Fifth Gear pits Ford Focus RS vs. Mitsubishi Evo X
Jun 13, 2009, 05:30 PM
#33
Newbie
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both awesome cars.
The FQ300 is essentially the same as our GSR.
The Focus RS goes for 25000 pounds while the Evo goes for 28000 pounds. That's roughly a $5000 price difference in favor of the Ford.
I think Ford deserves credit for a hell of a car. That Ford was right there with the Evo without the benefit of the amazing AWD system. Where would our car be in that race without that system?
The FQ300 is essentially the same as our GSR.
The Focus RS goes for 25000 pounds while the Evo goes for 28000 pounds. That's roughly a $5000 price difference in favor of the Ford.
I think Ford deserves credit for a hell of a car. That Ford was right there with the Evo without the benefit of the amazing AWD system. Where would our car be in that race without that system?
Jun 14, 2009, 09:23 AM
#34
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I'm sick of is; magazines and others pairing the EVO against FWD cars and saying "look it's still 2 seconds slower than the EVO, but only 2 seconds"! A second or even two = a huge cap... Never the less the Cobalt SS and Focus RS will not out run an EVO on the track! Like I said prior , the SS vs. RS would have been a legitimate race, not some "mamby pamby" attempt to try and de-throne the EVO!
P.S. I was never a huge fan of 5th gear, top gear is a much better show and they pair the EVO with Subies and AWD super cars.
P.S. I was never a huge fan of 5th gear, top gear is a much better show and they pair the EVO with Subies and AWD super cars.
Jun 14, 2009, 01:40 PM
#41
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We all know the true track car is the GSR & not the MR... the MR is chosen to show off the next technological evolution of Mitsu cars for being equipped with the new TC-SST tranny. The Evo should always be evolving, after all that's what the word "evolution" means.
Last edited by tipoytm; Jun 14, 2009 at 01:42 PM.
Jun 14, 2009, 02:37 PM
#42
Jun 14, 2009, 02:50 PM
#43
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes the GSR is the track car of the two, the MR is someone who's looking for performance but doesn't want the daily hassles of driving a street legal rally car and it's go-kart like suspension/transmission. The MR is slower than the GSR on the strip and on the track, there's no SS (stock) that would beat the GSR, you haters or non-believer can say what you will... If you read the motor trend article the SS was fast but never beat the MR. It all depends on the driver, tires and weather conditions! The laws of physics do apply, even to the EVO! Stock for Stock it will slay the SS in a straight line or on the track. From the magazines I read the stock SS does 0-60 in 5.5 and the qt in 13.9, the GSR time has varied but remains in between 4.7 to 5.0 to 60 and 13.5 in the qt. My information is correct, I spent 30 minutes reading the article on the multi car test in which the EVO and Cobalt SS was in, as well a few others.
P.S. And the SS has no lift shift which the EVO doesn't and still the SS falls short!
P.S. And the SS has no lift shift which the EVO doesn't and still the SS falls short!
Jun 14, 2009, 03:17 PM
#44
Ummmm....the Evo isn't a street legal rally car, Mitsubishi left rallying some time ago and you'd have to heavily modify an Evo X (or an VIII or a IX) to actually rally it. The MR is also the faster of the two, supposedly at least. It has better suspension, better brakes and the trick transmission that does all the work for you. If you actually read the Car and Driver Lightning Lap or the Motortrend article, you'll notice that the SS is within a second of the Evo (or it's faster). In fact, here's the articles
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...p_2008_feature
http://www.motortrend.com/features/p...ing/index.html
So in the Lightning lap comparison, the Evo X MR ran a 3:13.3 at 78.2 MPH while the Cobalt ran a 3:13.0 at 78.3 MPH, pretty close if you ask me (and if you want to consider that a big gap, the Evo still lost).
In the Motortrend test, the Cobalt managed a 1:47.751 while the Evo managed a 1:47.713. So they differ by less than 4 one-hundreths of a second, hardly a big difference (especially if you want to consider 3 tenths insignificant).
If you look at the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, the Cobalt manages a 5.4 and 13.9 at 104 MPH. The Evo X manages a 4.9 (5.1) and 13.6 (13.7) at 100.9 (100.2) MPH (brackets indicate MR time). Now then, given that the Cobalt has a higher 0-60 time and a higher trap speed, it's reasonable to suggest that it's faster once it has grip meaning in anything but a dig race, the Cobalt will win. The Evo isn't that fast from a roll, I was at the track yesterday and even with just a stage 2 setup on the wimpy stock TD04 turbo, I could rather easily pull away from the Evo MR that was there and I actually had to let off the throttle completely to let him pass.
In conclusion, your information is not correct.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...p_2008_feature
http://www.motortrend.com/features/p...ing/index.html
So in the Lightning lap comparison, the Evo X MR ran a 3:13.3 at 78.2 MPH while the Cobalt ran a 3:13.0 at 78.3 MPH, pretty close if you ask me (and if you want to consider that a big gap, the Evo still lost).
In the Motortrend test, the Cobalt managed a 1:47.751 while the Evo managed a 1:47.713. So they differ by less than 4 one-hundreths of a second, hardly a big difference (especially if you want to consider 3 tenths insignificant).
If you look at the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, the Cobalt manages a 5.4 and 13.9 at 104 MPH. The Evo X manages a 4.9 (5.1) and 13.6 (13.7) at 100.9 (100.2) MPH (brackets indicate MR time). Now then, given that the Cobalt has a higher 0-60 time and a higher trap speed, it's reasonable to suggest that it's faster once it has grip meaning in anything but a dig race, the Cobalt will win. The Evo isn't that fast from a roll, I was at the track yesterday and even with just a stage 2 setup on the wimpy stock TD04 turbo, I could rather easily pull away from the Evo MR that was there and I actually had to let off the throttle completely to let him pass.
In conclusion, your information is not correct.
Jun 14, 2009, 04:41 PM
#45
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every magazine varies in time, if your racing from a roll your more than likely street racing! Once again the 291 hp goes to all 4 wheels not 260 straight to 2! I've seen many japanese track events with stock GSR's pulling away from MR's! All I'm saying is, if the two were to do battle in stock form the EVO X GSR will beat the SS on the strip and on the track (if both drivers were equally talented)!
The GSR beats the STi on a track in some cases and the STi has beat the MR, you tube some videos and you'll see what I'm saying! It's determined by many things, don't rely on magazines articles. The SS is limited, where the GSR is not, if you want to disprove the EVO maybe you should join the SS forums... Bottom line, the MR is the slower of the two, they should track test the GSR and it will beat the SS as well as the MR. The MR is also heavier than the GSR. I've also seen magazines where the GSR/MR is pulling 1.0 g's on lateral skid pads, the SS will never achieve that (stock)! In that case my friends, the X does out handle the SS, sounds like driver error to me... But once again it varies from magazine to magazine, why am I even trying to justify myself against your claims?
Here's the stats on the SS motor trend!
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ive/index.html
Here's the stats on the GSR via car and driver, your information is also incorrect!
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...st+page-4.html
BTW This is my last post on this topic, were off the threads original topic!
The GSR beats the STi on a track in some cases and the STi has beat the MR, you tube some videos and you'll see what I'm saying! It's determined by many things, don't rely on magazines articles. The SS is limited, where the GSR is not, if you want to disprove the EVO maybe you should join the SS forums... Bottom line, the MR is the slower of the two, they should track test the GSR and it will beat the SS as well as the MR. The MR is also heavier than the GSR. I've also seen magazines where the GSR/MR is pulling 1.0 g's on lateral skid pads, the SS will never achieve that (stock)! In that case my friends, the X does out handle the SS, sounds like driver error to me... But once again it varies from magazine to magazine, why am I even trying to justify myself against your claims?
Here's the stats on the SS motor trend!
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ive/index.html
Here's the stats on the GSR via car and driver, your information is also incorrect!
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...st+page-4.html
BTW This is my last post on this topic, were off the threads original topic!
Last edited by Xtremist; Jun 14, 2009 at 04:55 PM.