I guess I am taking these tenths of a second too seriously. My thinking was that especially for the '04, without the wheel spinning and wheel-hop, and any other launch problem, the time would be much better. But if the '05 takes .3 seconds longer then that's good enough for me. That shows a consistancy between the two GTOs.
STi: 0-60 in 4.6 seconds (with a high rpm abusive clutch drop) 5-60 in 5.8 seconds
THANK YOU. Finally, a 5-60 time. Now, is it FINALLY obvious to you turbo/AWD fan people what we V8 people are talking about?? It's even worse on the base WRX.
I am pretty sure the GTO also traps higher in the 1/4 mile. That means that from a roll (like I just posted), the GTO is going to walk away from the STi.
Having cross-shopped the 350HP GTO against the STi and having purchased the STi, I can offer a few valid points here.
Yes..the STi will outhandle the GTO in every category. Yes..the STi will beat it in the 1/4 (personal best of 12.9@104 in a stock STi) No..an STi will not hang from a rolling start above 80MPH against the GTO. Below those speeds though, it takes until at least 120MPH for the GTO to catch it. Tested this on the NJTP. Yes..the STi will beat you to death and is not practical as a daily driver. Yes..the GTO has a much more refined interior and ride. Yes..the GTO will provide much longer smokey burnouts than an STi...but breaking all 4 loose in 1st and 2nd in an STi is something that everyone should experience at least once in life.
Personally, I think they should compare the GTO to the new Legacy GT. Very close performance numbers all around (against the 350HP GTO that is).
* from a rolling start * in perfect weather and on dry pavement * with an unskilled driver in the STi * who is drag racing but too concerned about the clutch to really race * and we are not at altitude where turbos don't suffer from power loss * and only if it's the newer 400hp version of the GTO
Under those circumstances you win. Impressive.
Under any other circumstances the STi would tie or win, and that's in straight-line performance, which is the GTO's primary strength.
Now let's put a GTO in a rally cross and see how well it can compete with an STi on its home turf. Or not, because that would just be silly.
These are different animals, but the STi can hold its own even on the GTO's home turf.
You act like several of these things would never happen.
* from a rolling start
Very common street racing scenario. Obviously all highway races fall under this category.
* in perfect weather and on dry pavement
I know the Subaru guys like to talk about racing in the rain, or in the snow, but....come on. I don't find this one ridiculous either. Plus, on the STi's stock tires, it's going to be MORE of a death trap than the GTO, because the GTO at least comes with all seasons. I believe the STi is summer only. Perhaps there is an all-season option...
* with an unskilled driver in the STi
Maybe you think only highly skilled quasi-professionals buy Subarus, but I don't.
* who is drag racing but too concerned about the clutch to really race
This one is REAL likely. I expect a very small percentage of owners would actually drive it "properly" off the line.
* and we are not at altitude where turbos don't suffer from power loss
I live at or near sea level (east coast) so this one means nothing to me.
* and only if it's the newer 400hp version of the GTO
Well, there will be more 400hp GTOs on the street than 350hp versions, as the 06 models come out. So again, this is not unrealistic.
I will concede, just so you are aware, that the STi isn't bad, even starting off boost.
"Street racing is illegal and dangerous and it should be saved for the track. "
EXACTLY.
Which is why 5-60 times have MUCH more relevance to real-world driving and real-world power than 0-60 times. And since the current GTO (400 hp version) has a substantially better 5-60 time (5.1 seconds in the GTO vs. 5.8 secs in the STi), this would be an INDICATION than for real-world driving and the use of real-world power, the GTO has a substantial edge.
But this is ALL a moot point anyway. I mean, what is at stake here? Are ANY of you guys (GTO and STi fans) afraid that potential buyers of either of these cars might switch to the 'other' side simply over a few 1/10's in acceleration? Would a STi fan even briefly consider a GTO just because it has a few 1/10's in the 5-60 and 1/4 mile? Would a potential GTO buyer be thinking about a STi instead just because he could be quicker in the rain/dirt? Get real.....
You guys might as well be arguing about whether it is better to do big, smoky burnouts on 2 tires or have the ability to sling gravel with 4.......
There is more to life than cars (there's this whole snack chip discussion which I'm glad juice brought up). And there's more to 'performance' than just time-to-distance.
For instance, I know that I would be absolutely shredded if I attempted to go up against either a GTO or a STi with my dinky little Celica GTS at a light; but then, I had a different set of performance criteria to meet.
To each his own. As far as I'm concerned, as long as I'm converting dead dinos into forward motion and lateral g's, I'm a happy camper.
Plus, on the STi's stock tires, it's going to be MORE of a death trap than the GTO, because the GTO at least comes with all seasons. I believe the STi is summer only. Perhaps there is an all-season option...
Quick comment. Just because the STi comes with summer tires, don't assume that they don't do well in the rain. All seasons are like a jack of all trades, master of none. I will concede that the stock Bridgestones aren't worth a damn in any temperature below 40 degrees. However, they are still very sticky in the wet. I have yet to hydroplane or lose grip in the rain with a years worth of driving in my STi. Plus, I don't think that anyone here needs any convincing that Subaru's AWD system is top notch. With a set of Nokian WR tires (all season, but snow rated) I was ripping up the roads in the white stuff last winter. The ability to lock the center diff at 50/50 makes the STi a year-round driving machine.
I had an E36 M3 before the STi. And even with its 50/50 weight ratio, and dedicated snow tires it was still a little hard to handle at times in the winter. And that car only had 240 hp. I can't imagine driving a 350 or 400 hp GTO in the snow, even with snow tires. I am curious if anyone here has driven their GTO in the snow?
First, when I said death trap, I meant using an STi with summer tires in the snow. Obviously it would be fine in the rain. I think I was trying to hint at the fact that AWD won't make up for summer tires in the snow.
Also, snow traction has basically little to do with horsepower and everything to do with torque. Horsepower happens at the upper end of the tach with your foot on the floor. Most cars have a problem with snow traction under those conditions, regardless of their horsepower rating. Given that the GTO is torquey, it would probably be bad except for the traction control. I'm pretty sure that as a heavy RWD, it would do fine with snow tires.
What? Haven't you seen the new dip-shaped corn chips? They rock!
Summer tires - I've seen tests (I forget by who) that also showed some were excellent in the wet. In the snow they're awful, though. The soft compounds get hard.
Hard to argue with someone that's driven both cars. This sounds like a reasonable evaluation of the two cars. 12.9@104 in the quarter? You must be hammering the hell out of your STi at the drag strip. Are you conceding top end to the GTO?
"I think they should compare the GTO to the new Legacy GT. Very close performance numbers all around." Where did you see those numbers? The only numbers I have seen aren't even in the ball park.
new to this forum - STi fan.......just wanted to say smth, i jus read a review for the new 4 dr bently which tops out at 195 mph and umm sputterguy, it has a twin turbo and AWD layout, just wanted to let you know. i know that the GTO has great history but the era of big blocks n RWD came to end a while go, i'm not saying that there arent some great V8/RWD cars out there, for example the whole V series makes me drool but as bently and benz's AMG divisions have shown AWD and forced induction is the future, sorry....
i know that the GTO has great history but the era of big blocks n RWD came to end a while go
Maybe for younger generations of Evo-STi lovers both cars that their looks don't say much but "look at me please!". Everybody has different taste on to vehicles. I cannot say or confirm that RWD V* are coming to an end. Why is Ford selling over 20,000 V8 RWD mustangs and Chrysler is so agresively promoting the SRT8 and the Charger? By the way, there are list of people waiting for the Saleen 281E and it's other 2 versions. Even Pontiac is selling all of it's miss Judge-d GTO's.
No my friend, the muscle cars are coming back very strong and it is supported by a different population is able to afforded - late 20's to 60 year old males.
I still think that comapring the GTO and the STi is a mistake. A 2 door vs. a 4door, a 4 cilinder vs an 8 cilinder, not even to match insurance coverage(cheaper in the GTO than the STi) A drag racer vs a rally racer...a 4wd vs a 2wd. Apples and oranges do not compare. Great cars both of them, only that the GTO will be more apealing to an older generation and I even know kids (18 to 22) doing whatever possible to get one.(GTO) No doubt about it, the STi is more popular than the GTO between youngsters.
Still, from 0-60 nor 5-60 which is real world numbers and at top speeds of 100-130 the STi don't stand a chance in a straight line against a bigger displacement vehicle like the GTO. The numbers have been verified by Car and Driver Mag. Juts do a search on the web site and compare the numbers for both the EVo and the STi and the numbers from "21 century muscle car" comparo in which the GTO smoked the Mustang GT in every category and was the best performer taking out a stupid-biast "Gotta have it factor". The GTO had 5 points in raw performance over the Stang.
then compare the numbers for al 3 Evo, Sti and GTO. The 4 bangers will put up with the GTO like until the 75 mph mark, after that my friend it is M3/GTO territory and the Big boys play while the youngsters sit and watch in awe.
Lancer Evo: 0-60 in 4.8 Sec, 5-60 in 6.1 sec, 1/4 mile in 13.6 sec. @ 104 mph Top Gear 30-50 12.2 sec, Top gear 50-70 12.2 sec, top speed 152, 0-100mph 12.6 sec, 0-130 mph 25 sec.
GTO: 0-60mph 4.8 sec,(equal with Evo, .10sec over STi not much difference at all) 5-60mph 5.1 sec (1 full second over Evo and 1.3 seconds over the STi that my friend is a LOT) 1/4 mile 13.3sec @ 103mph (Not much difference over Evo .3 sec and over STi .10 hardly any difference at all) Top Gear 30-50 9.6sec (2.6 sec over the Evo and 2.7 sec over the STi. almost 3 sec difference!!!) Top Gear 50-70 9.4sec( Finaly the Evo got to me and scored 1.3 seconds under and beat me! STi with 9.4 sec beat me too!) Top speed 158mph (Evo 152 and STi 145mph sorry!) 0-100mph (EVo 12.6 sec and STi 13.1 -.9sec for the EVo and -1.4sec for the STi) 0-130 19.6 sec (25 sec for the EVo (-5.4sec) and 24.1 for the STi (-4.1sec) So I really don't know from what street race and obviously not stock cars the STi nor the EVo are faster than the GTO. Slalom and skidpad? Yeah, I got to give you at least two points to win...
alrite alrite so maybe the era of rwds n big blocks havent come to an end but of all those cars listed, which one of the two we're talking about keeps up better? exactly the STi
from the vette to the viper to the amg and audi s, the GTO can't keep up in 0-60.
ANd if you take the money u saved buying an STi over a vette, roughly 15k, and invest that in an STi....need i say more
wow thats a pretty thorough comparision i'll give you props for that but for me i'm looking at 0-60 times the most since the local police isnt to fond of going faster than that on residential streets and let me restate that 4.6sec to 60 is not uncommon territory for the STi and how much does it really matter than the gto can hit 158 mph verses 140+ in the STi, i know i won't be hitting those speeds and for your sake i hope you won't either, since that's acting for a night in jail. also, there is a much greater aftermarket for STi/Evo than the GTO, there are Evo's running at the 9 seconds for the 1/4 mile and pick up any of hundreds of tuner mags and you'll see a sti/evo, and running Sti's in the 450 hp range isnt uncommon....
Stock vehicle comparo I meant. I can also invest on a Ram Air intake, chiptunning, take out extra weight and tadda! I will have at least an extra 100hp only with the ram air, add an extra 45hp with the chip...145hp+400= 545hp...3725 pds of newtonian gravity = 6.83lb/hp ratio...
You are right on street racing as being ilegal, I don't street race. Weight is your friend with a lighter 4 cilinder engine. The GTO was a rush for Mr. Lutz to get a coupe to cover for the Trans Am and the Camaro. Proven to be more powerful and quicker than any of the mentioned above stock models(Camaro and Trans Am). When I went to buy my car, I tried a Mustang GT and a BMW 330, I have an A4 2003.5 1.8t chiptunned + KN filter and a diverter valve Dyno'ed at 240sh HP tracked 6.4 to 0-60mph and 1/4 mile of 14.09. I know a quality interior (My Audi) and space from my Equinox LT. What got me on the GTO was the well appointed interior and that after a couple of months there is not a rattle or noises unlike my Audi and my friend 2005 MUstang GT. The GT's interior is CHEAP, it is like a prision in the back not suitabke for adults and I don't think even children will be confortable back there. The transmission on the Stang made strong noises as it shifts and my friend even had problems with the gas tank and hand brake.
I did'nt look at the STi neither the EVo. Not apealing. A lot of people say that the GTO is a flat car, a fleet car. Could be, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To me the STi and the EVo are cousins from and ugly auntie. They look alike and offer more or less the same. Attitude. I don't think you are going to see a lot of grown up men in an EVo. Like I said before, that's for teenagers and recently graduated college students. The GTO is stealth to the cops, (the rumble gives it away...) and for me 32 year old guy fits fine. I can care less if it is a chick magnet, my favorite chick (My daughter) loves the vroom, vrooom dady! (She is 2 and a half) I bet you that she would have liked the EVo and the STi better!!!
Enjoy your cars gentlemen, you make the payments and feel the power every time you drive. Nothing like smiling after a stupid not knowing guy tailgating to get you move to the right lane, then actualy floring the pedal a little bit and see the car in the rear view mirror...Can't they read 6.0 litre? Stealth, I love it.
yea good point, sleepers r much better than crap civics w/ loud exhausts n rear wings, when i get my STi i'm thinking of removing the rear deck for a carbon fiber piece w/o the wing n maybe getting a front mounted intercooler that way i can get a carbon fiber hood w/o the scope and run higher boost i jus hope the redesign won't be horrible, but then again it aint to appealing now so they can't really go bad lol
the e55 i know for sure is awd and they all use forced induction
First, the E55 never had AWD, not even optional. Second, you're a little behind the times. AMG is making the switch (on a few models) from forced induction to N/A with larger displacements. They've designed their own engine for this purpose. But that SL65 with the twin turbo V12 is one bad mofo. 738lb-ft torque from like 2000-4000rpm. Enough said. BTW, that car is RWD and no AWD system is available...
The GTO is light years ahead of the F bodies in build quality, interior/seats, comfort etc. No comparison other then Big V8 engine.
Same reason I bought GTO was for it's quality interior/seats and of course the 400hp Vette engine. One of GM's best interiors. Looks are subjective. Many people have complimented my GTO, at traffic lights in parking lots, driving down streets, it gets a lot of attention for a supposedly DULL car. Could be the V8 rumble too. As for people saying it's a fleet car, I don't know of anywhere you can rent a GTO, where as you can easily rent a 2005 Mustang at Hertz. I am 30 yrs old. From what I have seen many of the EVO and WRX are High School or College student aged. I would never cross shop the 2 cars. Not sure why Edmunds compared the 2? Also I barely see any GTO's, the few I have seen range from our age up to late 50's. I see many WRX and EVO though. Sti is rare also, but looks very much like a WRX from a distance? Enjoy what you bought. I DEBADGED my car like I do with my others, so there is not even the 6.0 on the back. My 2.5 yr old loves the Goat as well. One guy about my age, 30 has an Sti, he brings it to the local cruise night where I bring my GTO. We have some good conversations.
The GTO can keep up 0-60 with the vette, I believe it's within 1/2 a seccond. Pretty close. 4.2 vette and 4.6 GTO according to GM's numbers. The Viper is more then twice the price of GTO, it better outperform it.
You can take the $14k I saved buying GTO over Vette and invest it in the GTO... need I say more. Depends on how much you are willing to spend/mod. There will always be a faster car out there.
For me the stock GTO performance is more then enough for me.
Oh no! Now I have to get rid of my GTO and get a $100K+ Bentley, or an AMG. But wait, didn't the GTO go up against the CLK and for half the cost perform nearly the same.
And since you are new to this forum, I'll try to bring you up to speed. The STi only wins in certain categories. Others it loses to the GTO, even the '04 GTO. And the penalty you pay for the few brilliant moments. Well, I guess it's worth it to the ones who have purchased the STi...
The GTO is light years ahead of the F bodies in build quality, interior/seats, comfort etc. No comparison other then Big V8 engine.
I own a 95 Camaro Z28 and have driven an 04 GTO M6. This makes me qualified to say that you are absolutely right. The cars have nothing in common, other than engine and transmission.
totally my bad, i was mislead about the AMGs but audi offers awd on all its cars esp the A8 and it only makes sense when you're dealing with such high hp/tq levels to send the power to 4 wheels vs. 2 as for the reason benz isnt switching to awd idk but it seems to me that awd is the future and since GM owns 20% of subaru i believe we may be seeing more awd cars from GM, maybe an awd 'vette or maybe not....
AWD is not the future. How many sports cars actually have AWD? How come I am betting you would not make that argument if we were talking about Ferrari's?
AWD certainly has advantages in the traction department. But it adds weight, complexity, reduces fuel mileage, is expensive when it breaks, and does not handle as well as RWD in a comparable car at its limits (yes that is true for paved tracks, obviously not dirt/snow/etc. tracks).
Back to the topic at hand, has anyone figured out why we are comparing a STI and a GTO yet?
Surprisingly most Porsche 911 models have AWD (even the turbos). Lamborghini also uses a viscous coupling not unlike the one Subaru uses in some models. And of course anything in the Audi family.
Depends on the application, but many super cars do have AWD.
(yes that is true for paved tracks, obviously not dirt/snow/etc. tracks).
are you serious? so if awd vechiles work best on paved tracks rwd vechiles should be used in rallies which are often comprised of dirt/snow/ect, good luck doing that...
You read it wrong. RWD is best for paved tracks. Look at any major race series, they are all RWD.
As far as Porsches go, yes many 911s are AWD. However the Boxster (which arguably handles better than the 911) is RWD. Also their elite GT cars are all RWD.
You can get a quality WEBASTO sunroof aftermarket installed for $1200, same company Holden uses and a base Garmin GPS for $850. If you are looking to go that route.
I didn't get the SAP, sports appearance package either, not worth $3k. I have 17" wheels they are ok. Weren't the 18" an option? When I bought mine about 6 months ago, 17" only on the ones I saw.
Too bad they didn't make a convertible GTO, oh well.
....is used as much to differentiate brands than anything else.
Audi got into AWD (and still does IMO) as an effort to differentiate themselves from MB/BMW.
Lambo offers AWD to differentiate themselves from Ferrari.
And (finally) Suburu went to AWD on their entire lineup to differentiate themselves from Toyota/Honda/Mazda/Mitsu/etc. etc. etc. It's purely marketing and brand identification.
From a pure personal level, I don't like the idea of the extra driveline losses inherent in AWD setups (drag on performance AND fuel economy), nor the extra weight.
That and the fact that smoky burnouts and lurid, tail-out power slides (not in the AWD vocabulary) are FUN........
AWD being a marking scheme seems a bit of a far reach for me, while burn outs are entertaining they have nothing to do with performance and are not beneficial to the vechile in any way, there are 50+ posts in this thread were gto ppl complain that to achieve a 0-60 time of 4.6 sec in a sti you have to rev the engine & dump the clutch, unlike doing donuts at least there a purpose to doing this....
AWD isnt a way a deffferentiate yourself from other cars, it a way to make yourself BETTER than other cars....
lastly, you can let all 4 tires loose with the 300 hp the STi comes with AND manual select how much power goes to the rear tires with the DCCD i believe, in the end with the STi you can select to have the power automatically directed to the tires with the most grip or select it yourself, which guess wut? that's right it puts "smoky burnouts and lurid, tail-out power slides" but in the AWD vocabulary
also in the latest copy of road and track they listed the top 12 vechiles i believe with the most fun to drive factor, among them were the vette, viper, porsches and thats right....the STi, go pick up a copy maybe it'll change your mind
Kind of ironic because Motor Trend a few years back ranked the Holden Monaro, "GTO" as their top 10 cars we should get in the USA. Go figure. The GTO does have the same drivetrain as the Vette which was on MT top 12 most fun to drive cars.
JD Pwr ranked the GTO as it's most appealing sporty car.
They are both good but dif. cars. They appeal to dif people. the only comparison is that they are similar in cost, that is about it.
AWD for performance cars, not run of the mill family haulers, is used by manufacturers to allow the owners to safely use more of the performance envelope. It does not result in higher performance limits in and of itself except in narrow circumstances, like say Pikes Peak where traction is at a premium. In other words, AWD can make a car easier to drive fast, but not faster.
BTW, if you direct all the power to the rear wheels doesn't that mean you have a RWD car?
I can also invest on a Ram Air intake, chiptunning, take out extra weight and tadda! I will have at least an extra 100hp only with the ram air, add an extra 45hp with the chip...145hp+400= 545hp
I'd like to see a dyno sheet to back up that claim. So, you're telling me that with a ram air intake and chiptunning [sic] one can have a 545 bhp GTO?
LOL . . . Sorry, I'm still laughing here. . . . Almost done... . . . OK. Do you know how hard it is to generate an additional 145 hp on a normally aspirated car with bolt-on mods? I'd bet that ram air intake adds at most 10-15 hp on the top end. With an ECU reflash, even dyno tuning, maybe an additional 15-20 across the board. But, for an additional 145 hp you're going to need real forced induction, or a bored/stroked engine and new cams.
Realistically, you need to change the cam to get huge power gains out of an LS1/LS2. The heads are really good and without changing them, you can get QUITE a bit of extra power from the engine, and still have very good drivability and mileage. In fact, I know a guy who put an LS1 in a 95 Caprice. Also put in a T56 (6-speed, just like the GTO uses). With JUST a mild cam, cheap long-tube headers, cat-back exhaust, and 4.56 gears it pushed that boat of a car (4350 lb race weight guys) to a 12.5 @ 111.22 mph, in 47° air. He gets well over 20mpg on the highway. That's also quite a bit faster than an 05 GTO. The engines have a lot of potential, and I'm understating the case here. And this was an LS1. The LS2 uses LS6 heads, which are even better.
The only thing that matches the STi and the GTO is the PRICE of both vehicles. Currently, the GTO with discounts is cheaper than the STi. Considering that the GTO has no other options than a 6 speed for $695 but makes the bottom line cheaper not taxing the Gas Guzzler. The other option is 18" alloy wheels (NICE I have them) or if you want to go "Fast and Furious" you can add all that plastic front end fascia and rear...for $2995...way too expensive.
There is no Sunroof option or sport package, this car is loaded from factory, the only thing that I will have appreciated was a Sunroof and a Navigation system as nice as the one in the 05-06 Vette. But I wasn't going to pay an extra $4000 for those options. Raw power, real HP.
Obviously you did not read a post stating that with $14k a guy can make an STi do a 1/4 mile in less than 9 seconds.
Exageration I used based on a premise that I WILL NOT SPEND $14k ON A CAR. PLEASE. Other than that if I spend $14k on my GTO on Ram Air, ChipTunning and engine work I will bet you 500hp +
My chip tunning on the car increased engine output by 8% So do the math. That is an extra 32HP. Add a high performance filter at a 10 to 12 hp and I got a 40HP increase with only less than $1k investment. An ups chip for naturally aspirated cars gives 8-12% increase in HP and about 15 - 25% on turbos' do your research. This is not the first car I chip, I also chipped my Audi A4 1.8T. The difference is incredible at low end torque. I have not Dynoed' my car, I did not stated that I did. In fact I don't have a Ram Air. I said If I had 14k I could do wonders.
I am happy I made you laugh understanding that you did not get my sarcasm on to what to do with 14k. Laughing is good for the soul so enjoy it.
$14K = 2 weeks in Monaco and I can even rent a Ferrari 360 for a couple of days and enjoy the drive...food and wine a plenty. As you grow older you learn not to put your money in the garage nor in the closet or in your nose.
It's functional so it's not purely marketing. Remember, Subaru's strong markets are the snow belt, Colorado, Alaska. AWD matters to those customers.
tail-out power slides (not in the AWD vocabulary)
Sure they are, absolutely! When was the last time you saw a WRC pic were the car was not sideways? And it's much more controllable because AWD will pull you out of a skid and get you out of trouble.
smoky burnouts AWD can make a car easier to drive fast, but not faster
Those two statements are a clear contradiction. You can only do the first because traction is limited. Therefore you would indeed go faster if you had more traction. Traction is always a factor.
I always thought that AWD would slow a car down and lower the mileage just like with 4-wheel drive. I don't know the difference. Is there a difference? So I was surprised with the actual perfomance of the STi. But I'll bet that with having to coordinate 4 drivelines, and of course, 100% reliance on the turbo for power, is why the STi doesn't always live up to its potential.
Comments
Not from a roll. And not from off the line if your Any Driver doesn't know how (or is too timid) to rev the engine to 4500rpm and drop the clutch.
5-60 in 5.8 seconds
THANK YOU. Finally, a 5-60 time. Now, is it FINALLY obvious to you turbo/AWD fan people what we V8 people are talking about?? It's even worse on the base WRX.
I am pretty sure the GTO also traps higher in the 1/4 mile. That means that from a roll (like I just posted), the GTO is going to walk away from the STi.
I will acknowledge this. I am impressed it isn't slower 5-60.
Yes..the STi will outhandle the GTO in every category.
Yes..the STi will beat it in the 1/4 (personal best of 12.9@104 in a stock STi)
No..an STi will not hang from a rolling start above 80MPH against the GTO. Below those speeds though, it takes until at least 120MPH for the GTO to catch it. Tested this on the NJTP.
Yes..the STi will beat you to death and is not practical as a daily driver.
Yes..the GTO has a much more refined interior and ride.
Yes..the GTO will provide much longer smokey burnouts than an STi...but breaking all 4 loose in 1st and 2nd in an STi is something that everyone should experience at least once in life.
Personally, I think they should compare the GTO to the new Legacy GT. Very close performance numbers all around (against the 350HP GTO that is).
Cheers :shades:
* from a rolling start
* in perfect weather and on dry pavement
* with an unskilled driver in the STi
* who is drag racing but too concerned about the clutch to really race
* and we are not at altitude where turbos don't suffer from power loss
* and only if it's the newer 400hp version of the GTO
Under those circumstances you win. Impressive.
Under any other circumstances the STi would tie or win, and that's in straight-line performance, which is the GTO's primary strength.
Now let's put a GTO in a rally cross and see how well it can compete with an STi on its home turf. Or not, because that would just be silly.
These are different animals, but the STi can hold its own even on the GTO's home turf.
-juice
* from a rolling start
Very common street racing scenario. Obviously all highway races fall under this category.
* in perfect weather and on dry pavement
I know the Subaru guys like to talk about racing in the rain, or in the snow, but....come on. I don't find this one ridiculous either. Plus, on the STi's stock tires, it's going to be MORE of a death trap than the GTO, because the GTO at least comes with all seasons. I believe the STi is summer only. Perhaps there is an all-season option...
* with an unskilled driver in the STi
Maybe you think only highly skilled quasi-professionals buy Subarus, but I don't.
* who is drag racing but too concerned about the clutch to really race
This one is REAL likely. I expect a very small percentage of owners would actually drive it "properly" off the line.
* and we are not at altitude where turbos don't suffer from power loss
I live at or near sea level (east coast) so this one means nothing to me.
* and only if it's the newer 400hp version of the GTO
Well, there will be more 400hp GTOs on the street than 350hp versions, as the 06 models come out. So again, this is not unrealistic.
I will concede, just so you are aware, that the STi isn't bad, even starting off boost.
For most folks that means bracket racing and the local drag strip, and that's from a deal stop.
I said skilled, not full-blown professional. An owner/enthusiast would qualify.
Don't go to Colorado.
Or Taos. I could barely breathe the thin air up there.
-juice
EXACTLY.
Which is why 5-60 times have MUCH more relevance to real-world driving and real-world power than 0-60 times. And since the current GTO (400 hp version) has a substantially better 5-60 time (5.1 seconds in the GTO vs. 5.8 secs in the STi), this would be an INDICATION than for real-world driving and the use of real-world power, the GTO has a substantial edge.
But this is ALL a moot point anyway. I mean, what is at stake here? Are ANY of you guys (GTO and STi fans) afraid that potential buyers of either of these cars might switch to the 'other' side simply over a few 1/10's in acceleration? Would a STi fan even briefly consider a GTO just because it has a few 1/10's in the 5-60 and 1/4 mile? Would a potential GTO buyer be thinking about a STi instead just because he could be quicker in the rain/dirt? Get real.....
You guys might as well be arguing about whether it is better to do big, smoky burnouts on 2 tires or have the ability to sling gravel with 4.......
-juice
Thanks. It was about time we had a little levity in this thread.
BTW - You're SO wrong. You can't eat salsa or queso worth a darn with corn chips.....heck, I'd choose Cheetos anyday or cornchips.... :P
For instance, I know that I would be absolutely shredded if I attempted to go up against either a GTO or a STi with my dinky little Celica GTS at a light; but then, I had a different set of performance criteria to meet.
To each his own. As far as I'm concerned, as long as I'm converting dead dinos into forward motion and lateral g's, I'm a happy camper.
Quick comment. Just because the STi comes with summer tires, don't assume that they don't do well in the rain. All seasons are like a jack of all trades, master of none. I will concede that the stock Bridgestones aren't worth a damn in any temperature below 40 degrees. However, they are still very sticky in the wet. I have yet to hydroplane or lose grip in the rain with a years worth of driving in my STi. Plus, I don't think that anyone here needs any convincing that Subaru's AWD system is top notch. With a set of Nokian WR tires (all season, but snow rated) I was ripping up the roads in the white stuff last winter. The ability to lock the center diff at 50/50 makes the STi a year-round driving machine.
I had an E36 M3 before the STi. And even with its 50/50 weight ratio, and dedicated snow tires it was still a little hard to handle at times in the winter. And that car only had 240 hp. I can't imagine driving a 350 or 400 hp GTO in the snow, even with snow tires. I am curious if anyone here has driven their GTO in the snow?
First, when I said death trap, I meant using an STi with summer tires in the snow. Obviously it would be fine in the rain. I think I was trying to hint at the fact that AWD won't make up for summer tires in the snow.
Also, snow traction has basically little to do with horsepower and everything to do with torque. Horsepower happens at the upper end of the tach with your foot on the floor. Most cars have a problem with snow traction under those conditions, regardless of their horsepower rating. Given that the GTO is torquey, it would probably be bad except for the traction control. I'm pretty sure that as a heavy RWD, it would do fine with snow tires.
Summer tires - I've seen tests (I forget by who) that also showed some were excellent in the wet. In the snow they're awful, though. The soft compounds get hard.
-juice
"I think they should compare the GTO to the new Legacy GT. Very close performance numbers all around." Where did you see those numbers? The only numbers I have seen aren't even in the ball park.
i know that the GTO has great history but the era of big blocks n RWD came to end a while go, i'm not saying that there arent some great V8/RWD cars out there, for example the whole V series makes me drool but as bently and benz's AMG divisions have shown AWD and forced induction is the future, sorry....
Uh, AMG cars are RWD. And their new engine line up is no longer using forced induction, it is using large displacement V8s.
Have to disagree with you. How about the Corvette, Viper, AMG's, Monaro/GTO, Mustang etc? All RWD with pretty big displacement engines.
Maybe for younger generations of Evo-STi lovers both cars that their looks don't say much but "look at me please!". Everybody has different taste on to vehicles. I cannot say or confirm that RWD V* are coming to an end. Why is Ford selling over 20,000 V8 RWD mustangs and Chrysler is so agresively promoting the SRT8 and the Charger? By the way, there are list of people waiting for the Saleen 281E and it's other 2 versions. Even Pontiac is selling all of it's miss Judge-d GTO's.
No my friend, the muscle cars are coming back very strong and it is supported by a different population is able to afforded - late 20's to 60 year old males.
I still think that comapring the GTO and the STi is a mistake. A 2 door vs. a 4door, a 4 cilinder vs an 8 cilinder, not even to match insurance coverage(cheaper in the GTO than the STi) A drag racer vs a rally racer...a 4wd vs a 2wd. Apples and oranges do not compare. Great cars both of them, only that the GTO will be more apealing to an older generation and I even know kids (18 to 22) doing whatever possible to get one.(GTO) No doubt about it, the STi is more popular than the GTO between youngsters.
Still, from 0-60 nor 5-60 which is real world numbers and at top speeds of 100-130 the STi don't stand a chance in a straight line against a bigger displacement vehicle like the GTO. The numbers have been verified by Car and Driver Mag. Juts do a search on the web site and compare the numbers for both the EVo and the STi and the numbers from "21 century muscle car" comparo in which the GTO smoked the Mustang GT in every category and was the best performer taking out a stupid-biast "Gotta have it factor". The GTO had 5 points in raw performance over the Stang.
then compare the numbers for al 3 Evo, Sti and GTO. The 4 bangers will put up with the GTO like until the 75 mph mark, after that my friend it is M3/GTO territory and the Big boys play while the youngsters sit and watch in awe.
Lancer Evo: 0-60 in 4.8 Sec, 5-60 in 6.1 sec, 1/4 mile in 13.6 sec. @ 104 mph Top Gear 30-50 12.2 sec, Top gear 50-70 12.2 sec, top speed 152, 0-100mph 12.6 sec, 0-130 mph 25 sec.
STi: 0-60 4.9 sec, 5-60 6.4 sec, 1/4 mile 13.4 @ 102mph, Top Gear 30-50 12.3 sec, Top gear 50-70mph 9.4sec, TopSpeed 145 mph, 0-100mph 13.1 sec, 0-130mph 24.1 sec
GTO: 0-60mph 4.8 sec,(equal with Evo, .10sec over STi not much difference at all) 5-60mph 5.1 sec (1 full second over Evo and 1.3 seconds over the STi that my friend is a LOT) 1/4 mile 13.3sec @ 103mph (Not much difference over Evo .3 sec and over STi .10 hardly any difference at all) Top Gear 30-50 9.6sec (2.6 sec over the Evo and 2.7 sec over the STi. almost 3 sec difference!!!) Top Gear 50-70 9.4sec( Finaly the Evo got to me and scored 1.3 seconds under and beat me! STi with 9.4 sec beat me too!) Top speed 158mph (Evo 152 and STi 145mph sorry!) 0-100mph (EVo 12.6 sec and STi 13.1 -.9sec for the EVo and -1.4sec for the STi) 0-130 19.6 sec (25 sec for the EVo (-5.4sec) and 24.1 for the STi (-4.1sec) So I really don't know from what street race and obviously not stock cars the STi nor the EVo are faster than the GTO. Slalom and skidpad? Yeah, I got to give you at least two points to win...
from the vette to the viper to the amg and audi s, the GTO can't keep up in 0-60.
ANd if you take the money u saved buying an STi over a vette, roughly 15k, and invest that in an STi....need i say more
also, there is a much greater aftermarket for STi/Evo than the GTO, there are Evo's running at the 9 seconds for the 1/4 mile and pick up any of hundreds of tuner mags and you'll see a sti/evo, and running Sti's in the 450 hp range isnt uncommon....
You are right on street racing as being ilegal, I don't street race. Weight is your friend with a lighter 4 cilinder engine. The GTO was a rush for Mr. Lutz to get a coupe to cover for the Trans Am and the Camaro. Proven to be more powerful and quicker than any of the mentioned above stock models(Camaro and Trans Am). When I went to buy my car, I tried a Mustang GT and a BMW 330, I have an A4 2003.5 1.8t chiptunned + KN filter and a diverter valve Dyno'ed at 240sh HP tracked 6.4 to 0-60mph and 1/4 mile of 14.09. I know a quality interior (My Audi) and space from my Equinox LT. What got me on the GTO was the well appointed interior and that after a couple of months there is not a rattle or noises unlike my Audi and my friend 2005 MUstang GT. The GT's interior is CHEAP, it is like a prision in the back not suitabke for adults and I don't think even children will be confortable back there. The transmission on the Stang made strong noises as it shifts and my friend even had problems with the gas tank and hand brake.
I did'nt look at the STi neither the EVo. Not apealing. A lot of people say that the GTO is a flat car, a fleet car. Could be, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To me the STi and the EVo are cousins from and ugly auntie. They look alike and offer more or less the same. Attitude. I don't think you are going to see a lot of grown up men in an EVo. Like I said before, that's for teenagers and recently graduated college students. The GTO is stealth to the cops, (the rumble gives it away...) and for me 32 year old guy fits fine. I can care less if it is a chick magnet, my favorite chick (My daughter) loves the vroom, vrooom dady! (She is 2 and a half) I bet you that she would have liked the EVo and the STi better!!!
Enjoy your cars gentlemen, you make the payments and feel the power every time you drive. Nothing like smiling after a stupid not knowing guy tailgating to get you move to the right lane, then actualy floring the pedal a little bit and see the car in the rear view mirror...Can't they read 6.0 litre? Stealth, I love it.
First, the E55 never had AWD, not even optional.
Second, you're a little behind the times. AMG is making the switch (on a few models) from forced induction to N/A with larger displacements. They've designed their own engine for this purpose. But that SL65 with the twin turbo V12 is one bad mofo. 738lb-ft torque from like 2000-4000rpm. Enough said. BTW, that car is RWD and no AWD system is available...
Same reason I bought GTO was for it's quality interior/seats and of course the 400hp Vette engine. One of GM's best interiors. Looks are subjective. Many people have complimented my GTO, at traffic lights in parking lots, driving down streets, it gets a lot of attention for a supposedly DULL car. Could be the V8 rumble too. As for people saying it's a fleet car, I don't know of anywhere you can rent a GTO, where as you can easily rent a 2005 Mustang at Hertz. I am 30 yrs old. From what I have seen many of the EVO and WRX are High School or College student aged. I would never cross shop the 2 cars. Not sure why Edmunds compared the 2? Also I barely see any GTO's, the few I have seen range from our age up to late 50's. I see many WRX and EVO though. Sti is rare also, but looks very much like a WRX from a distance? Enjoy what you bought. I DEBADGED my car like I do with my others, so there is not even the 6.0 on the back. My 2.5 yr old loves the Goat as well. One guy about my age, 30 has an Sti, he brings it to the local cruise night where I bring my GTO. We have some good conversations.
You can take the $14k I saved buying GTO over Vette and invest it in the GTO... need I say more. Depends on how much you are willing to spend/mod. There will always be a faster car out there.
For me the stock GTO performance is more then enough for me.
And since you are new to this forum, I'll try to bring you up to speed. The STi only wins in certain categories. Others it loses to the GTO, even the '04 GTO. And the penalty you pay for the few brilliant moments. Well, I guess it's worth it to the ones who have purchased the STi...
I own a 95 Camaro Z28 and have driven an 04 GTO M6. This makes me qualified to say that you are absolutely right. The cars have nothing in common, other than engine and transmission.
as for the reason benz isnt switching to awd idk but it seems to me that awd is the future and since GM owns 20% of subaru i believe we may be seeing more awd cars from GM, maybe an awd 'vette
AWD certainly has advantages in the traction department. But it adds weight, complexity, reduces fuel mileage, is expensive when it breaks, and does not handle as well as RWD in a comparable car at its limits (yes that is true for paved tracks, obviously not dirt/snow/etc. tracks).
Back to the topic at hand, has anyone figured out why we are comparing a STI and a GTO yet?
Depends on the application, but many super cars do have AWD.
-juice
are you serious? so if awd vechiles work best on paved tracks rwd vechiles should be used in rallies which are often comprised of dirt/snow/ect, good luck doing that...
As far as Porsches go, yes many 911s are AWD. However the Boxster (which arguably handles better than the 911) is RWD. Also their elite GT cars are all RWD.
In BTCC, AWD was outright banned for being an unfair advantage.
Most series are regulated so it's one or the other. In Rally there are lower classes for RWD. In most pavement racing it's out-ruled, not out-done.
-juice
I didn't get the SAP, sports appearance package either, not worth $3k. I have 17" wheels they are ok. Weren't the 18" an option? When I bought mine about 6 months ago, 17" only on the ones I saw.
Too bad they didn't make a convertible GTO, oh well.
Audi got into AWD (and still does IMO) as an effort to differentiate themselves from MB/BMW.
Lambo offers AWD to differentiate themselves from Ferrari.
And (finally) Suburu went to AWD on their entire lineup to differentiate themselves from Toyota/Honda/Mazda/Mitsu/etc. etc. etc. It's purely marketing and brand identification.
From a pure personal level, I don't like the idea of the extra driveline losses inherent in AWD setups (drag on performance AND fuel economy), nor the extra weight.
That and the fact that smoky burnouts and lurid, tail-out power slides (not in the AWD vocabulary) are FUN........
AWD isnt a way a deffferentiate yourself from other cars, it a way to make yourself BETTER than other cars....
lastly, you can let all 4 tires loose with the 300 hp the STi comes with AND manual select how much power goes to the rear tires with the DCCD i believe, in the end with the STi you can select to have the power automatically directed to the tires with the most grip or select it yourself, which guess wut? that's right it puts "smoky burnouts and lurid, tail-out power slides" but in the AWD vocabulary
ohh, and the gto didnt make the cut, sry :P
JD Pwr ranked the GTO as it's most appealing sporty car.
They are both good but dif. cars. They appeal to dif people. the only comparison is that they are similar in cost, that is about it.
BTW, if you direct all the power to the rear wheels doesn't that mean you have a RWD car?
I'd like to see a dyno sheet to back up that claim. So, you're telling me that with a ram air intake and chiptunning [sic] one can have a 545 bhp GTO?
LOL
.
.
.
Sorry, I'm still laughing here.
.
.
.
Almost done...
.
.
.
OK. Do you know how hard it is to generate an additional 145 hp on a normally aspirated car with bolt-on mods? I'd bet that ram air intake adds at most 10-15 hp on the top end. With an ECU reflash, even dyno tuning, maybe an additional 15-20 across the board. But, for an additional 145 hp you're going to need real forced induction, or a bored/stroked engine and new cams.
Currently, the GTO with discounts is cheaper than the STi. Considering that the
GTO has no other options than a 6 speed for $695 but makes the bottom line
cheaper not taxing the Gas Guzzler. The other option is 18" alloy wheels (NICE
I have them) or if you want to go "Fast and Furious" you can add all that
plastic front end fascia and rear...for $2995...way too expensive.
There is no Sunroof option or sport package, this car is loaded from factory,
the only thing that I will have appreciated was a Sunroof and a Navigation
system as nice as the one in the 05-06 Vette. But I wasn't going to pay an
extra $4000 for those options. Raw power, real HP.
Exageration I used based on a premise that I WILL NOT SPEND $14k ON A CAR. PLEASE. Other than that if I spend $14k on my GTO on Ram Air, ChipTunning and engine work I will bet you 500hp +
My chip tunning on the car increased engine output by 8% So do the math. That is an extra 32HP. Add a high performance filter at a 10 to 12 hp and I got a 40HP increase with only less than $1k investment. An ups chip for naturally aspirated cars gives 8-12% increase in HP and about 15 - 25% on turbos' do your research. This is not the first car I chip, I also chipped my Audi A4 1.8T. The difference is incredible at low end torque. I have not Dynoed' my car, I did not stated that I did. In fact I don't have a Ram Air. I said If I had 14k I could do wonders.
I am happy I made you laugh understanding that you did not get my sarcasm on to what to do with 14k. Laughing is good for the soul so enjoy it.
$14K = 2 weeks in Monaco and I can even rent a Ferrari 360 for a couple of days and enjoy the drive...food and wine a plenty. As you grow older you learn not to put your money in the garage nor in the closet or in your nose.
tail-out power slides (not in the AWD vocabulary)
Sure they are, absolutely! When was the last time you saw a WRC pic were the car was not sideways? And it's much more controllable because AWD will pull you out of a skid and get you out of trouble.
smoky burnouts
AWD can make a car easier to drive fast, but not faster
Those two statements are a clear contradiction. You can only do the first because traction is limited. Therefore you would indeed go faster if you had more traction. Traction is always a factor.
-juice