EVO X GSR Sold.....
I'm not a tuner shop owner, but all this doesn't make much sence to me businesswise.
Why would someone who's business is to sell performance part chose a discontinued model over a new model that is in the beginning of its production cycle? There will be no more IXs produced and the existing cars will rot in a few years. At the same time more and more Xs will appear creating demand for parts. Are you not looking into the future?
Secondly, if the car is slower, than I would have thought it will bring even more demand to make it at least as fast as IX.
I could understand selling the car from an owner's point of view - this is slow, I want a fast one. But as a tuner shop... I don't get it.
Now the GT-R. From what I heard, this car so high-tech, it will not be easy to tune at all. And who would need to mod a GT-R if it drives at par with GT3s and even Veyrons?
Why would someone who's business is to sell performance part chose a discontinued model over a new model that is in the beginning of its production cycle? There will be no more IXs produced and the existing cars will rot in a few years. At the same time more and more Xs will appear creating demand for parts. Are you not looking into the future?
Secondly, if the car is slower, than I would have thought it will bring even more demand to make it at least as fast as IX.
I could understand selling the car from an owner's point of view - this is slow, I want a fast one. But as a tuner shop... I don't get it.
Now the GT-R. From what I heard, this car so high-tech, it will not be easy to tune at all. And who would need to mod a GT-R if it drives at par with GT3s and even Veyrons?
Older cars are supported all the time. I don't understand your rationale here.
Newbie
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
From: Canada
I read the OP's post over and over again and i'm determined that it's a joke. This can't be a serious and legitmate post or reason to sell a $35k car with only 1500 miles. Not to mention that their "seasoned" drivers pulled off 1/4 times on a stock IX that can be run better by on a 110 degree day with zero launch and just rolling off the line. To me their information means nothing because it was done by inexperienced drivers with no variables to back it up. It's a joke, literally...
If they got a 13.2 for the IX and a 13.8 for the X, would you respect the posters decision? The difference between the two platforms would still be the same (according to his numbers). And he would still say that the IX is a better "starting" platform.
They also HAD the X in their hands and could develop mods for it thus take the opportinity to be the first on the growing market. But they chose to sell it because it is slower??? That's where I get lost.
And the new GT-R thing... Not a great car in terms of market for mods IMO.
Well, as far as I understand they already have the IX and will continue working on it despite the declining market and tight competition.
They also HAD the X in their hands and could develop mods for it thus take the opportinity to be the first on the growing market. But they chose to sell it because it is slower??? That's where I get lost.
And the new GT-R thing... Not a great car in terms of market for mods IMO.
They also HAD the X in their hands and could develop mods for it thus take the opportinity to be the first on the growing market. But they chose to sell it because it is slower??? That's where I get lost.
And the new GT-R thing... Not a great car in terms of market for mods IMO.
And who cares whether the GT-R can be modded or not? The car is already an 11-sec ride, has the "refinement", has the suspension, and drivetrain out the box. It will probably crush the EVO (any year) in AutoX and RR right off the showroom floor!
I love it when people get there panties all twisted up for nothing.
Let me state some facts, we did this for us... not the Evom community.
If I am going to spend another 33K for an EVO I want it to feel like the IX I bought for 33K. 2 years ago.
Also please do not act like we don't know what’s up, we mod and tune our own IX. If you go to the drag racing forum you will see we pulled a 12.1 with an Intake and TBE on our IX.
( https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...3&postcount=20 ) I know that’s not the best time, but it’s still a lot better them most of you on a TBE and intake.
I am one of the few people on here who had an X and IX to play with; this is what I did with them, what are you doing?
As someone put it above we sold it while it was HOT and in demand, the day I decided to sell the X it was gone. So I got what I wanted and only spent $500 instead of 33K.
Let me state some facts, we did this for us... not the Evom community.
If I am going to spend another 33K for an EVO I want it to feel like the IX I bought for 33K. 2 years ago.
Also please do not act like we don't know what’s up, we mod and tune our own IX. If you go to the drag racing forum you will see we pulled a 12.1 with an Intake and TBE on our IX.
( https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...3&postcount=20 ) I know that’s not the best time, but it’s still a lot better them most of you on a TBE and intake.
I am one of the few people on here who had an X and IX to play with; this is what I did with them, what are you doing?
As someone put it above we sold it while it was HOT and in demand, the day I decided to sell the X it was gone. So I got what I wanted and only spent $500 instead of 33K.
They had a choice to spend money (no matter how you slice it - it's money spent) on research and development for the IX or the X. They chose the IX. It would be the same as me taking my money and buying a X and then trying to see what the costs of making it fast would be when I already have an VIII. Whatever their agenda, you can't bash them for their decision. They already said they weren't bashing the car.
And who cares whether the GT-R can be modded or not? The car is already an 11-sec ride, has the "refinement", has the suspension, and drivetrain out the box. It will probably crush the EVO (any year) in AutoX and RR right off the showroom floor!
Last edited by Mojito; Feb 29, 2008 at 02:19 PM.
This reply is not intended to be a flame whatsoever, but questionable data needs to be questioned.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the 10 is an Evo. The fact that it didn't seem to be in your mind does not change that hard fact.
Regarding your data, I would hope that a driver with 10+ years of experience would not have a 16 second variance on his Evo IX roadcourse runs. Perhaps that was a typo or the first driver fell asleep at the wheel for those 16 seconds? And the second driver had a 12 second variation around the course? I don't have ten years of road racing experience yet myself, but if I have more than a 3 second variance on a two and a half minute course, I'd be retiring my helmet. Good grief! 16 seconds gives you enough time to wreck the car, jump out, pull out your cell, and dial the number for the towing company. What were you doing in those 16 seconds?
And the drag racing runs are very lackluster for both cars. According to dragtimes.com, HRP is at an elevation of only 38 feet. Having all wheel drive cars that have proven to trap 101-104mph bone stock and only manage to barely break out of the 14s on one run does not bode well for the drag racing numbers either. Were you upshifting at 5000rpm? Were you starting in second gear? Help me understand these numbers. I had a stock WRX wagon back in 2002 and managed better times than all but two of those you are reporting here, and it had a 70 horsepower handicap running in the summer at 550 feet higher elevation. What gives?
Lastly we have driver #1 with a 3 second variation on a 30 second autocross course, but in the X this time. The very first time I ever autocrossed in my life I did not have a 3 second variance that entire day. What in the world happened to him to have a 10% variance in run times?
To anybody that has spent any time on track at all, these numbers make no sense at all. Would you care to explain them?
Actually, that is incorrect. Since you wanted to point out that the X is not a real Evo "in your opinion", I am happy to point out that your IX is not a GSR in reality. The US Spec IXs did not have SAYC and thus were never marketed as Mitsu as a GSR. Just a little point of data about real Evos, moving right along...
The variations in times, particularly on the autocross, do not bode well for these drivers at all.
I hope you have better results with your GTR. Good luck.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the 10 is an Evo. The fact that it didn't seem to be in your mind does not change that hard fact.
Regarding your data, I would hope that a driver with 10+ years of experience would not have a 16 second variance on his Evo IX roadcourse runs. Perhaps that was a typo or the first driver fell asleep at the wheel for those 16 seconds? And the second driver had a 12 second variation around the course? I don't have ten years of road racing experience yet myself, but if I have more than a 3 second variance on a two and a half minute course, I'd be retiring my helmet. Good grief! 16 seconds gives you enough time to wreck the car, jump out, pull out your cell, and dial the number for the towing company. What were you doing in those 16 seconds?
And the drag racing runs are very lackluster for both cars. According to dragtimes.com, HRP is at an elevation of only 38 feet. Having all wheel drive cars that have proven to trap 101-104mph bone stock and only manage to barely break out of the 14s on one run does not bode well for the drag racing numbers either. Were you upshifting at 5000rpm? Were you starting in second gear? Help me understand these numbers. I had a stock WRX wagon back in 2002 and managed better times than all but two of those you are reporting here, and it had a 70 horsepower handicap running in the summer at 550 feet higher elevation. What gives?
Lastly we have driver #1 with a 3 second variation on a 30 second autocross course, but in the X this time. The very first time I ever autocrossed in my life I did not have a 3 second variance that entire day. What in the world happened to him to have a 10% variance in run times?
To anybody that has spent any time on track at all, these numbers make no sense at all. Would you care to explain them?
Actually, that is incorrect. Since you wanted to point out that the X is not a real Evo "in your opinion", I am happy to point out that your IX is not a GSR in reality. The US Spec IXs did not have SAYC and thus were never marketed as Mitsu as a GSR. Just a little point of data about real Evos, moving right along...
The variations in times, particularly on the autocross, do not bode well for these drivers at all.
I hope you have better results with your GTR. Good luck.
Very well said. The sad thing is there will be some uneducated X shoppers that read this "tuner's" post and actually believe this test.
I think I'll stick to comparisons done by trustworthy sources. So far, Car & Driver, Road & Track, Motor Trend and Edmunds have all proved the X is slower at the drag strip, but faster around certain roadcourses.
- non-biased IX owner
You guys are looking at the times and I'm not figuring out why you're trolling the OP for this. Would it have made a difference if the times were in the realm of what most magazines made?
If they got a 13.2 for the IX and a 13.8 for the X, would you respect the posters decision? The difference between the two platforms would still be the same (according to his numbers). And he would still say that the IX is a better "starting" platform.
If they got a 13.2 for the IX and a 13.8 for the X, would you respect the posters decision? The difference between the two platforms would still be the same (according to his numbers). And he would still say that the IX is a better "starting" platform.
agree !
and to FULLBOOSTRACING .. thanks for the honest review on BOTH cars and actually did a REAL TEST with them .. instead of basing your facts on something someone has read to you from car & driver ..
Last edited by xme; Feb 29, 2008 at 02:21 PM.
Very well said. The sad thing is there will be some uneducated X shoppers that read this "tuner's" post and actually believe this test.
I think I'll stick to comparisons done by trustworthy sources. So far, Car & Driver, Road & Track, Motor Trend and Edmunds have all proved the X is slower at the drag strip, but faster around certain roadcourses.
- non-biased IX owner
I think I'll stick to comparisons done by trustworthy sources. So far, Car & Driver, Road & Track, Motor Trend and Edmunds have all proved the X is slower at the drag strip, but faster around certain roadcourses.
- non-biased IX owner
I just thought because our numbers were off from what the mags were putting down everyone would want to see it.
THATS ALL THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO IT HAHAHAH
Fairwell to our X pic
You will be missed, kind of
Last edited by BCOZEVO; Feb 29, 2008 at 02:26 PM.
all things being equal, did both drivers operate both vehicles? Sorry if I missed that, but I from what I read there is no way to distinguish between driver and car disparities in this case... Did I miss something? I realize you suggest they both know what they are doing, but you'd want to put the same driver in each car..right?
all things being equal, did both drivers operate both vehicles? Sorry if I missed that, but I from what I read there is no way to distinguish between driver and car disparities in this case... Did I miss something? I realize you suggest they both know what they are doing, but you'd want to put the same driver in each car..right?
