Seriously when you start a thread with "Let me start off with full disclosure… some people consider here consider me an EvoX hater." you lose some cred points there buddy. Also I have many doubts on your impartial stance for your test drive, I mean it literally sounds like you just test drove it to bash it. Plus a lot of what you say just doesn't make sense, for instance smashing the gas and it goes no where??? Interesting, because so many have commented on how much stronger the X feels down low, or did you mash the gas at 40mph in 5th gear. Dude seriously this thread is pointless and your about as impartial as Michael Jackson is normal.

 

Yup and with coilovers a swaybar cat back and all of 240 AWDHP @ 3510 full of fuel stock tires brakes and wheels the car went 6 seconds (1:30 FLAT at streets of willow) faster than motor trend's test and 4 seconds faster than the IX's (same test) STOCK FOR STOCK ,Oh on this track I KILLED the IX's stock brakes after 3 HARD laps (when I ran one last year)and the X took everything we could throw at it all day. Did you defeat the esc? because thats what you are describing in your HAMMERING of a new car you don't own.... and I realy like the new look with the car at track height

 

I mean what is the real point of this thread, do you honestly think people are going to take your poorly written bias review seriously??? I mean who should I take more seriously-

Corner A (DrSmile)- A person who is obviously been a EVO X hater, and still is as far as am I concerned. A person who is trying to pass themselves off as impartial, yet writes a review that does such a poor attempt at covering up their obvious hatred and bias opinions.

or

Corner B- The many positive and impartial reviews from Edmunds, Motor Trend, Car and Driver, Road and Track, Vishnu, AMS, Dynoflash, Vivid, and so many others.

I think I will side with Corner B. Or people can just test drive it and decide for themselves.

 

......I don't mind honest discussion and disagreements, but we're going way past that. Flaming, baiting, name calling, and random douchbaggery are rampant here, and it's going to end. Right here and now. If folks cannot post in a responsible and mature way, I'm going to start dropping the hammer. This is the one and only warning I will give to the posters in the EvoX forums, and this thread in particular. Do not mistake my kindness for weakness. This forum is for the enjoyment of all. Please post wisely. Carry on.
J.D.

 

The review is very biased indeed unlike all the other reviews out there.

 

yep you just need to pick up what you find interesting.

what Robi said is right:
"Yup and with coilovers a swaybar cat back and all of 240 AWDHP @ 3510 full of fuel stock tires brakes and wheels the car went 6 seconds (1:30 FLAT at streets of willow) faster than motor trend's test and 4 seconds faster than the IX's (same test) STOCK FOR STOCK"

but he had a prepped suspension vs the factory. What did you think, it will be slower? The wheel aligment and the suspension geometry is far a way from the street set up , it set it up for race. And the evos have plenty of power from the beginning to run good times , so when you set up the handling even better you can achive very good times with only suspension mods.
That is why if you track your car ,first handling + weight reduction. And that will give you more advantige then any hp gain. Big thumbs up for Robi work !

 

typical post of an "IX hater!" everybody is entitled to their opinion but calling names because you don't like their review is pure rubbish. I reserve judgement for the X but that doesn't make me dislike it. I noticed the interior too. If you want to make it look like CF make it at least believable(as most have noted before). Not a lot of trunk space, either.

 

well for the power gain for the X is not that suprising since have TWO upgraded cams... MIVEC remember? Just like in the 8 vs 9. as soon as you cammed the 8 the power equiled out. So that for the power gain. I really couldn't test drive the X yesterday , but the seats doesnt seemed to better then the IX,/i spend an hour in it / the truth is i think the IX seats are nicer. I also agree with the instrument panel. Pluss the stereo what the car had /we didn't adjust it yet/ it sucked. No place to replace the radio for gauges or an other one, etc. Might be they will come up some new idea to replace the factory some how.. looks to me you need to change the whole dashboard to get a new radio.
see its like everything is hidden, no RPM gauge in the midle ,nice and big, etc.
sorry i don't have a whole dashboard picture but you get an idea:



vs VIII, clean and simple:



other things i cant judge yet , so no comment there. But looks promising for me. I'm still a fan for the X.

The X looks very nice in person, we will road test it soon!

 

I'd bet that the flatter power curve on the X makes it feel significantly slower than an IX. That's the upside to a peaky motor -- it feels really quick. But actual performance has more to do with power under the curve. It's all well and good to talk about magazine numbers and which car may be faster on the track, but for most people, the way the car feels is most important. Can't blame 'em. In DrSmile's shoes I'd keep the modded IX too.

Now you want to know what fun is? The new STI making 374 ft-lbs of torque to the wheels with a tune and TBE. Yikes! I bet that's a blast to drive. And with a little squirt of meth, Sponaugle pushed it up to 401 ft-lbs. I'd say Subaru has got the EJ257 coming along nicely! I'd like to shoehorn one of the new motors into my '06 .

 

not just that , the heavier the car is it is feels more solid and seems more rigid and seems more well put it together. You can experienced this feeling very easily, when you sit in the IX RS and then you sit in the IX MR... weight difference is margin and the feeling difference is hughe! But the actual rigidity is a same. Well i think in the turn, under high load the RS will have less body torsion due less weight.
And it is a same chassie, line/IX/ etc.. Now the weight difference between the IX and the X, a lot more then the IX RS vs IX MR. senses can be cheaten easy... just remeber that.

Of course you need more rigid body when you got a lot heavier car, but the more rigidity have to hold more weight... So when the more rigid body get a high load in the turn, how much more rigid actually is, versus the less rigid but lighter body... So how big is the difference really?

of course you can work on both ways , but we talking about stock. Not hard to lighten up the X but a mean time not hard to stiffen up the IX also, so i leave that debate.

and i'm NOT the X hater, so pls. leave that out, but i 'm happy to discuss it. This is a way we learn, not to call names.

 

When Mitsu developed this car, one of their goals was to reach a larger audience. Having said that, some people who spend the $40k for it will expect the car to feel stronger than the previous gens. Knowing that won't be the case unless you follow an upgrade path and risk warranty loss may not be in the best interest for people that aren't racetrack enthusiasts. Having said that, I think Mitsu should've just leaned out the AFR (like the tuners are doing) and released a car that feels stronger than a stock IX. It would've probably yielded more sales IMO.

Just my 2 cents..

 

That's not comletely accurate. The X has been proven by ALL magazine reviews to be slower 0-60, slower 1/4 mile and slower around a track than the IX.

Also, his review wasn't a discussion about modding the car. You should try to keep the thread on topic. There are plenty of threads to talk about modding potential. What if he doesn't intend to mod the X? That's his perogative and he should be dissappointed in a car that requires modding to get it to the level of his satisfaction.

He never said he redlined the car. You shouldn't assume that he did. And, in an ideal world people wouldn't test drive cars hard and not buy them. But, in reality this happens with every performance car out there unless the dealership has a dedicated demo car. Doesn't seem like that was the case at this dealership.

I hope your saying this sarcastically. All the reviews by anyone (even magazines) are not 100% objective. There is always a bias. Magazines make their money because the car companies pay for advertising in their magazine. In return, the magazines write glowing reviews of their cars. You scratch our back, we'll scratch yours...happens everyday in the automotive industry with the car mags.

 

well i try to find any magazin articles its stated the any new car model is not better then the old one... i couldn't. So probably never happend ... .

 

Well, all the articles about the X do say it is a "better overall car" but none say that it is faster.

But, this guy's opinion is that it's not a better overall car. And, for him it very well might not be a better overall car. And that's his perogative to believe that.

Not everyone will like the X. Heck, I've driven plenty of "great overall cars" that I don't like at all. Just a matter of preference

 

Good Lord! I just joined this forum to try to learn more about the Evo X and I can't believe the animosity on here! The guy gave his impression of the car and a couple of guys jump down his throat! Unbelievable. Just reading their posts it seems like he got deep under their skin simply by posting a review they didn't like. It's just a car. Maybe he's been guilty of jumping on the two guys in particular who are bashing him in here? I don't have any background into that. But, geez, leave it alone and be the bigger man. Let people read his review and make their own opinion.

Anyhow, thanks to the OP for the review. It's actually refreshing to read a bad review since every other review seems to be overly biased to the positive side. Sounds interesting your comparisons against a IX and how this car feels more like a BMW/Audi. I'll have to check it out for myself when we get some at the local dealer!