they hold the AYC back ,because the evaporation system required in the US. Stupid.

to get a same hp level on the IX to get a X level you need more then a tune only.
The factory IX will not have over 310 whp on dynojet, with only tune.
thinking about it ,only 2 hp gain as factoy but when you tune the two engine with no mods the X is blowing away the IX by numbers. Only because the factory tune is that bad.

My car weights with no rear seats and empty trunk, full tank of gas and TBE
3352 lbs.

is that bad? Take out the weight is easy to a certain level.
I got my Sparco's sitting in the basement and i buy a small battery. I might even clean out the car from stereo and speakers, the car is easy under 3300 lbs.
And i'm not even gutting it , since nothing is taken out what a IX rs have
These are easy weight reduction, less the a 3 hours job

 

there's no need to call someone " stupid " because they say something you don't like or agree with... grow up and just admit the IX is better and you will be ok

 

no no no . sorry i dont call you a stupid !
I called the evaporation system stupid./because it's replaced the S-AYC/

Sorry for my english.
i was rocking the IX almost 2 years. I know how is the IX runs believe me.

 

this is a bit off the subject, but if Mitsubishi made the new X soooooooo rich... why didn't it occur to them to tune the car and get that 30-50 hp or whatever people are claiming that it will get themselves? Certainly having that much extra power would have been more of a selling point... not to mention that if it ran that rich, it would also improve fuel economy also giving it another reason to buy.

 

i think the main reason is ,safety.
They don't want to blow the engine with minor upgrades with no tune in first year. so ts a safe approach from them to the tuner scene. Since the Evos are usually ending up there. I call it a smart buisness. What they loose with 0.3 0r 0.8 time vs not blowing engine?
So they rich the tune up , that is why you usually see 40-50 whp gain on tune. Which is not 20-50hp more like 68 hp. /because on this dyno the loss from HP to whp 16%/

these numbers with the same mods the IX can't touch.
The X with ONLY cat back :
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=356241

or FMIC+ piping, intake,TBE,MBC:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=358850


of course we talking about how badly tuned the 4B11T fro factory. I'm not saying the 4B11T will hold more hp. Before people start ...
I just point out how "badly" tuned the 4B11T vs the latest 4G63T.
Which is quiet understandable.

 

Mitsu does this to keep the motor very safe so people that buy them and rag the heck out of them have more of a safety barrier. Way less warranty claims

 

Are you fncking kidding me? I have almost the same mods (with a crappy downpipe and mild tune since I'm going to be driving 3200 miles accross country with a trailer) and i made 317awhp, what was that you where saying about IX's can't touch those numbers buddy?

You are seriously starting to remind me of STi owners. All you ever hear them say (in my neck of the woods) is "well my car has 300 hp so it's gotta be faster than an Evo" Seriously, your crying about 2 fncking horsepower from the factory and a sh!tty tune.

Get off your high horse man. It's an Evo that is being outdone consistantly by its older "brother" and I firmly beleive it will continue to be. You need to get off it man, you keep beating the same dead horse over and over only to be proven wrong again and again. Your X is no fncking Ferrari to our IX's and VIII's. I can't even say it's on par.

And about the price, you wouldn't catch me going to a dealership to pay half of what mitsu wants for a fully loaded X of any model. No way. But 34k out the door for a GSR? Please. talk about not worth it.

I pray that they lock this thread soon because it's getting old hearing you fight so hard for the X. Go buy an STi and hang with that crowd man, please.

 

I agree.... you're hyping the X like it's the fastest thing ever on wheels... and numbers do not always = more speed or a better overall car either.

 

Exactly.

This is bench racing at it's best.

 

The Evo IX is faster stock for stock than the X.

The fastest / highest HP Evo between an IX and an X is currently an IX.

I own an IX.


IX > X

 

i was referring on the bad tune and the gain. Not the X vs IX. i even stated that one too.

 

couple of things
first of all i'm not fighting. I dont need to. I try to keep the facts straight. And i put up some infos , and if you will calm down you might learn from them.
so you make on only with cat back nothing else 317 awhp on dyno jet with 93 ?/ well you say downpipe too, and the number still not there ,320whp?/

Please show me where you prove me wrong and wrong again, would be good to improve your credibility.
Thanks Rob

 

^ But too bad that the comparison made in the original post had nothing to do with modding. Yes, most Evo owners end up unleashing at least a few more horses, but we're comparing the cars from the factory.

 

you said more than just a cat back, and no, I didn't use 93, used 91, and kept the boost low. When I get back to MA I will turn the boost up to where it should be and see what I get there.

I don't see anyone questioning my credibility on here. I think you should avert your attention over to the X forums, your not going to convince anyone here a X is better than a IX.

Ever

 

the fact is , the X got crappy tune at takes it toll on the performance.

But as most of you think is not an evo and slow etc. Its just wrong .
Yes i do think also, it is slower then the IX as factory. I dont even care . Since none of my evo's was factory more then 2 weeks.
But just a little tune nothing else the car wakes up . And you cant denied that .