That would be very interesting to hear. The thing is that I believe that my next step in the suspension/car improvement for my car will be in the active drivetrain world. I am just hoping that new EVO will have it in there, so I wouldn't have to jump over too many ropes in order to get it. At least it will be fun to go this route if I ended up on it!

Later

Mr. AWD

 

Would you finally make up your mind??

Well, you said it your self. This has/had nothing to do with me as you mentioned, so there is no gain on my side for writing what I wrote. On the other hand, you (or more like your confidence) seem to be in the need to defend your self (or your confidence) after what I wrote and I apologize for that. My intent was completely different and hurting your feelings wasn't one of them. If you couldn't see what I was trying to tell you, please forgive me for any harm that could have caused you!

Mr. AWD
ps. you don't have to write another message to correct what you have wrote already. Use EDIT button instead

 

I think this is very funny especially coming from a Nissan owner. Was it not Mitsubishi who was in the turbo supercar game the longest? The last year of the 3000GT VR-4 and the turbo DSM was 1999. All the other Japanese GT cars had disapeared years earlier. The 300ZXTT went away in '96 right? Where was the SR20DET for the 240SX/Sylivia? Never offered in the states. That would have been an excellent tuner platform with its RWD IMO, now everybody is making their own. And you say Mitsu never had a good bang for the buck? Have you ever seen, been in, driven, raced, looked closely at a turbo DSM? Fast foward to today. They are the second to come back to the market (admittedly behind the 350Z and I don't count Subaru since they never were in it to begin with) but so far the only one of two turbo options. The RX-8 is NA, rumors of the Supra abound and the Skyline is still a couple of years out. I know you've since "cooled down" since making those statments, but I just had to toss in my pennies. Final point: Does the Maxima even exist in JDM form? I thought they went from Almera, to Primera, to something else.

Everybody has gone over the whole warranty issue versus cost when considering AYC/ACD/6speed debate, but you've also got to remember the tariff issue. The government hates the fact that domestic carmakers lose market share to foreign cars every year so they charge them just to bring them over here. Notice how every major midsize Japanese car including light trucks and some other examples are made/assembled here? Only SUV's are excluded as so 4Runners, Montero, and Montero Sports still get boated over. That's why Mitsu quit making the Mighty Max, beacuse the tariff on pickups is very high (Tundras, Frontiers, B2200 are made here) and they couldn't afford to build another plant here. Now Mitsu is creating this high power, low volume sports car, that have to double production of to meet US demand, and have to mass produce overseas, ship here, pay a tariff, pass emissions, front mount intercooler, and still get it under 30K. That's no small task.

 

U.S. Maxima = JDM Cefiro with different bolt-on bodywork. Available in 2.0-litre to 3.0-litre engine sizes.

Cheers,

Paul Hansen

 

Can't remember if I mentioned it or not..but I was also told there would not be an option package with more horsepower. There was a rumor that there may be a 300hp upgrade avail. - not true

 

Here is an interesting take on someone with experience driving an ayc/acd Evo VII and non ayc RS..this is from someone at lancerregister.com:
"AYC dangerous?
i have an evo 7 rs with mechanical diff but my dad has the rs 2 with ayc diff i tried it in rain tonight and i don t know why mitsubishi put these things in (for safety that could not be thru)

i was driving in wet when floored in corners the outside will brake away just like a normal diff but then when you are a normal person you give countersteer it s a normal reaction but then the ayc kicks in to correct it and suddenly youre countersteer is too much so if youre not carefull you come into a contra slip and end somewere in trees.

an ayc is so unreal reaction a mechanical diff is so much better and saver. the car doesn t snap away so sudden en when it slides you have normal reaction countersteer and when the back end comes in place steer back you have much more time to do this than with ayc.

I drive my car a lot over the limit and if i could only buy an AYC car i would leave it at the dealer.

andre


mits stop building car equipped with AYC"

 

ACY and ACD is the only way to extract the full handling potential out of a high performance AWD street car. When a factory releases a sports car to the general public, it needs to be a compromise between performance and safety. In the factory’s eyes, a 16 year old girl should be able to drive an AWD car at reasonable speeds in the rain with out it swapping ends. That’s why passive AWD systems push so much the way they are set up from the factory. Sure, the enthusiast may be able to set up a passive AWD system to corner fairly neutral on a 70 mph sweeper. The problem is the next corner may be a 20 mph and the car will push like mad. Tighten up the rear bar and drop the front. Now the car is neutral on the low speed turns but when you chop the throttle coming into the next high speed turn she will swap ends. Let’s not even talk about what happens when it starts to rain! Throw in a little bit of turbo lag and on/off throttle transitions make things even worse. Mitsubishi has recognized the limitation of passive AWD and has been developing electronic solutions for its production cars starting with the EVO VI. For someone interested in a AWD car that handles more like a RWD car with lots of traction in a variety of conditions, ACY and ACD is the only way to go. 'If AYC and ACD are so great, why are they not included on the RS models?' Like the factory 5 speed transmission, the production electronic differentials are too fragile to use in top level off road competition. 'Why then is the AYC/ACD offered as an option on the RS?' Some people prefer to take a cheaper/lighter RS model with optional AYC/ACD into a street warrior - thus the birth of the RS II with AC as well. Sure there are disadvantages to AYC/ACD like driver feedback, weight and reliability. Hopefully the system will improve further with the J-spec EVO VIII. I have read rumors that the J-spec VIII may even have a front active differential. When ABS systems first came out, people thought they took control from the driver and only offered advantages to grandmas and soccer moms. What performance car today would come with out a fully integrated ABS system?

Turbo

 

Couldn't say it better my self!!

As for the previous thread, EVO 7 has three options for the center diff. If you drive that car on the slippery route in the tarmac option, your rear end is going to be looser than you would like it. The center diff stays open longer in that mode (besides AYC active quicker and more aggressive when transferring torque from one side to another) and that makes the rear end to overpower the front. That is why the car comes with the ACD switch, so you can adjust reactions of the drivetrain for the proper road conditions.

Basically, the car behaved just the way it should!!


Mr. AWD

 

Well most track cars DON't have abs. It has many disadvantages to a race driver..just how ayc/acd commonly does. Here is a little take on abs:
http://www.racingschools.com/tips/abs.shtml

Most experienced drivers dee no benifit in unreliable, complex, heavy parts when they can drive the car just as quick and brake just as well if not better without them..sure it may take a little more driver experience and effort, but that is no big deal for a race car driver. I'm not saying the VIII should come without ayc/acd or abs..I think they are great features that help the average driver.

 

Incorrect. If so, then a STi type C would have never beat a Evo GSR VII around a track, and especially not by 2 seconds.

And if it was the only way, then Nissan would have had it on the Skyline R32 GT-R.

AYC/ACD does it's job, and it does it well. However, there is a reason why Porsche went to a more fixed AWD system that instead keeps the majority of power to the rear, a little to the front, and basically leaves it at that. AYC and ACD are there to overcome the fact that the Lancer Evo is nose-heavy and prone to understeer. If MMC was to design an AWD Evo from scratch, on a brand new chassis that was specifically developed to take advantage of the AWD system, it's very likely they would not need the AYC/ACD system at all. It would also be much faster than the current Evo around a track.

I'm not bashing the Evo here, but it's a homologation special, a WRC base created from a relatively humble economy car. It achieves world-class performance within those parameters, but it is not a car without compromise. Given the cost of the high-performance cars without compromise, it's not a bad deal at all.

Cheers,

Paul Hansen

 

Then buy a Caterham Superlight Broeli. I do not know what your often mentioned racing program is about. But remember Mitsubishi is releasing street car. Hell it’s a sedan. Many race car ideas do not work on the street. Try to remember your use of the Evo VIII is going to be different than most readers here. It is different than mine at least.

Some people do not like AYC/ABS/ACD and some people don't like DFI either. Electronic control mechanical systems is the wave of the future. I work in the auto electronics industry and you will be shocked at all the new applications.

Traction control (a very distant relative of AYC) was so effective for the inexperienced F1 drivers that they outlawed it. Most race series have outlawed it because it is so effective. I guess you have to break it to all those misguided WRC teams too.

I prefer to tune and experiment with the ACD system in my car. Be happy that your USDM Evo will not have it.

Erik

 

I have to disagree with that statement.

Here is an interesting discussion regarding ABS brakes used on Formula 1 cars, the highest level of motor sport racing.

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/D...6/balance2.htm

Modern 4 channel ABS systems are hands down superior to a non abs system on the race track. On the most basic level, independent wheel control is what it’s all about. I don’t care how good of a driver you are, with out abs you only have control of one master cylinder. To have the same control that a basic 4 channel abs system has, you would need 4 separate brake pedals and be able to manage each one effectively 100% of the time while braking.

Imagine that you have two similarly equipped cars, one with ABS and one without. Both are approaching an increasing radius turn at 120 mph. The car with out abs will attempt maximum braking before entering the turn and then trail brake once into the corner. If done properly, the driver will keep the lighter inside tires on the edge of lockup while the outside heavily loaded wheels are along for the ride. The driver of the ABS equipped car is able to brake later into the corner, since his 4 independently controlled calipers are able to keep each wheel at its braking threshold through out the corner.

On more advanced systems used by the later EVO's, abs systems are tied in with the ACD and emergency brake and can improve stability and maneuverability as well.

Seeing that we are discussing Mitsubishis, I can understand your concern regarding reliability of any system on these cars. That my friend, I will agree with.

 

I think its a bad idea to start comparing models by lap times. Too many variables at work to base a decision on 1 or 2 seconds.

But the Porsche still understeers...

 

You are right on with my thinking. If it was another company I may not be so worried about reliabilty issues.
Hell, you know it can't be too reliable if Mitsu themselves are worried. That is THE reason it's rumored that it's not being brought to the US. I was told reliabilty/warranty issues.

 

Too many variables to state that AYC/ACD are necessary for maximum performance, also.

And nearly every sports car, muscle car and GT car now understeers from the factory. The question is, is it because of fundamental issues, such as chassis setup and balance, or is it because of suspension tuning? For instance, the Camaro/Firechicken understeer from the factory - and after you realign them to setting that do something besides hitting guardrails nose first, they oversteer.

(and if you wonder why, consider this. If you sue a manufacturer claiming a car's handling is dangerous, it is easier for the manufacturer to counter your suit if you went in nose first instead of tail first. The former clearly indicates you were going to fast - the latter is far more ambigous).

Cheers,

Paul Hansen