Motor Trend Evo,RS,MR test data
Originally Posted by jasonc32amg
Trying searching...I know someone posted a fancy graph comparing the ratios...
Originally Posted by EVO Neil
I think you're thinking of post #53 in this thread, but it doesn't list the gear ratios.
No, I think it was right after the MR's release and it was on here some where????? It layed the 6-speed ratios over the 5-speed...
Originally Posted by Joe250
Someone else, not sure who, was nice enough to graph this out:
Notice that the first 3 gears are essentially identical. In autocross, you will usually use the first 2 gears and that's it. So I would conclude that the transmission should not be a deciding factor in which car you pick for autocross.
Now for roadracing, things look a bit different and if the 6speed meets durability requirements, then it may look a lot better.
Hope that helps.
Joe
Notice that the first 3 gears are essentially identical. In autocross, you will usually use the first 2 gears and that's it. So I would conclude that the transmission should not be a deciding factor in which car you pick for autocross.
Now for roadracing, things look a bit different and if the 6speed meets durability requirements, then it may look a lot better.
Hope that helps.
Joe
As far as the article. I went home and couldnt' find the mag
so I went to the store and bought another one. I couldn't find it where I thought it said the RS had no ac. I apologize to anyone I insulted here. I could have sworn I read that in the article.
Originally Posted by Steiner
You're joking, right? The RS was quicker in 0-30mph, 0-60mph and the 1/4 mile, but lost around the track because its high speed braking (100mph+) wasn't as crisp as the ABS/EBD equipped MR and GSR. It may be cheaper, but it was slower because of the format of the track. Think back to the FQ400 beating the Lambo on Top Gear. It was cool so see if you're an Evo fan, but it had as much to do with the track as it had to do with the performance of the Evo. Basically, that track was a good fit for the Evo. I think the same thing could be said for Willow Springs. ABS and EBD is a huge advantage.
Last edited by DaWorstPlaya; Feb 2, 2005 at 12:27 PM.
Originally Posted by DaWorstPlaya
I wasn't talking about slower in the straight line, I meant slower on a track where you actually have to turn and brake several times. I agree, the track does make a difference as to how it plays out to the advantages of different cars. Racing isn't only about straight lines .... at least to me ...
i got beat my a mini cooper s on hoosier slicks at a recent auto-x. i was on street tires. very tight technical course. he had me by about .1 seconds.
Now that people have brought this up maybe with more RS, MR and reg. Evo's out there we can get more thoughts input on this through out the year
Now that people have brought this up maybe with more RS, MR and reg. Evo's out there we can get more thoughts input on this through out the year
Originally Posted by ldstang50
i got beat my a mini cooper s on hoosier slicks at a recent auto-x. i was on street tires. very tight technical course. he had me by about .1 seconds.
Now that people have brought this up maybe with more RS, MR and reg. Evo's out there we can get more thoughts input on this through out the year
Now that people have brought this up maybe with more RS, MR and reg. Evo's out there we can get more thoughts input on this through out the year
The 6-speed pays off on the top end...compare the jump in the 5-speed during the 4-5 shift to the MR and you can see how much more efficient it is...seeing that it really proves the merit of getting an MR as a street brawler.
Originally Posted by jasonc32amg
The 6-speed pays off on the top end...compare the jump in the 5-speed during the 4-5 shift to the MR and you can see how much more efficient it is...seeing that it really proves the merit of getting an MR as a street brawler.
Newbie
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
The RS lost all of its time in the section up the left side of the track diagram. The article indicated that it was due to oversteer and not handling the bumpy curves well. But there are a couple of big braking zones that could have also been a factor.
So which was it, the bumpy/curvy track, or the braking zones - or both?
I gots to know...
So which was it, the bumpy/curvy track, or the braking zones - or both?
I gots to know...
Originally Posted by Steiner
You're joking, right? The RS was quicker in 0-30mph, 0-60mph and the 1/4 mile, but lost around the track because its high speed braking (100mph+) wasn't as crisp as the ABS/EBD equipped MR and GSR. It may be cheaper, but it was slower because of the format of the track. Think back to the FQ400 beating the Lambo on Top Gear. It was cool so see if you're an Evo fan, but it had as much to do with the track as it had to do with the performance of the Evo. Basically, that track was a good fit for the Evo. I think the same thing could be said for Willow Springs. ABS and EBD is a huge advantage.
Originally Posted by conevadr
The RS lost all of its time in the section up the left side of the track diagram. The article indicated that it was due to oversteer and not handling the bumpy curves well. But there are a couple of big braking zones that could have also been a factor.
So which was it, the bumpy/curvy track, or the braking zones - or both?
I gots to know...
So which was it, the bumpy/curvy track, or the braking zones - or both?
I gots to know...
They were all small factors in why it finished where it did.
Originally Posted by EVO Neil
They were all small factors in why it finished where it did.
