I'm horrible, want a GT-R
If the sst could handle the power like a Gtr tranny could and the sst could swap into a 8 or ix then we would also have 8sec daily driven evo's in my opinion
Last edited by blackgsx01; Jan 12, 2013 at 09:31 PM.
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 33
Likes: 1
From: charlotte n.c
Just because the X have a paddle shift tranny doesn't make it the same as a GTR tranny. Also, never said it would kill a GTR
If the sst could handle the power like a Gtr tranny could and the sst could swap into a 8 or ix then we would also have 8sec daily driven evo's in my opinion
If the sst could handle the power like a Gtr tranny could and the sst could swap into a 8 or ix then we would also have 8sec daily driven evo's in my opinion
Honestly, if I could somehow plug in the gizmos from the Evo X into an CT9A Evo, including the TC-SST, that would be something for me. 
Here you go, finally got around to taking some pics and uploading them.
Here you go, finally got around to taking some pics and uploading them.
Found this on another forum
The Mitsubishi S-AWC and the Nissan Attesa-ETS (GTR version) systems are largely similar in their performance and function. They both operate on the principle of open-differential based power distribution with multi-clutch hydraulic "clamps" (you can think of them as very efficient brakes). These clutch paks are operated via input from many different sensors that all feed into an algorithm that literally looks "ahead" in time and predicts the cars trajectory and adjusts power accordingly. The S-AWC has a real active rear diff, the Nissan has just a dumb mechanical LSD for the rear.
To explain how the system directs power to a specific wheel you have to think of it as braking one wheel will send the power into the other direction. This principle works between the rear wheels (called "torque vectoring" by some) and also between the front and rear axles. Combined with the predictive quality of the algorithm controlling the clutch pak, the system can send power dynamically and quickly to the location in wants.
Now for the more complex mechanical stuff- the S-AWC system uses three clutch-paks total. One is dedicated for front and rear distribution and is located in the transfer case. Two more are located in the rear diff and each is dedicated to the rear left and right wheel. On a functional basis, the car is always 50:50 (completely open) at the center diff (ACD) and of the 50% of power that is sent to the rear diff 50:50 is divided between the two rear wheels (again a completely open diff).
When appropriate, the rear diff (AYC= Automatic Yaw Control) can split up to 100% of the power it receives from center diff (ACD) to either the left or right rear wheel. The center diff (ACD = Automatic Center Differential) is limited to sending a maximum of 50% of the engines power to the rear, so essentially the AYC can only send up to 50% of the engines power to either left or right rear wheels.
The center diff (ACD) can effectively lock up completely to prevent the center diff from turning into either a complete RWD or FWD car. Remember, the center diff is a bevel gear open diff at heart and when the front or rear wheels slip it can turn into a 100% FWD or a 100% RWD car- except the power is actually all going to the wheels that slip! That's bad news, so the ACD clamp is like a slip monitor and when things get too far away from 50:50 it clamps down and locks until things quite down. This however does not seem to occur much at all in the real world, but the system can send 100% of power to the front wheels or rear wheels technically based solely on wheel slip (sends power to the axle that is slipping).
The S-AWC center and rear diffs (ACD-AYC) are active. The front differential that splits power to the front wheels is not active and is a simple helical LSD.
The Nissan Attesa-ETS (GTR version) is essentially the same as the S-AWC in functionality. It two has a mechanical front differential (LSD) and effectively an active center differential. The big differences here are in the placement of components. The latest GTR uses a rear trans-axle based system that houses the transfer case (active center diff), the passive rear differential, and the transmission all in a central unit in the rear of the car. Power goes into it via a drive shaft from the front and exits to the front wheels via another drive shaft that sits a little off center to the passengers side.
The Attesa-ETS is similar to the S-AWC in that it uses multi-clutch hydraulic units to proportion power. However, the Nissan actually uses only 1 clutch pak (a GKN electromagnetic clutch) at the center diff instead of the S-AWC's 3 paks. Attesa-ETS center diff actually has only one clutch pak (see diagram).
http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/4...saxlediffs.jpg
http://www.gtrblog.com/wp-content/up...-trans-001.jpg
So what does all this mean? Nissan's system is capable of one more feature than the S-AWC system is, and it's all related to that extra clutch pak in the center differential. The S-AWC is a 50:50 (open system) by default and can send 100% of power to the front, and actively distribute to the left and right rear wheels (torque vectoring). The Nissan's system can do something called "torque biasing".
Torque biasing occurs when you take an open diff and lock the controlling clutch pak before it moves, therefore creating a pre-torque distribution. In the Attesa-ETS's case, it's a nearly completely RWD split of 98% rear and 2% front. When the system chooses to activate, it can send power to the front up to a 50:50 distribution. S-AWC cannot torque bias, and it is limited mechanically to sending only 50% of the cars power to either rear wheel maximum.
But S-AWC does have it's virtues over the Attesa-ETS. It's lighter, WAY lighter, and is a little more elegant in its execution. Torque biasing is not really necessary with a sedan that has a weight distribution of 60 front and 40 rear. It also, according to Mitsu engineers, has a much faster reaction time than the Attesa-ETS does. Some also claim the algorithm for analysis of wheel speed, G-force+yaw, steering angle, etc. is better with Mitsubishi. These claims are all relative and there is really very little proof, there are a few hints in the 2008 Mitsu technical papers on the revised S-AWC.
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 33
Likes: 1
From: charlotte n.c
Lol right....it's not the same. Your comparing them by just twin discs and sequential and thinking there the same, concept yes but completely different when it comes to the TCM and components.
Found this on another forum
The Mitsubishi S-AWC and the Nissan Attesa-ETS (GTR version) systems are largely similar in their performance and function. They both operate on the principle of open-differential based power distribution with multi-clutch hydraulic "clamps" (you can think of them as very efficient brakes). These clutch paks are operated via input from many different sensors that all feed into an algorithm that literally looks "ahead" in time and predicts the cars trajectory and adjusts power accordingly. The S-AWC has a real active rear diff, the Nissan has just a dumb mechanical LSD for the rear.
To explain how the system directs power to a specific wheel you have to think of it as braking one wheel will send the power into the other direction. This principle works between the rear wheels (called "torque vectoring" by some) and also between the front and rear axles. Combined with the predictive quality of the algorithm controlling the clutch pak, the system can send power dynamically and quickly to the location in wants.
Now for the more complex mechanical stuff- the S-AWC system uses three clutch-paks total. One is dedicated for front and rear distribution and is located in the transfer case. Two more are located in the rear diff and each is dedicated to the rear left and right wheel. On a functional basis, the car is always 50:50 (completely open) at the center diff (ACD) and of the 50% of power that is sent to the rear diff 50:50 is divided between the two rear wheels (again a completely open diff).
When appropriate, the rear diff (AYC= Automatic Yaw Control) can split up to 100% of the power it receives from center diff (ACD) to either the left or right rear wheel. The center diff (ACD = Automatic Center Differential) is limited to sending a maximum of 50% of the engines power to the rear, so essentially the AYC can only send up to 50% of the engines power to either left or right rear wheels.
The center diff (ACD) can effectively lock up completely to prevent the center diff from turning into either a complete RWD or FWD car. Remember, the center diff is a bevel gear open diff at heart and when the front or rear wheels slip it can turn into a 100% FWD or a 100% RWD car- except the power is actually all going to the wheels that slip! That's bad news, so the ACD clamp is like a slip monitor and when things get too far away from 50:50 it clamps down and locks until things quite down. This however does not seem to occur much at all in the real world, but the system can send 100% of power to the front wheels or rear wheels technically based solely on wheel slip (sends power to the axle that is slipping).
The S-AWC center and rear diffs (ACD-AYC) are active. The front differential that splits power to the front wheels is not active and is a simple helical LSD.
The Nissan Attesa-ETS (GTR version) is essentially the same as the S-AWC in functionality. It two has a mechanical front differential (LSD) and effectively an active center differential. The big differences here are in the placement of components. The latest GTR uses a rear trans-axle based system that houses the transfer case (active center diff), the passive rear differential, and the transmission all in a central unit in the rear of the car. Power goes into it via a drive shaft from the front and exits to the front wheels via another drive shaft that sits a little off center to the passengers side.
The Attesa-ETS is similar to the S-AWC in that it uses multi-clutch hydraulic units to proportion power. However, the Nissan actually uses only 1 clutch pak (a GKN electromagnetic clutch) at the center diff instead of the S-AWC's 3 paks. Attesa-ETS center diff actually has only one clutch pak (see diagram).
http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/4...saxlediffs.jpg
http://www.gtrblog.com/wp-content/up...-trans-001.jpg
So what does all this mean? Nissan's system is capable of one more feature than the S-AWC system is, and it's all related to that extra clutch pak in the center differential. The S-AWC is a 50:50 (open system) by default and can send 100% of power to the front, and actively distribute to the left and right rear wheels (torque vectoring). The Nissan's system can do something called "torque biasing".
Torque biasing occurs when you take an open diff and lock the controlling clutch pak before it moves, therefore creating a pre-torque distribution. In the Attesa-ETS's case, it's a nearly completely RWD split of 98% rear and 2% front. When the system chooses to activate, it can send power to the front up to a 50:50 distribution. S-AWC cannot torque bias, and it is limited mechanically to sending only 50% of the cars power to either rear wheel maximum.
But S-AWC does have it's virtues over the Attesa-ETS. It's lighter, WAY lighter, and is a little more elegant in its execution. Torque biasing is not really necessary with a sedan that has a weight distribution of 60 front and 40 rear. It also, according to Mitsu engineers, has a much faster reaction time than the Attesa-ETS does. Some also claim the algorithm for analysis of wheel speed, G-force+yaw, steering angle, etc. is better with Mitsubishi. These claims are all relative and there is really very little proof, there are a few hints in the 2008 Mitsu technical papers on the revised S-AWC.
Found this on another forum
The Mitsubishi S-AWC and the Nissan Attesa-ETS (GTR version) systems are largely similar in their performance and function. They both operate on the principle of open-differential based power distribution with multi-clutch hydraulic "clamps" (you can think of them as very efficient brakes). These clutch paks are operated via input from many different sensors that all feed into an algorithm that literally looks "ahead" in time and predicts the cars trajectory and adjusts power accordingly. The S-AWC has a real active rear diff, the Nissan has just a dumb mechanical LSD for the rear.
To explain how the system directs power to a specific wheel you have to think of it as braking one wheel will send the power into the other direction. This principle works between the rear wheels (called "torque vectoring" by some) and also between the front and rear axles. Combined with the predictive quality of the algorithm controlling the clutch pak, the system can send power dynamically and quickly to the location in wants.
Now for the more complex mechanical stuff- the S-AWC system uses three clutch-paks total. One is dedicated for front and rear distribution and is located in the transfer case. Two more are located in the rear diff and each is dedicated to the rear left and right wheel. On a functional basis, the car is always 50:50 (completely open) at the center diff (ACD) and of the 50% of power that is sent to the rear diff 50:50 is divided between the two rear wheels (again a completely open diff).
When appropriate, the rear diff (AYC= Automatic Yaw Control) can split up to 100% of the power it receives from center diff (ACD) to either the left or right rear wheel. The center diff (ACD = Automatic Center Differential) is limited to sending a maximum of 50% of the engines power to the rear, so essentially the AYC can only send up to 50% of the engines power to either left or right rear wheels.
The center diff (ACD) can effectively lock up completely to prevent the center diff from turning into either a complete RWD or FWD car. Remember, the center diff is a bevel gear open diff at heart and when the front or rear wheels slip it can turn into a 100% FWD or a 100% RWD car- except the power is actually all going to the wheels that slip! That's bad news, so the ACD clamp is like a slip monitor and when things get too far away from 50:50 it clamps down and locks until things quite down. This however does not seem to occur much at all in the real world, but the system can send 100% of power to the front wheels or rear wheels technically based solely on wheel slip (sends power to the axle that is slipping).
The S-AWC center and rear diffs (ACD-AYC) are active. The front differential that splits power to the front wheels is not active and is a simple helical LSD.
The Nissan Attesa-ETS (GTR version) is essentially the same as the S-AWC in functionality. It two has a mechanical front differential (LSD) and effectively an active center differential. The big differences here are in the placement of components. The latest GTR uses a rear trans-axle based system that houses the transfer case (active center diff), the passive rear differential, and the transmission all in a central unit in the rear of the car. Power goes into it via a drive shaft from the front and exits to the front wheels via another drive shaft that sits a little off center to the passengers side.
The Attesa-ETS is similar to the S-AWC in that it uses multi-clutch hydraulic units to proportion power. However, the Nissan actually uses only 1 clutch pak (a GKN electromagnetic clutch) at the center diff instead of the S-AWC's 3 paks. Attesa-ETS center diff actually has only one clutch pak (see diagram).
http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/4...saxlediffs.jpg
http://www.gtrblog.com/wp-content/up...-trans-001.jpg
So what does all this mean? Nissan's system is capable of one more feature than the S-AWC system is, and it's all related to that extra clutch pak in the center differential. The S-AWC is a 50:50 (open system) by default and can send 100% of power to the front, and actively distribute to the left and right rear wheels (torque vectoring). The Nissan's system can do something called "torque biasing".
Torque biasing occurs when you take an open diff and lock the controlling clutch pak before it moves, therefore creating a pre-torque distribution. In the Attesa-ETS's case, it's a nearly completely RWD split of 98% rear and 2% front. When the system chooses to activate, it can send power to the front up to a 50:50 distribution. S-AWC cannot torque bias, and it is limited mechanically to sending only 50% of the cars power to either rear wheel maximum.
But S-AWC does have it's virtues over the Attesa-ETS. It's lighter, WAY lighter, and is a little more elegant in its execution. Torque biasing is not really necessary with a sedan that has a weight distribution of 60 front and 40 rear. It also, according to Mitsu engineers, has a much faster reaction time than the Attesa-ETS does. Some also claim the algorithm for analysis of wheel speed, G-force+yaw, steering angle, etc. is better with Mitsubishi. These claims are all relative and there is really very little proof, there are a few hints in the 2008 Mitsu technical papers on the revised S-AWC.
It's been quite a while since I've posted, probably stopped around the time that I sold the last evo and picked up the GTR. I would like to speak to the OP's original statement and discuss my thoughts on the GTR vs. EVO, for lack of better words.
I say that because they are two different animals.
I owned an '03 Apex Silver and an '08 X OB... in between those two I had an '07 Corvette Z51, not for me.
The Evo and the GTR go through the SAME evolution in HP, the difference being the final power figure and the money spent. Money into the tuning, bottom end, bigger turbos, shep trans, 2.2/2.4L swaps, it's exactly the same as what I see out of the GTR guys/gals... money into tuning ECUTEK/COBB, bottom end, long block, shep trans, it's not any different, except the hole in your pocket. The bottom line is where you end up when you're done with all of that, the evo has 650HP and the GTR has 1250HP (figures aren't exact, just a generalization). It's all relative.
Here are some things to consider OP if you plan to make the swap:
-I do miss the manual transimission, so I picked up a Golf TDI with the 6 speed and that keeps me happy. You should consider doing the same if you don't already have a daily that has a manual
-Maintenance costs for me last year: approx. $4500, this includes the new set of Michelin PSS at $1800. You'll need to factor in serious cash for maintenance up-keep... generally
-If you plan to mod, you need to make a lot of money
It's what they like to call the 'GTR tax' and it's truely upsetting :P
-Start lurking on www.gtrlife.com and see what the vibe is, mature folks that are true car nuts and will do anything for their brotheren. It blows me away how great the guys are and what they will do for their fellow car nuts.
Two price points:
New brake set: $4,500
New transmission: $18000
The transmission debacle has subsided since the onset of the adjusted factory launch settings, I haven't seen a failure in quite a while and I suspect most of the failures can be attributed to repeated launches with the original LC1/2 (whatever it was) whether or not the victim wanted to admit.
I purchased my GTR in 2008 as original owner, it has 10,200 miles on it and I love it. I do STILL miss my EVO, I think there will always be a special place in my heart for it, it was my teenage dream to own a 6/7 GSR and when the 8 came out I grabbed the first one off the truck.
I have tracked my GTR, 1.1 mile road course in Virginia and I murdered everything including a 550HP EVO X... and by murdered I mean lapping cars, it's just ridiculous how stupid fast this car is. I plan to take it to Laguna Seca here in March to have some fun there and test the new square setup 285 all around on the Michelin PSS.
It's a very expensive car to own, not gonna lie. One of the reasons it has so few miles on it is one, because I was afforded the luxury of a daily driver but two, and more importantly, it was too expensive to maintain coming from an EVO budget at the time. I didn't wait until I was where I am now to be able to really enjoy it, with that said I am happy I made the purchase then, at $76k vice the $100k now.
Things I don't like:
-Interior is nice, but not $76k/$100k nice... still, better than the EVO.
-The paint, so cheap... especially black. (Mine is black)
-The sound of the engine/exhaust, it's just not really for me... it doesn't sound exotic, it doesn't sound like the old inline 6, it doesn't sound domestic meaty, where the hell does it fit in? I don't know but I just don't dig it that much.
-Bose sound system, not that great
Lots of rambling and editing, some of it might not even make sense but I am just trying to assist the OP in his decision. Additionally, on GTRlife there are several GTR's for sale so if you decide to make the jump to GTR then I think you should look for your GTR there.
The GTR is not mistaken for anything (like a sentra), it looks exotic and some say it is exotic, or a supercar. I will leave that to the people that like to argue. The EVO however, does honestly look like a suped up lancer, and I can attest to the general publics knowledge because I did indeed receive that comment in my '03 EVO 8 from time to time. On the flipside, the other day my wife and I were walking back from dinner and turned the corner just as a group of guys walked by the GTR and one of them stopped and said "guys, do you know what this is?! It's a fuc|<ing GTR, skyline... you know, from Japan?" Some roaring, hooting and hollering... that happens, ALL the time. There is no mistaking this car. I love it.
Ok, long rambling post. OP if you have any questions there are a few owners in this thread from what I have seen, ask anything.
I say that because they are two different animals.
I owned an '03 Apex Silver and an '08 X OB... in between those two I had an '07 Corvette Z51, not for me.
The Evo and the GTR go through the SAME evolution in HP, the difference being the final power figure and the money spent. Money into the tuning, bottom end, bigger turbos, shep trans, 2.2/2.4L swaps, it's exactly the same as what I see out of the GTR guys/gals... money into tuning ECUTEK/COBB, bottom end, long block, shep trans, it's not any different, except the hole in your pocket. The bottom line is where you end up when you're done with all of that, the evo has 650HP and the GTR has 1250HP (figures aren't exact, just a generalization). It's all relative.
Here are some things to consider OP if you plan to make the swap:
-I do miss the manual transimission, so I picked up a Golf TDI with the 6 speed and that keeps me happy. You should consider doing the same if you don't already have a daily that has a manual
-Maintenance costs for me last year: approx. $4500, this includes the new set of Michelin PSS at $1800. You'll need to factor in serious cash for maintenance up-keep... generally
-If you plan to mod, you need to make a lot of money
It's what they like to call the 'GTR tax' and it's truely upsetting :P-Start lurking on www.gtrlife.com and see what the vibe is, mature folks that are true car nuts and will do anything for their brotheren. It blows me away how great the guys are and what they will do for their fellow car nuts.
Two price points:
New brake set: $4,500
New transmission: $18000
The transmission debacle has subsided since the onset of the adjusted factory launch settings, I haven't seen a failure in quite a while and I suspect most of the failures can be attributed to repeated launches with the original LC1/2 (whatever it was) whether or not the victim wanted to admit.
I purchased my GTR in 2008 as original owner, it has 10,200 miles on it and I love it. I do STILL miss my EVO, I think there will always be a special place in my heart for it, it was my teenage dream to own a 6/7 GSR and when the 8 came out I grabbed the first one off the truck.
I have tracked my GTR, 1.1 mile road course in Virginia and I murdered everything including a 550HP EVO X... and by murdered I mean lapping cars, it's just ridiculous how stupid fast this car is. I plan to take it to Laguna Seca here in March to have some fun there and test the new square setup 285 all around on the Michelin PSS.
It's a very expensive car to own, not gonna lie. One of the reasons it has so few miles on it is one, because I was afforded the luxury of a daily driver but two, and more importantly, it was too expensive to maintain coming from an EVO budget at the time. I didn't wait until I was where I am now to be able to really enjoy it, with that said I am happy I made the purchase then, at $76k vice the $100k now.
Things I don't like:
-Interior is nice, but not $76k/$100k nice... still, better than the EVO.
-The paint, so cheap... especially black. (Mine is black)
-The sound of the engine/exhaust, it's just not really for me... it doesn't sound exotic, it doesn't sound like the old inline 6, it doesn't sound domestic meaty, where the hell does it fit in? I don't know but I just don't dig it that much.
-Bose sound system, not that great
Lots of rambling and editing, some of it might not even make sense but I am just trying to assist the OP in his decision. Additionally, on GTRlife there are several GTR's for sale so if you decide to make the jump to GTR then I think you should look for your GTR there.
The GTR is not mistaken for anything (like a sentra), it looks exotic and some say it is exotic, or a supercar. I will leave that to the people that like to argue. The EVO however, does honestly look like a suped up lancer, and I can attest to the general publics knowledge because I did indeed receive that comment in my '03 EVO 8 from time to time. On the flipside, the other day my wife and I were walking back from dinner and turned the corner just as a group of guys walked by the GTR and one of them stopped and said "guys, do you know what this is?! It's a fuc|<ing GTR, skyline... you know, from Japan?" Some roaring, hooting and hollering... that happens, ALL the time. There is no mistaking this car. I love it.
Ok, long rambling post. OP if you have any questions there are a few owners in this thread from what I have seen, ask anything.
Some good info in here ... I also like the back and forth comparisons. I've been considering a 2010+ GTR for about a year now. Honestly it's been more like two years but when I was overly eager to pull the trigger I couldn't seem to find one that hasn't been abused or isn't over priced.
I have no doubt that the GTR would be a superior track car. I'm not talking about roll-ons and 1/4 mile BS either I'm talking big track events where both ***** and brakes come into play. The thing that still keeps me undecided is whether or not I'll have ***** enough to drive the GTR like I drive my EVO. I consider my 9 a disposable item. The wear and tear of track days doesn't keep me up at night and if I wreck it (and walk away) I can stomach losing the $25K. Will I be able to do that with a GTR... probably not as wrecking a GTR is more like totalling three fully prepped EVOs!
I'm not sure I will still be willing to push the envelope in track in a $90k car. I'm not sure I can tolerate the damage that accumulates from track days whether it be broken windshields or sand blasting from following cars at triple digit speeds. Hell I'm still not sure I won't throw up at the end of a lapping day knowing I just shredded a set of $1800 tires LOL!
I think the GTR would make for a fun daily driver but its a bit overkill for that. I really don't think on/off ramps and freeway sprints would satisfy me. So, I'm in a holding pattern right now. Maybe if an incredible deal presents itself I'll jump on it but I have yet to see what I consider a great deal as the demand for them seems to be growing.
I have no doubt that the GTR would be a superior track car. I'm not talking about roll-ons and 1/4 mile BS either I'm talking big track events where both ***** and brakes come into play. The thing that still keeps me undecided is whether or not I'll have ***** enough to drive the GTR like I drive my EVO. I consider my 9 a disposable item. The wear and tear of track days doesn't keep me up at night and if I wreck it (and walk away) I can stomach losing the $25K. Will I be able to do that with a GTR... probably not as wrecking a GTR is more like totalling three fully prepped EVOs!
I'm not sure I will still be willing to push the envelope in track in a $90k car. I'm not sure I can tolerate the damage that accumulates from track days whether it be broken windshields or sand blasting from following cars at triple digit speeds. Hell I'm still not sure I won't throw up at the end of a lapping day knowing I just shredded a set of $1800 tires LOL!
I think the GTR would make for a fun daily driver but its a bit overkill for that. I really don't think on/off ramps and freeway sprints would satisfy me. So, I'm in a holding pattern right now. Maybe if an incredible deal presents itself I'll jump on it but I have yet to see what I consider a great deal as the demand for them seems to be growing.
Evolving Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
From: kc mo
I have no doubt that the GTR would be a superior track car. I'm not talking about roll-ons and 1/4 mile BS either I'm talking big track events where both ***** and brakes come into play. The thing that still keeps me undecided is whether or not I'll have ***** enough to drive the GTR like I drive my EVO. I consider my 9 a disposable item. The wear and tear of track days doesn't keep me up at night and if I wreck it (and walk away) I can stomach losing the $25K. Will I be able to do that with a GTR... probably not as wrecking a GTR is more like totalling three fully prepped EVOs!
I'm not sure I will still be willing to push the envelope in track in a $90k car. I'm not sure I can tolerate the damage that accumulates from track days whether it be broken windshields or sand blasting from following cars at triple digit speeds. Hell I'm still not sure I won't throw up at the end of a lapping day knowing I just shredded a set of $1800 tires LOL!
At the end of the day you can rest easy in you evo knowing that if you want to mod it properly it has alot more potential at the track than a gtr(weight)...if you want a more comfortable daily a gtr is the obvious choice...or if prestige is your thing a (lotus) or many other cars will serve you well...but in potential a evo is at the top of is game...recent redline time attack and all other records still favor the evo...i know alot of other people will say time of development and money is the problem...but we all know weight is the enemy of speed...and the gtr is a pig...all arguments to the contrary are in denial of the unfortunate design of the heavy chasis...its a great car...just falls short in modding potential when compared to a ct9a...wtac record shattered by 3 1/2 seconds this year by another evo 9...thats insane...no gtrs even close...and no amount of money can change physics (weight)...lol...
I'm not sure I will still be willing to push the envelope in track in a $90k car. I'm not sure I can tolerate the damage that accumulates from track days whether it be broken windshields or sand blasting from following cars at triple digit speeds. Hell I'm still not sure I won't throw up at the end of a lapping day knowing I just shredded a set of $1800 tires LOL!
At the end of the day you can rest easy in you evo knowing that if you want to mod it properly it has alot more potential at the track than a gtr(weight)...if you want a more comfortable daily a gtr is the obvious choice...or if prestige is your thing a (lotus) or many other cars will serve you well...but in potential a evo is at the top of is game...recent redline time attack and all other records still favor the evo...i know alot of other people will say time of development and money is the problem...but we all know weight is the enemy of speed...and the gtr is a pig...all arguments to the contrary are in denial of the unfortunate design of the heavy chasis...its a great car...just falls short in modding potential when compared to a ct9a...wtac record shattered by 3 1/2 seconds this year by another evo 9...thats insane...no gtrs even close...and no amount of money can change physics (weight)...lol...
Doc,
You're dead on about the increased concern over damage from heavy track events... my entire hood, even with taping it out, is damaged quite a bit... tons of rock chips. And the tires, yes $1800 for a new set is redamndiculous, and it does make me hesitate a bit on future track events but it is so much fun on the track I can't see staying away. The Michelin PSS should last a bit longer even with one or two track events on them... time will tell I suppose.
Congrats EvoG8r, I had seen that you purchased but I think there are several subscribed and wanted to provide input for any potential future buyers.
You're dead on about the increased concern over damage from heavy track events... my entire hood, even with taping it out, is damaged quite a bit... tons of rock chips. And the tires, yes $1800 for a new set is redamndiculous, and it does make me hesitate a bit on future track events but it is so much fun on the track I can't see staying away. The Michelin PSS should last a bit longer even with one or two track events on them... time will tell I suppose.
Congrats EvoG8r, I had seen that you purchased but I think there are several subscribed and wanted to provide input for any potential future buyers.
So, GT-R tax is yikes.
My mod plans are a Speed-by-design 700hp package with custom tune and a set of DPE SC7 or Volk G12s with summer tires (maybe those new BFG Rivals). That adds up to at least $10k (more if I pay someone to install parts for me)... I could buy a used beater 03 Evo for that.
The things you do so you have a 10 second sex machine.
Provided my job does nothing crazy, I'd like to take my car on a hill climb in the mountains of NC this summer and do an HPDE.
I love driving this car to work. Get lot's of stares, thumbs up and cops asking me how fast it goes.
My mod plans are a Speed-by-design 700hp package with custom tune and a set of DPE SC7 or Volk G12s with summer tires (maybe those new BFG Rivals). That adds up to at least $10k (more if I pay someone to install parts for me)... I could buy a used beater 03 Evo for that.
The things you do so you have a 10 second sex machine.Provided my job does nothing crazy, I'd like to take my car on a hill climb in the mountains of NC this summer and do an HPDE.
I love driving this car to work. Get lot's of stares, thumbs up and cops asking me how fast it goes.