To Kordwood: Are you serious? It might create drag for the acceleration times but it also creates a lot of downforce for the handling and road course part. Without it those figures would be a lot worse.

Duhh, Oh really? As I've always said, I never push my vehicle to it's handling limits, but I push it to it's acceleration limits frequently. I don't race on closed courses and I don't drive 150 miles per hour. Maybe it's different for others, but things like wings are useless to me.

 

I just thought of something else. If the RS has less weight but the same suspension set up as the GSR the geometry would be thrown off a little. This would reflect in the slalom numbers. I recall an article where SCC removed 600 lbs from a 350Z and it actually did worse in the slalom due to the geometry of the suspension being thrown off.

 

Oh, ok. I thought you meant in general it would be better without the wing, but if it is just a personal thing then I understand. If you're not pushing the handling limits though you are missing half the fun, surely there are better cars for straight line acceleration?

Aston

 

I had the same question, because it didn't make sense to me either. Why does the RS, which has all the fastest acceleration times, have the slowest lap time? Is that attributable to the lack of ABS? Or could it have something to do with the lack of a wing, so no downforce?

 

The lack of ABS hurt the RS in the braking zones.

As far as the rear wing, yes, it does generate more downforce than Evo's without one and the VG takes that one step further even. Look at the picture in the article and you'll see we did a simple ribbon test. The VG does wonders, even at sixty miles-per-hour, and a winged Evo is better than one without. You'll also notice that racing Evo's inevitably have a wing, even if they don't use the factory wing.

 

awesome article. i've just become a bigger fan of Motor Trend.

 

Great info .... I always wondered how the different dynamics would play out .... it seems although the MR is heavier, the addition of an aluminum roof helped slalom nos. ..... while the bilsteins hurt the nimbleness of the vehicle it helped with skidpad nos. (long fast corners)? it there any truth in that or was it because of the lighter rims, wing and VG? past a 100mph will the MR pull ahead of the others because of better gearing?

 

Me too and i havent' even recieved my magazine yet

Neil, one more quick question. Is the Lock to lock the same for all 3 cars. I belive in the UK the GSR is 2.3 turns and RS is 2.1 but those are RHD units. I just wonder because you mention the RS is more oversteerie.

 

Yes, all three USDM Evo's have the same steering, 2.1 turns lock-to-lock.

 

Thanks for the info Neil,

I'm assuming these cars have the same 93 octane for this test. Regarding the oversteerie feel on the RS could the other models have steering assist that is speed sensitive and RS not? I ask because my 03 steering feels differnt compared to my MR and I always thought it was the shocks.

This will be an interesting article and I'm really surprised to have this shootout published on Motortrend and looking forward to the reading.

Richard Evo, the RS acceleration is bothering me too. Either all cars were dynoed for HP difference or if the GSR was ran without the wing to find out. If they were dynoing it the hp on the MR would be the differnt because of the gear ratio difference in 4th, which would not be even comparo.



OT: The car and driver TV (evo vs Sti) was lame. Motortrend should buy it back and have a real STi vs evo shootout on tv.

 

California pump 91 octane fuel was used in all three cars.

All cars were run stock as delivered from the Mitsubishi press fleet.

 

Yuck no wonder car and driver's MR trapped at 104MPH

 

That and it was a different car, on a different track, under different weather conditions. Many variables to consider, not the least of which is the octane rating of the fuel used.

 

i love my rs

 

yes for the rs!