EVO X vs EVO IX, finally a test! MT
Evolved Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,849
Likes: 1
From: USA
Yeah, I think the results are really flawed, especially considering that hitting 60 mph in second gear for the X takes going up to the 7600 rpm fuel cut-off. This means that with the motor having a misfiring issue around 7000, that they would have to shift before the 7000 mark, which means like 6800- 6900, and that's going to screw the pooch on the 0-60 and 1/4 mile time. This would also cripple the overall lap times, so I feel quite confident that when a healthy EVO X is run against the 9 again that it will beat it just as it has in Japan. And people always say, "well the JDM X is lighter than the USDM X," well so is the JDM EVO 9. The results should be the same here with a production ready model that isn't sick.
Evolved Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
From: Bavaria, Germany
Yeah, I think the results are really flawed, especially considering that hitting 60 mph in second gear for the X takes going up to the 7600 rpm fuel cut-off. This means that with the motor having a misfiring issue around 7000, that they would have to shift before the 7000 mark, which means like 6800- 6900, and that's going to screw the pooch on the 0-60 and 1/4 mile time. This would also cripple the overall lap times, so I feel quite confident that when a healthy EVO X is run against the 9 again that it will beat it just as it has in Japan. And people always say, "well the JDM X is lighter than the USDM X," well so is the JDM EVO 9. The results should be the same here with a production ready model that isn't sick.
While I would like to agree with several people about being too early to jump into conclusions over the X's poor numbers, all tests on pre-production units have thrown pathetic results. Just to put it into perspective, a 170bhp Mini Cooper S with its tiny 1.6 liter is just 1mph behind the new Evo, or at least the one tested bt Motor Trend. The Mazdaspeed3 just destroys it. This is too hard to swallow.
agree with you again.
man its getting tiresome to listen to people who will always find a way to complain about the car that has not officially been released, be it weight, price, straight line performance, track performance (even when the X is crippled, which this one clearly is), streering feel, looks, options, etc
Clearly X will be a different car, it will have a different set of features than the previous version and it will draw a different crowd, mitsubishi makes no secrets about that, so make peace with it already complainers.
The most important thing for now is to recognize that and then simply either stick with your car or perhaps get a X, when it comes out and you have a chance to see it-feel it-drive it, that is.
No need for continuous *****in and whinin about all the detriments of the X, Can somebody look on the bright side, at least its not as ugly as the new STI.
and as time will prove, the X will definitely be modifiable, from power/weight ratio perspective, simple as that
man its getting tiresome to listen to people who will always find a way to complain about the car that has not officially been released, be it weight, price, straight line performance, track performance (even when the X is crippled, which this one clearly is), streering feel, looks, options, etc
Clearly X will be a different car, it will have a different set of features than the previous version and it will draw a different crowd, mitsubishi makes no secrets about that, so make peace with it already complainers.
The most important thing for now is to recognize that and then simply either stick with your car or perhaps get a X, when it comes out and you have a chance to see it-feel it-drive it, that is.
No need for continuous *****in and whinin about all the detriments of the X, Can somebody look on the bright side, at least its not as ugly as the new STI.
and as time will prove, the X will definitely be modifiable, from power/weight ratio perspective, simple as that
Yeah, I think the results are really flawed, especially considering that hitting 60 mph in second gear for the X takes going up to the 7600 rpm fuel cut-off. This means that with the motor having a misfiring issue around 7000, that they would have to shift before the 7000 mark, which means like 6800- 6900, and that's going to screw the pooch on the 0-60 and 1/4 mile time. This would also cripple the overall lap times, so I feel quite confident that when a healthy EVO X is run against the 9 again that it will beat it just as it has in Japan. And people always say, "well the JDM X is lighter than the USDM X," well so is the JDM EVO 9. The results should be the same here with a production ready model that isn't sick.
Last edited by pltek; Nov 30, 2007 at 05:44 AM.
agree with you again.
man its getting tiresome to listen to people who will always find a way to complain about the car that has not officially been released, be it weight, price, straight line performance, track performance (even when the X is crippled, which this one clearly is), streering feel, looks, options, etc
Clearly X will be a different car, it will have a different set of features than the previous version and it will draw a different crowd, mitsubishi makes no secrets about that, so make peace with it already complainers.
The most important thing for now is to recognize that and then simply either stick with your car or perhaps get a X, when it comes out and you have a chance to see it-feel it-drive it, that is.
No need for continuous *****in and whinin about all the detriments of the X, Can somebody look on the bright side, at least its not as ugly as the new STI.
man its getting tiresome to listen to people who will always find a way to complain about the car that has not officially been released, be it weight, price, straight line performance, track performance (even when the X is crippled, which this one clearly is), streering feel, looks, options, etc
Clearly X will be a different car, it will have a different set of features than the previous version and it will draw a different crowd, mitsubishi makes no secrets about that, so make peace with it already complainers.
The most important thing for now is to recognize that and then simply either stick with your car or perhaps get a X, when it comes out and you have a chance to see it-feel it-drive it, that is.
No need for continuous *****in and whinin about all the detriments of the X, Can somebody look on the bright side, at least its not as ugly as the new STI.
Yeah, I think the results are really flawed, especially considering that hitting 60 mph in second gear for the X takes going up to the 7600 rpm fuel cut-off. This means that with the motor having a misfiring issue around 7000, that they would have to shift before the 7000 mark, which means like 6800- 6900, and that's going to screw the pooch on the 0-60 and 1/4 mile time. This would also cripple the overall lap times, so I feel quite confident that when a healthy EVO X is run against the 9 again that it will beat it just as it has in Japan. And people always say, "well the JDM X is lighter than the USDM X," well so is the JDM EVO 9. The results should be the same here with a production ready model that isn't sick.
1) Doing the math, the car won't need to reach 7600rpm to hit 60. Based on tire size and gear ratios, the X GSR will hit 60 miles an hour between 7100-7200rpm. The IX hits 60 right at 7000rpm.
2) Don't start claiming that the car was misfiring. You don't know that and the article doesn't state that.
A close illustration of a production example, our early-build GSR did suffer from one "handbuilt" niggle: an asthmatic engine that seemed to suffer respiratory attacks near redline, a symptom Mitsubishi says was most likely an engine-control gremlin that would be sorted by production.
Under normal driving conditions, the four-banger, as well as all the mechanicals around it, performed flawlessly, but as the tach needle tickled 7000 rpm, the engine came down with a soft wheeze, a symptom that most likely cost the X a 10th or two at the track and dragstrip.
Last edited by atombomb33; Nov 30, 2007 at 08:01 AM.
evo's history. Subaru thinks it can compete with the M3 with the luxuries which in reality is actually worst than the new Mitusbishi's evo X interior. What is going on with these street legal rally cars these days?I feel the evo is changing from Semi slick tires to all seasons! You can say it's good at everything, master of none! I'm going to wait and comment after the RS is released. So far i feel my S2kCR is a worthy replacement for my evo MR in terms of handing and auto x. It's just too slow in the straights.
I'm sorry 14 sec at 96mph is unacceptable. My bone stock 03 evo ran 13.5's at over 100mph with 271hp.
Evolved Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,259
Likes: 0
From: ATLANTA
HMM.. HIGHER PRICE FOR LOWER PERFORMANCE... MITSU IS DOING EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID WITH TEH 2000 ECLIPSE ADN NOW NO ONE EVEN TAKES THAT POS CAR SERIOUSLY ANYMORE. HYUNDAI AND KIA ARE EATING MITSUS LUNCH ADN JUST IMAGINE IF THEY CAME OUT WITH AWD TURBO CARS OF THEIR OWN ...LOL IT WOULD THEN BE COMPLETLEY OVER..
Let's stick to the facts and not try to make things up. It's people that post unverified facts that start all the arguing. Using the facts and information we have at hand...
1) Doing the math, the car won't need to reach 7600rpm to hit 60. Based on tire size and gear ratios, the X GSR will hit 60 miles an hour between 7100-7200rpm. The IX hits 60 right at 7000rpm.
2) Don't start claiming that the car was misfiring. You don't know that and the article doesn't state that.
3) A "healthy" X is not going to somehow post significantly better numbers to make it beat the IX. Even if you give the X the 2/10ths that Motor Trend would allow, it still won't get it in the ballpark of the IX.
Also, for the USDM X to beat the USDM IX, it would have to be faster than the JDM X...http://www.caranddriver.com/assets/d...8_ss.pdf...ran a 5.0/13.8...which is physically impossible considering the extra weight.
1) Doing the math, the car won't need to reach 7600rpm to hit 60. Based on tire size and gear ratios, the X GSR will hit 60 miles an hour between 7100-7200rpm. The IX hits 60 right at 7000rpm.
2) Don't start claiming that the car was misfiring. You don't know that and the article doesn't state that.
3) A "healthy" X is not going to somehow post significantly better numbers to make it beat the IX. Even if you give the X the 2/10ths that Motor Trend would allow, it still won't get it in the ballpark of the IX.
Also, for the USDM X to beat the USDM IX, it would have to be faster than the JDM X...http://www.caranddriver.com/assets/d...8_ss.pdf...ran a 5.0/13.8...which is physically impossible considering the extra weight.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 27
From: Southern California
While it definitely sucks that its overall acceleration is quite slower than that of its predecessors, it still handles better despite the added weight. Give it a model year or two when they upgrade the car's power (which will happen for sure), and it'll catch up.
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, TX
Again deferring to the facts and market conditions; taking into consideration the decreasing value of the US dollar and therefore more expensive cost of imports, the value if the X - one of its initial selling points - may become significantly less importnat.
I saw an article on the upcoming Dodge Challenger, 37,000 425 hp, 0-60 in 4.5 175 MPH top speed and a 6 speed.
I know they are completely different animals, but that is a pretty good deal.
I have been a little dissapointed with the direction that both the STI and EVO have taken. They should have broadened the appeal of the lower to mid priced offernings and then created specialty versions (like the FQ series in Europe) that they could sell at significant premiums.
A car that runs a 1/4 mile in 14 seconds is not the type of value I consider to be importnat.....
I saw an article on the upcoming Dodge Challenger, 37,000 425 hp, 0-60 in 4.5 175 MPH top speed and a 6 speed.
I know they are completely different animals, but that is a pretty good deal.
I have been a little dissapointed with the direction that both the STI and EVO have taken. They should have broadened the appeal of the lower to mid priced offernings and then created specialty versions (like the FQ series in Europe) that they could sell at significant premiums.
A car that runs a 1/4 mile in 14 seconds is not the type of value I consider to be importnat.....
Evolving Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 485
Likes: 0
From: Alabama
i just wonder .....how much power are they gonna keep being able to squeeze out of a 4 cylinder engine as the years go on and on.....i mean the new evo needs like 325 hp or more in order to be fast....
Last edited by kilgoja; Nov 30, 2007 at 03:31 PM.