doesn’t do the STI justice.

The Evo,while looking like a car that could change shape into a 15-foot robot at the push of a button,does have a purposeful honesty to it.The beauty lies in what it does: finely crafted sharp-edged fins, vents,wings,and things that exploit the wind,cool the engine,and look the part. They all seem appropriate to the car and what it’s meant to do.

Not so with the STI,which has a more malleable nature.You can grab it by the scruff of its neck and throw it around,and it’ll reward you with heroic deeds.From the way you can launch it from 6000 rpm with all wheels spinning to the way you can drive it slideways around a corner,it lets you have more fun than the Evo does.(Yes, there’s still a software-regulated hardwareprotecting 5000-rpm rev-limiter from a standstill that won’t allow the Evo IX to unleash enough power to bark the tires on dry-pavement launches.)

Then there’s price.Last time around,the Evo MR was about $1200 costlier. This time,that difference has jumped to almost $3000.Most of us—although not the entire staff,it must be said—feel okay saving that much money for the added driving pleasure in an uglier car.

Okay,we picked a winner—but do we now have two hairs where there was once one? ■

1ST PLACE ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

SUBARUIMPREZA WRX STI

More fun than the Evo;tossable and a more rewarding drive

2ND PLACE ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

EVO IX MR

Dedicated machine;cool looks— but more expensive than its rival

POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS

DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT ENGINE TYPE

Front engine, AWD Front engine, AWD Turbocharged I-4, iron block, Turbocharged flat-4, alum block, aluminum head aluminum heads

VALVETRAIN BORE X STROKE

DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl 3.35 x 3.46 in / 85.0 x 88.0 mm 3.92 x 3.11 in / 99.5 x 79.0 mm DISPLACEMENT 121.9 cu in / 1997 cc 149.9 cu in / 2457 cc COMPRESSION RATIO 8.8:1 8.2:1 REDLINE 7000 rpm 7000 rpm POWER (SAE NET) 286 hp @ 6500 rpm 300 hp @ 6000 rpm TORQUE (SAE NET) 289 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm 300 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm WEIGHT TO POWER 11.5 lb/hp 11.1 lb/hp TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual 6-speed manual AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIOS 4.58:1 / 3.18:1 3.90:1 / 2.95:1 SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR Struts, coil springs, Struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar; multilink, anti-roll bar; struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar coil springs, anti-roll bar STEERING RATIO 13.0:1 15.2:1 TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK 2.1 2.7 BRAKES, F;R 12.6-in vented disc; 12.7-in vented disc; 11.8-in vented disc, ABS 12.3-in vented disc, ABS

WHEELS TIRES

17 x 8.0, forged aluminum 17 x 8.0, forged aluminum 235/45R17 93W 225/45R17 90W Yokohama Advan A-406 Bridgestone Potenza RE070

DIMENSIONS WHEELBASE

103.3 in 100.0 in TRACK, F/R 59.6 / 59.6 in 58.7 / 58.9in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 178.5 x 69.7 x 57.1 in 175.8 x 68.5 x 56.3 in TURNING CIRCLE 38.7 ft 35.4 ft CURB WEIGHT 3283 lb 3315 lb WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION 61/ 39 % 58 / 42 % SEATING CAPACITY 5 5 HEADROOM, F/R 39.9 / 36.7 in 38.6 / 36.7 in LEGROOM, F/R 43.0 / 36.6 in 42.9 / 33.0 in SHOULDER ROOM, F/R 54.1 / 53.3 in 52.7 / 52.9 in CARGO VOLUME 10.2 cu ft 11.0 cu ft

TEST DATA

ACCELERATION TO MPH 0-30 1.5 sec 1.3 sec 0-40 2.3 2.2 0-50 3.3 3.1 0-60 4.5 4.5 0-70 6.1 5.7 0-80 7.8 7.6 0-90 10.0 9.5 0-100 12.4 12.1 PASSING 45-65 MPH 2.5 sec 2.5 sec QUARTER MILE 13.3 sec @ 103.4 mph 13.0 sec @ 103.5 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 107 ft 108 ft BRAKING, 100-0 MPH 306 ft 320 ft 600-FT SLALOM 69.8 mph avg 68.8 mph avg MT FIGURE EIGHT 25.4 sec @ 0.72 g avg 25.5 sec @ 0.72 g avg LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.92 g avg 0.91 g avg 1.56-MILE ROAD-COURSE LAP 93.8 sec 94.2 sec TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 2550 rpm 2500 rpm

CONSUMER INFO

BASE PRICE $35,764 $33,620 PRICE AS TESTED $36,564 $33,620 STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL No/yes No/yes AIRBAGS Dual front Dual front, front sides BASIC WARRANTY 5 yrs/60,000 miles 3 yrs/36,000 miles POWERTRAIN WARRANTY 10 yrs/100,000 miles 5 yrs/60,000 miles ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE 5 yrs/unlimited miles 3 yrs/36,000 miles FUEL CAPACITY 14.0 gal 15.9 gal EPA CITY/HWY ECON 18 / 24 mpg (est) 18 / 24 mpg MT FUEL ECON 20.6 mpg 19.6 mpg RECOMMENDED FUEL Unleaded premium Unleaded premium