Great Auto-x today!
05-18-2008, 07:42 PM
#21
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 21,018
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hahaa...so it's not about the driver?
Seriously though, those are all good cars, it's just too bad that some people act the way they do and then stereotyping starts....but, the truth is, that stereotyping has got to start somewhere and for a reason...you've got to admit it.
05-19-2008, 09:37 AM
#27
Usually those cars are just as nasty inside...
The Subies may be fast but they lack the refinement of many European machines. I rather take relatively slow, safe and well engineered to just simply nasty...
05-19-2008, 10:32 AM
#29
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 16,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
subarus might not be as easy on the eyes, but not well engineered? <rant>
I will also say that the STI is a crazy fun car to drive on an autox track and it out performs most audi's easy.
if I had to have one car on the track (or autox) in stock form, the STI would win when put to a comparable price point Audi.
You can argue the luxury, the gaps, the 'feel of the door' as it closes, etc all day, but there is a reason that the STIs beat the Audis at the autox.
It all depends what you want in a car, and what you are willing to pay. there obviously is no 'better' car without subjectivity involved.
But to pass off the STIs and Evos as 'rice' and dimiss them is insanely short sited and ignorant of what those cars are capable of.
It is insane to me that people take the 1.8T/2.0T and try to mod the hell out of it and are excited when, $7000+ later, they have 300hp when a stock STI has that and is cheaper out the door, BEFORE any mods. But Audi people call the them 'rice' because of what, the fact they are japanese? the wings? The core of the car is the same, a turbo 4 cylinder with AWD.
If the WRX had come out 2 years earlier, I would have bought one of those over an A4 no question, having already been a subaru owner. But it didn't, and I am happy with all that has come of my involvment with the audi scene, and I am GLAD that WRX didn't come out sooner, but Audi owners tend to have their noses so high in the air that they can't even consider the reality of the situation.
</rant> (not directed at any one person in particular)
if I had to have one car on the track (or autox) in stock form, the STI would win when put to a comparable price point Audi.
You can argue the luxury, the gaps, the 'feel of the door' as it closes, etc all day, but there is a reason that the STIs beat the Audis at the autox.
It all depends what you want in a car, and what you are willing to pay. there obviously is no 'better' car without subjectivity involved.
But to pass off the STIs and Evos as 'rice' and dimiss them is insanely short sited and ignorant of what those cars are capable of.
It is insane to me that people take the 1.8T/2.0T and try to mod the hell out of it and are excited when, $7000+ later, they have 300hp when a stock STI has that and is cheaper out the door, BEFORE any mods. But Audi people call the them 'rice' because of what, the fact they are japanese? the wings? The core of the car is the same, a turbo 4 cylinder with AWD.
If the WRX had come out 2 years earlier, I would have bought one of those over an A4 no question, having already been a subaru owner. But it didn't, and I am happy with all that has come of my involvment with the audi scene, and I am GLAD that WRX didn't come out sooner, but Audi owners tend to have their noses so high in the air that they can't even consider the reality of the situation.
</rant> (not directed at any one person in particular)
