Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83
Well, the price isn't really that different (unless you are comparing fully optioned, top-of-the-line models, which isn't exactly a fair comparison), but anyone who has driven both can tell the differences between them. So it's not as if you're getting the exact same car (or even the same performance) for less money.
Originally Posted by Optimus Prime
I had an STi and then went to an Evo X. The X was cheaper, but it felt like I was driving (I said driving, not sitting stationary staring at a dash board) a car that was $20K more than the STi I had.
This is where Mitsu failed - they created a blazing-fast follow-up to the IX with all sorts of new tech, fancy Recaros, etc. and then put it into sedan form only with a price higher than the STI. Subaru went with the low-cost solution - old tech, old engine, utilitarian hatchback, and a few nicer amenities in the interior. Recession hits and Mitsu can't figure out why they're going out of business. They responded as quick as they could with a Fastback version of their Lancer, but it was too little/too late.
No doubt that the Evo is the better performing car - but the number of people racing these cars on the weekend does not make for a big enough market at this price range.
Reminds me of my experience walking around the auto show last year - Mitsu salesguy calls me over to check out the Evo X.
I say: "Yeah, they're awesome cars but I already bought a new car last year".
He asks: "What did you buy?"
I say: " I got an STI"
He rolls his eyes and says: "Why did you waste your money on that, the Evo X is faster!"
I say: "Yeah, but it won't hold me and my wife and our luggage. Real life, man..."