I autocross, and do track events in my '03 and believe that the MR 6-spd will be an advantage for track events. the 5-spd has a big gap between 4th & 5th (and 5th is quite tall) which really hurts top end acceleration. 4th is short enough that at every track i driven at this year (pocono, lime rock, summit point, watkins glen) I have to use 5th at least once per lap on all these tracks. as a point of reference, in my '03 M3 I would pull to redline in 4th on the back straight of the glen. about 136mph. in the evo i would be at redline in 4th exiting the esses, shift to 5th and struggle up to 125. yes, i know the evo is as aerodynamic as a brick, and the boost tapers above 5500rpm, but the point is a shorter 5th gear would definately helped. the differance is even more pronounced at summit point. for me personally, I wish they would just fit the '05 RS with a slightly shorter 5th, and avoid the weight penalty of the 6-spd.

 

i love the way the MR drove... my '03 could never drive like it. i could get bilstein coil's, but still not perfect. still won't feel as soft and comfortable. it's everything on the MR. the lower center of gravity, the built-in lumbar support, the six-speed, the tranny, the turbo, teflon behind the clutch, gas pedal felt better, brakes softer but just as effective, EVERYTHING. tires were softer but stickier, so they felt, gears were shorter but had more action goin' on.. i couldn't believe what they did. my '03 was simply a beta.

i still have yet to drive a GSR, but i have to say those bilstein's are something else. i'm sure the ACD will have an effect, but they still have the tokiko's, so i dont know.. i'll just have to drive it. bilstein's are luxury when you want em to be and animals when you hit that corner. animals with soft stickiness working hand in hand with the soft but effective shocks and the great acd with front slip locking up. no more bouncing. wow. very forgiving unlike my rugged '03. go drive one bro, you'll see what i'm talking about.

however, it still doesn't justify the 6 or 7 grand i'd have to come up with on a trade-in. maybe some bilstein coilovers and the vortex and it'll feel good. only way out is to GAP it, but that just ain't right, lol. plus i have a system, no stock speakers or head unit, so it looks like me and my baby 03 and i are gonna be together for a long time =)

 

this is all from one proper test drive of a customer's vehicle who didn't mind hitting it. results may vary.

 

oh yes, and MR's are for sale with me in socal. many available.

 

Agreed


Most definitely, it's a huge difference that you notice on the first high-speed corner.

I disagree. At freeway speeds the new six-speed is very close the the old five-speed in rpm@sixty mph so it really is a more tightly packed gear box allowing you to keep the new turbo on the whistle.

I disagree. The aluminum roof has more to do with lowering the center of gravity of the car, which is a huge handling benefit, than it has to do with the weight savings that most are mentioning on this board. Seems that any people don't really understand just how important and how much of a benefit that roof is.


The weight difference is nominal between the two vehicles. See my above statement about the aluminum roof.



Sorry, but I totally disagree with you on this. It makes absolutely NO finanacial sense to re-engineer headlights and taillights for a 1000-unit U.S. run. The MR and Evo VII lights are NOT DOT approved or legal in the U.S. Most people fail to realize that we use left-hand drive lights while the Japanese use right-hand drive lights and they produce a very difference light patterns on the road. Think about the LHD beam pattern that cuts off the high left corner so you don't blind oncoming dirvers and then reverse that pattern using RHD lights on a LHD car, yup you blind oncoming drivers, hence one reason they are illegal.

I totally disagree. You can tell the difference in five feet of driving with the new shocks, they're a HUGE improvement.


It's only good if you don't modify and don't race you car. At least the 3 year maintenance is nice.




My conclusion is that many people overlook many of the benefits of the MR or dismiss them as trivial, without clearly understanding them. THe MR was 2 seconds faster on the same track, on the same day as a stock '03 Evo, which is a huge difference. Sure you could modify your '03 and equal an MR performance-wise, but it would cost you your warranty and hurt your resale value. Whereas with the MR, you'd have that improved performance, stock, and get the added resale value that a 1000-unit run car will most definitely have. To each his own, but the MR is worth every penny in my humble and professional opinion.

 

I believe you mean the October 2004 issue of Motor Trend NOT C&D. As far as I know no other magazine has even run a comparison of the two cars in the U.S. yet.

 

here is some more info, remember, Locked = 50:50

"Replacing the viscous coupling-type with an electronically controlled multi-plate clutch differential, the ACD effectively regulates slippage in the 50:50 torque split center differential from free to lock-up to match driving conditions. Control is further optimized with a 3-way selector that enables the driver to override the automatic system and choose between Tarmac, Gravel or Snow modes for different surface conditions."

"Developed with the motor sports arena firmly in mind, the ACD uses a center differential to distribute drive torque equally between front and rear wheels and thereby improve steering response at the same time as enhancing traction - a vital factor in reducing stage and other race times. Ensuring optimal transmission of drive torque from the engine to the road surface under all conditions, ACD's multi-plate clutch delivers up to three times the differential limiting force of a viscous coupling- type unit. To achieve this level of performance, the multi-plate clutch employs the same kind of steel plates as mechanical limited-slip differentials, thereby offering superior durability and response under high clutch plate load conditions. Using sensors, the system electronically optimizes the cover clamp load to match driver input and vehicle operating status. Thus able to regulate center differential limiting action from free to locked, as conditions require, the ACD realizes the ideal 4WD system.

Under hard acceleration, the ACD reduces slippage and approaches a locked state, thereby transmitting more torque to the road surface for better traction and acceleration. When the driver makes rapid steering inputs, meanwhile, the ACD operates virtually as an open differential to improve steering response and feel through corners while retaining outstanding 4WD stability. The ACD also enables the driver to manually select one of three modes - Tarmac, Gravel, Snow - giving optimum traction for paved, un-paved and snow-covered roads according to preference or to suit conditions. And, for the rigors of rally, gymkhana or other competitive use, the ACD operates in a virtually open state when the parking brake is used, thereby enabling rapid and effective side brake turns."

Mitsubishi ACD - “active centre differential system” ACD is the new major technical feature that distinguishes the previous Evo 4-6 models from the new Evo 7 ACD is an extension of the technology used in for the anti yaw control systems (AYC) employed in various previous Mitsubishi models in the rear axle position. The ACD system comprises an electric motor, driving an oil pump which pressures an oil reservoir to a peak 16-bar pressure. This reserve of “SYSTEM PRESSURE” is fed to the piston of the ACD plate pack via a modulation (proportion) valve. The modulation valve is software controlled by the “ACD ECU (electronic control unit).


The control inputs for the ACD electronic control unit are


4 wheel speeds
G force both lateral and longitudinal
Throttle position – a variable value
Braking state - on or off
Steering angle – neutral position (straight ahead) and off centre position provided by 3 optical inputs generated by rotation of the steering wheel.
Handbrake state – on or off
System pressure – Hydraulic pressure state
Mode switch state – to select Gravel, Snow or Asphalt software strategy (maps)

The “Gravel” and “Snow” software strategies are similar; Gravel has the highest ultimate locking value of the two. In “Asphalt” mode a unique software strategy is employed


-------------

The ACD in the EVO is different than the system in the STi because we can't enter a fully manual mode, just 3 set software mappings.

 

There is EXTENSIVE reviews on the MR on the new Best Motoring Video that just came out, "Factory Fighters"

http://www.bestmotoringvideo.com

I just got done watching it, and they actually do tests on a JDM Evo MR vs JDM Regular Evo for alot of things. I know you're wondering why this would matter for the US models, but they do tests that could be compared with our models to see if there are improvements in times.

For instance, they test the MR on a tiny track, then add 4kg on the roof (what the alluminum roof saves) and see how it handles.

Also, they test out whether the BBS wheels are better than the stock Enkei's on the track.

There's alot more. I liked this BMI volume more than alot of the others in terms of what cars they tested - alot of Evos there But they don't have touge this time for those interested in that..

 

I still wouldn't trade my RS for anything. It is my daily driver and I love every inch of it. I don't need speakers when I have all the engine and tire noise. I absolutely love it. Don't forget about the rear trunk brace.

 

I think that the MR would have been nicer than its siblings if it came with ALL of the JDM options. The one option that people never mention when they talk about the US MR is the missing SAYC (Super Active Yaw COntrol...not that you didn't know what this stood for). This little piece of engineering improves lateral G cornering from .89G in 2003 model to almost .98 G in the JDM MR version. Obviously you can achieve this with larger tires and added suspension parts but I would prefer the SAYC.

Here are some details on this little device.

http://www.mitsubishi-motors.co.jp/PDF-E/evo8.pdf

 

Maybe I'm missing something here, but...

http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/cor...001/13E_09.pdf

Look at page 2, Figure 2. This describes torque-split. The first full paragraph on the right describes figure 2, ending with "... should be established at about 30:70."

Why would they talk about a rear-split greater than 50% if it couldn't do it?

 

Look at the gear ratios. Fifth gear in the MR is even higher than in the 5-speed box. Does the lower final drive and the lower 1st-4th gears really improve things? I dunno. I need to graph out all the gearing and decide for myself.

So Neil, you are trying to tell me that you, or that the average Evo buyer, will notice the 8lb savings in the roof and that you could actually feel the improvment in handling that the lower CG will provide? Puhlease. I don't think most could feel the difference between a sunroof and no-sunroof car and the difference in weight there is much higher. Yes, a lower CG and less vehicle weight are good things. Will most Evo drivers tell a difference? No. Is it worth a significant premium over the GSR? My contention is that it is not.

You are right about the cost of certifying the headlights and taillights for just 1000 cars. It would be expensive. That doesn't change the fact that the US MR doesn't have them and people want them.

I'll have to take your word on the Bilsteins. Somehow I doubt you could tell the difference in such a short distance, but again, I don't know firsthand.

Have you been denied warranty coverage for modifying or racing your car? If not, than you are continuing to perpetuate hearsay. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, but everyone talks about it like it has happened to them personally. Just more misinformation, imho.

My conclusion is that people make a lot out of some of the more trivial items on the MR without clearly relating their benefits to the real world. Meanwhile, they forget that the significant changes on the MR apply to all the '05 Evo's. $5000 + tax is a lot to pay for the few differences between the MR and GSR.

Joe
www.joe250.com

 

I remember first reading about the MR, and man it look so bad ***. Sadly a lot of what I first saw and liked about the car are not part of the production car. What things that were left off of production version of the US MR disappointed you the most? To me, and it's not really dealing with stuff left off, but stuff added, and I'm talking about weight. I mean the light weight of the MR was really great, it was like an RS with all the goodies and more power, but when I found out it weighed more than the GSR I was disappointed.

 

if i didn't have my '03, i'd be all over the MR. but because i do, FUGGIT. the MR, as i posted above, is an unbelievable thing though. what do you expect, in Japan there are car companies competing like crazy. in result of this, Mitsubishi had to step it up, and so they did.

 

Whoops. Sorry about that. I meant MT.