Point made. Another point i would say is that the slower cars will benifit more ebing the bottom end of performance rises just as quickly as the top (in proportion)....the middle is harder.

But to prove that the evo has not come as far as it could have, can you name another performance car in the mid range that has held up to a satisfactory level of advancement. The only one I can think of that has stayed on par without going up massively in price is the GTR which is a phenomenal price, but still much more. The m3 has advanced nicely, but at double the price. 911 has advanced leaps and bounds since 92, but again, pricey then and pricey now.

 

Quite a handful actually:

Double the price of EVO I, now double the price of EVO X on the successors:

Porsche entry level - 968 to current Boxster/Cayman
190E 2.5-16 - C63 (190E 2.5-16 was like 80k back then, it is actually a little cheaper now)
S4 - current S4 or even RS4
Viper - current Viper (weigh the same, but power went up 50%, easier to drive)
Supra - Well it is just the timing where EVO I happen to start right before Mk IV is released but it is a huge jump from Mk III to Mk IV interms of performance. However it is discontinued indefinately.
Majority of TVR lines although now the company is pretty much gone.

Close price range:
CRX Si-R - Civic Type-R
Nissan Silvia - from S13 to S15
Ford Mustang - Fox body to current
Chevrolet Corvette - C4 to C6
Lotus entry level - Elan to Elise S2 (it is actually cheaper than EVO in UK)

 

i dont think this is a fair question...

youd have to calculate many other factors into the equation... such as inflation... and location.... and purpose of the car and many other factors and on top of that the car isnt the same detuned with its sole purpose was only to sell enough for it to enter a rally comp. now its targeted (in my opinion) to the evo fans that are now growing up and in there early 30's, i myself am just 18.. but thats what it just seems liek to me hahah =] PLUS its Mitsubishi's life line. it needs to sell and keep afloat in the American market.

the car has surly evolved.. has it evolved in the direction you would have liked it to? well thats unique to everyones needs.

but thats just my opinion and im pretty new to all this =]

 

and its 3:10am here hahah ill probbaly come back and laff at what i just wrote hahah

 

No no, what you've written is totally legit and I agree with you. But my argument is solely based on performance improvement on EVO and other cars' performance improvement in the same period of time.

We can't ignore the fact that performance cars in general are not profittable to companies. Generally there are only two reasons a company would produce such car, for homologization for racing, as you mentioned, and to change/improve the company image.

All the cars I listed out that probably did better interms of improving performance all have improvement in combination of safety & regulations (mainly emission), reliability, comfort (including size), looks (although controversial) and/or price & value. If a car can't keep up with changing demand and regulations, they will be cut. You can see this from NSX, Supra, MR-2, Silvia, all TVRs, GTO (3000GT), FTO (couldn't keep up with ITR overall), Sprinter (AE101, AE111) etc etc.

However, all this doesn't change the fact that EVO failed to improve its performance as well as some other cars have.

I guess I should just close this discussion, it seems no one likes it lol

 

Evo 1 would have been lower mid 20's us and evo X is 32,xxx, no where near double.
E class and all mercedes have jumped leaps and bounds, but still expensive
S4 has improved in performance percentage wise on par. RS4 is a different story
Supra made a big leap, but to be fair, the pre IV ones were not so great
Viper has not increased dramatically in performance....not percentage wise in relation to its price class.
TVR also set the bar pretty low in the early 90s.

Silvia has not improved dramatically from 91 to 2001...i know these cars very well
Mustang - low bar....average improvements
Corvette - Expected gains at a good price point
Elan of the mid 90s was crap. Cant compare to an elise, totally different line

I dont really think any of these examples prove the point. Drive and evo 1 and an evo X and there is a substantial difference. Made less of a difference th some, and more than others. Its also safe to say that its hard to improve on a very good concept.

 

I actually do still mildly agree with the basis of your point, but I do not think its as dramatic as may appear. The types of cars that have advanced massively are supercars, german luxury brands, and average commuter cars like the maxima.

They key to make the evo seem more advanced would be additional power. The handling and brakes are already on the highest level for the size, style, and weight. To reduce weight without compromising the livability would be very expensive. I would also say the SST is a big advancement, and I would not doubt if the XI is a notable advance as well

 

Wow, you understood this thread?? =XX

I had to click on it to find out wtf does "EVO X VS 2008, EVO I VS 1992" means....

 

How can you compare a homologation car to the rest of these? Mitsubishi (and Subaru) had to deal with displacement limits, size limits, and a host of other factors from the Evo I through the TME (or VII, arguably). Once they broke from the homologation rules with the VIII, then you could start comparisons. And when you look at sports cars, the 6 years we've seen the Evo have been typical of most other sports cars.

 

i am sorry i miss the point of this post

 

you still need a 2liter engine in the rally. And the evolution is all around the world primery used as a rally car , Even today. So that is why they sticked with the 2liter engine. the subi still using 2liter in the rally. fact the 2l subi engine is better then this 2.5 l .
So it is still the limitation on the engine side ..

 

I've been searching around but cant seem to find the info.. (and subsequently cautious of getting flamed for posting this)

Between each Evo, how has it changed?? Because between the IX and the X is the first time i've heard positive as well as negative (weight, etc) changes to the evo. I read this was the same impression between the change from VI to VII. So how did the evo change between each generation?

 

Wiki - Lancer Evolution

 

I know. The Evo X road car is not a homologation car though. They could do whatever they wanted, just like Subaru went with the 2.5 flat 4 after they stopped making homologation cars.

The Evo I through Evo 7 were "slowed" relative to other cars by the need to adhere to rally specifications, especially displacement of the engine.

 

"The Evo I through Evo 7 were "slowed" relative to other cars by the need to adhere to rally specifications, especially displacement of the engine."

sorry i don't get this one./my bad english/ would you explain to me ,what are you said here to me?