This is the last I am going to type in this thread, I've grown tired of arguing with people on this topic. But please people stop jumping to conclusions, give the EVO X a chance. Nobody here (or us so called EVO X lovers) are saying that the EVO X is going to be faster in a straight line than a EVO IX, it just isn't possible with the weight gain and slight bump in power (unless Mitsubishi heavly underrates the power which I highly doubt). I am just saying I do not believe 14.0@96mph is a true accurate representation of its power, that is all. I don't even think the magazine thought this as well because it was obvious the car had issues and it wasn't a huge topic with the magazine. I know some of you are disappointed, I myself am disappointed, not by the acceleration runs, but by the inability of Mitsubishi to field a production version of the EVO X for the test. I mean the car is scheduled for release in less than two months and they give MT a pre-production EVO X with issues. Once again, great marketing campaign by my favorite company Mitsubishi . I mean come on Mitsubishi, Subaru just handed over the keys to Car and Driver of full US Spec STI for a review (mixed reviews) and Mitsubishi can't do the same. I am seriously tired of this sh*t, and it absolutely embarrassing that Mitsubishi would give MT a EVO X that obviously would get trounced by the EVO IX, I mean it was already at a disadvantage to began with more weight and slight bump in power, now add misfire issues to flame, great job . Honestly performance wise I do not think the EVO X will be the same, but I expect it to be pretty good and have better overall package. I don't know you start to get to an age were you know a couple of tenths in the 1/4 mile isn't such a big deal, as long as I know my car is overall a great package. Besides most of us mod our EVO anyways, and I expect this to be the same case with the EVO X. This is the customers I think Mitsubishi is trying to target now, gearheads, keep your IXs and hope for the best for the EVO XI.

 

the X interior is down right HOT compared though. . .maybe I can convince the wifey to be that a X or XI MR is a "good" transition with the TCCST thingy. . .

 

did you guys note that the POWERTRAIN WARRANTY is only 5 years for the X??? Haha, my VIII will still be "warranted" in 2015 when most of the Evo X "warranties" would've expired. . .

 

2008 had me very excited. I will be in the market to trade out the VIII next spring and thought I had two fantastic options - the new STi and the X. I've had both a 500hp 04 STi and a 340hp 04 EVO and like the EVO the best so was leaning towards that for next year.

The STi is just ugly (to me) and I'm not hip on the hatch look. However stock performance looks good and it has a proven motor, albeit inferior to the 4g63.

The X looks amazing (to me) but stock performance is 'ok'. No worries though, aftermarket parts can address that. However, 331 lbs and the loss of the 'rawness' can not be tuned in as easily. That combined with the transmission I would want only in the GSR which won't have the options I want or the color further displease me. And if I go with the MR, with a questionabley durable, but intriguing tranny, to get the options I want I'm looking at over $40k.

Now I'm thinking about picking up a XI that someone has dumped the cash into and let them take the depretiation hit for me and wait to see what the next few years hold.

Oh, yeah. Of course all this is based on available data. Perhpas the MR will have a bullet proof, tunable tranny and slaughter the XI in performance for ~$37k, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

I'm holding on to my IX's. Like the post above said, the aftermarket can address just about every shortcoming of the X except the "feel" and weight <- for the most part.

In weightlifting terms, I just think of 315lbs sitting on a barbell. It's 6 x 45lb plates plus a 45lb bar. Anyone that has tried to bench, squat, or deadlift that knows what it feels like.

To think the X has that 315 riding around it at all times is a bummer.

 

It will be embarrassing.

I'm very disappointed. Very! I never thought that the Evo would become a mainstream car. On top of that, 14.0 @ 96 mph??? WTF!!! That's VW GTi territory for god sake!

 

Um.. the car in Who am I is an Evo IV.
Get your facts straight lol

 

Did you guys even RTFA or did you just miss the various mentions that the preproduction tester X in question was having engine troubles? People need to calm down with the sensationalism...

 

obiviously the x will do better than 14 sec on a healthy engine.....might not do as well as the ix in the 1/4 mile but it will be closer than that.....i think the big plus the x will have is on a track...well the mr x anyways....due to the faster shifting tranny...that will possibly make it faster than the ix on the track...but the ix would probably still be faster than a gsr x on the track.....i dunno...it's gonna be close...we'll just have to wait a few months so we can get a real test .....if anyone is trying to decide just wait a few months.....until the dust settles and we'll see what happens...you don't have to go buy an x the very day it hits the lot....just wait til u know for sure how it will do

 

This is a C&D test with JDM Evo X with a healthy engine:
http://www.caranddriver.com/assets/d...vo_x_08_ss.pdf

*Remember that the JDM is lighter than USDM

It is clear that the Evo X is SLOWER than the Evo 9!!!!

 

No problem for me. I plan on voiding it in the first 3 months

 

I think too many of you are making too huge of a deal over numbers that were produced from a pre-production model with issues up top... and this has been pointed out several times. But the fact that the pre-production engine is choking at higher rpms will lead to either a weak top end or the driver shifting earlier than necessary (which should be fixed by the time it's released), and I think that this is making a big deal. Compare the acceleration numbers:



While I understand that the new 5-speed is a new unit, I'd imagine the gearing isn't drastically different, so we can assume certain similarities between the new and old transmissions in terms of what speed you'll be at. Based on the test data, despite their differences, both cars seem to launch similarly and hit 30 mph from a dig at the same time. However, by 40 mph, which is around the speed an Evo IX will top out at in first gear, the X should also be close to redline, but given the noted issues, it's probably choking (leading to weak acceleration at the top end) or the driver shifted early... and as we all know, during shifting there is no acceleration during that brief period. But to 50, the X actually gets there slightly quicker from 40 mph, but once you hit 60 (top of second gear), the X falls behind for the same reason. And beyond that, it goes completely downhill, though I'm sure it's also due to the increased weight.

I'm not saying that a proper production X will make up for the differences in this test (since it won't), but it won't be nearly as slow as the X used in this comparison. I'd imagine it would at least be a lot closer to running a 5 second flat sprint to 60 with its quarter-mile time at least in the 13s while trapping at least in the triple digits (which may be an indication of the top end hp being killed off by the test vehicle's issues).

 

i noticed that the skidpad was .97g on the car and driver thing.... .99g on the other test of the us version.... didn't they say the ix was .95g.... i think i've heard the 350z was a 1.00g ....not really sure what this means...is this how many g's it will hold until it spins out?....i dunno but i've driven my ix and my bro's 350z...and to me mine handles a lot better than his..... so not sure if this measurement makes much of a difference...anyone that is more knowledgable on this matter feel free to comment...i dunno ...i've driven a 300zx and it handled nicely...for some reason the 350z just never felt comfortable to me.....but the evo feels perfect....it's almost like u can do no wrong when u drive it....the limits are so far out there......i am continually blown away by this cars handling and responsiveness...i mean every time i get in another car i'm like ...man this car sux...lol...that's when i have to be careful cuz i'm used to the evo handling and these other cars can't handle the curves as well...everyone is like screaming slow down...and i'm like why....cuz i'm just used to not having to slow down for a turn...haha....i can't imagine how well the ix would handle with the ayc... i mean i don't even see a need for it cuz it handles so well already....anyways i might take the x for a test drive one day just to see how it feels

 

Hey, even the Evo 8 posted better numbers when it was first introduced in 2003:

0-60 mph, sec 4.6
1/4 mile, sec @ mph 13.1/105.1
Braking, 60-0 mph, ft 106
Skidpad, g 0.96
600-ft slalom, mph 71.4


Source: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/..._overview.html

 

+1

The lighter JDM X isn't faster than a USDM IX. There's just no way the heavier USDM X will get better numbers and somehow top the USDM IX.

Hell would have to freeze over and pigs would have to fly before that will happen