Did I make a boo-boo? The 3rd gen Eclipse was the last one with AWD and turbo engine available. 4th gen Eclipse starting in 2000 was the one with a V6 option and the ugly Pontiac-style fins down the side doors. Mitsu decided they needed to have the Eclipse "appeal" to more women. Hence, the design of the 4th gen and the loss of AWD and turbo power. The Eclipse has been soft ever since. And, yes, they sold slightly more copies of the 4th gen Eclipse...primarily driven by the 0/0/0 financing they offered.

Don't believe me? I used to work for Mitsu's advertising agency from 2002-2004. I lived through that horrible time with them. Only good thing that happened during those years, is the Evo came to the US.

 

That from a guy who drives a cabriolet?

 

Actually EvilRob is right...this time.

1G = 89-94
2G = 95-99
3G = 00-05
4G = 06+

2G are the last ones to have AWD and turbo.

 

Thats a sure way of confirming a model's reliability.

By the way, Id say for any model car, its probably more of a chance of the earlier generations to be broken down BECAUSE THEYRE OLDER!!!!!!!!

BTW, I hate the EVO X, I think its awful looking and Id rather have an VIII or IX any day of the week. Thumbs down to Mitsu for making it like it is. They should have called it something else, but not an EVO. The EVO 1 to the 9 were EVOs... the X is ... an X.. thats it.

 

Wow I guess mitsu dealers arn't the only one that don't know what they are talking about

 

OK, I got the generation numbers wrong. I'm a retard. I thought there were two distinct body styles between 89-94. Anyhow, I didn't work with them way back then. Still doesn't change the fact Mitsu screwed up the Eclipse...and will do the same with the Evo. Or, should I say, they already have screwed up the Evo X...

 

I think you might have got the eclipse and talon confused that's why you thought it was the 4th gen

Well depends how you interpert that they screwd it up. They increased sales and reliability the stock 03 eclipse had just as much hp as a GST (210hp) plus it had low end torque. It was more reliable and safer that's why it was heavier. Styling well that depends who you talk to some people like it (me) some people don't (you). I guess the only thing they messed up on it is they didn't turbo the V6 or the I4 version. They did that on purpose though becasue they knew they were going to launch the Evo in the states.
Quick note: GST didn't come AWD so don't give me they screwd that up if that was the case then the eclipse was screwd since the 2nd gen

Now you can't say the same thing about the evo X because although the engine is different it's a more powerful/lighter engine (stock for stock)and the car handles better. It's only slower of the line because it's heavier but that is because it has like 7 airbags and is a little wider for better handling. We don't know how well the 4B11T takes to mods so I will refrain from saying its easy to make it go faster. One thing that I'm sure though is that between making a car go fast and making a car turn better it's always easyer to make the car go faster.

 

Maybe...after some serious X hate...

 

^That is much uglier than the Evo X. I still can't get over the idea that the new STI looks like a snail.

 

I only make the comment about the Eclipse because when you ask guys that owned the 2G Eclipse, the overriding opinion from them is that Mitsu screwed up the Eclipse when they lost the turbo and AWD. I've sat in focus groups and it's sad to hear how much those guys loved the 2G and hated the 3G. Look, I'm getting my generations right . I also sat in initial product focus groups for the current generation Eclipse and every single person (~200) interviewed in those focus groups asked if the new Eclipse would have turbo and AWD and suggested that the car better have both. Mitsu didn't give the core target what they wanted because they wanted to target a larger audience who weren't car enthusiasts and could care less about turbo and AWD.

Now, I'm with you on the Evo X. We don't know what it can do. Might be one hell of a car. Might not be. I think we all know that magazines are "paid" to write good stories about cars based on the amount of advertising an auto maker buys in their magazine. Sad, but true. Plus, the editors are fed information about what "makes a car great" through the press kit they get from Mitsu. Only time will tell with the new Evo. But, Mitsu does not have a good track record of making great cars when they change their target audience...as they are with the new Evo. I hope and pray gets it right. I want them to succeed. I still have friends who work for them. Oh well...we'll just wait and see. I'll still be one of the first to test drive it though

 

=X

 

Yeah but the Evo X still has a turbo and AWD. Mitsubishi is listening. If they weren't, we would have ended up with an EVO that's FWD and has a V6. Your eclipse analogy is flawed because the main items that you were complaining about (Turbo and AWD) have been retained. What exactly did Mitsubishi forget about the Evo’s core target? The reason why I ask is because the things that you’ve mentioned (Turbo and AWD) have been retained. I’m not sure if I get your point.

 

also, the fact that the eclipse is pretty much a USDM car, while the lancer is a "world car"

 

My point with the Eclipse reference was that they took away the core of what made an Eclipse an Eclipse (the driving experience delivered by AWD and turbo made it what it was). And they did it to satisfy a new target audience while not caring about their existing die-hard customer's wants/needs.

Mitsu has a history of targeting the wrong group of consumers and leaving their loyal consumers in the dust. Another example is when they launced the Endeavor SUV. They walked away from the core needs of the guys who loved the Montero and Montero Sport. All in the hopes that they could attract a new consumer with the Endeavor. I think we all know that didn't work out so well for them. They can't give away the Endeavor.

With the Evo, Mitsu is following a similar path to the Eclipse all in the name of finding a new consumer. Based on all the initial articles we've all read, you can make the case that the Evo has somewhat walked away from the core driving experience that makes an Evo an Evo. That raw, dialed-in feeling is gone for a more plush ride. The styling is less aggressive so it will appeal to more consumers. Yes, there is more technology, and it all seems like cool stuff. Except the SST which I'll never agree with an automatic tranny in a car like the Evo. Take this quote from Car and Driver for instance...

Anyhow, the new car, based on the driving impressions from the magazine just doesn't deliver the same driving experience we've all fallen in love with. The Evo X has lost bits of what makes an Evo an Evo, and they did it to satisfy a new target customer while not caring about what die-hard Evo customer's wanted or needed in the next generation Evo. There are plenty of people on this forum that can talk all day about how the new Evo doesn't fit them and what they wanted.

As with almost everything, history repeats itself. And usually when history repeats itself it's not good. My fear for the new Evo is that history is repeating itself and Mitsu didn't learn from their mistakes with the Eclipse.

 

I agree with what you are saying and maybe that’s why Mitsubishi is in trouble in the U.S. But in the end you have to ask yourself; is the Evo X a better car than the previous EVO’s ? And that answer would be yes. Everyone who has driven the EVO X says that the EVO X is a better car. The only folks that are saying that isn’t a better car are the folks who own the previous generation cars and never have driven the EVO10. I’d say give it a chance.

Also you only posted a very small part of the Car and Driver article. Here are the last few sentences of that same article.

I actually prefer a grown-up EVO. The last generation cars were a little to boy-racer for my tastes.