MR vs. GSR...for real
It's a wholely difference experience, driving an MR.
To say you're "more connected" or "less connected" is a bit of a weak definition, in my mind.
In the curves, when both hands need to be firmly on the wheel to maintain control and balance, the MR is, to me, better. The motor, and we share the same motor, mind you, needs to be in a certain range of RPMs to make power.
The MR does that well. It knows what the motor can do, and is damn good at keeping it in the range it needs to be in.
In my mind, it does it smoother and less abrasively than I can personally do in my GSR. The twin clutch is faster, the twin clutch is better than I am. I'm not afraid to admit that. The twin clutch is going to be better and faster than most people.
But, it's a feel thing. I prefer the 5 speed. I prefer the feel of the clutch, the "control" aspect of it all.
Power wise, I was also worried about the long term survivability of the SST; clutches in a manual are more of a "known" to me.
To say you're "more connected" or "less connected" is a bit of a weak definition, in my mind.
In the curves, when both hands need to be firmly on the wheel to maintain control and balance, the MR is, to me, better. The motor, and we share the same motor, mind you, needs to be in a certain range of RPMs to make power.
The MR does that well. It knows what the motor can do, and is damn good at keeping it in the range it needs to be in.
In my mind, it does it smoother and less abrasively than I can personally do in my GSR. The twin clutch is faster, the twin clutch is better than I am. I'm not afraid to admit that. The twin clutch is going to be better and faster than most people.
But, it's a feel thing. I prefer the 5 speed. I prefer the feel of the clutch, the "control" aspect of it all.
Power wise, I was also worried about the long term survivability of the SST; clutches in a manual are more of a "known" to me.
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
From: Austin TX
My race car is a manual, so I want to drive a manual on the street.
I'd never argue that the auto-manuals aren't superior from a performance perspective (they are), but since nobody here is earning their living based on laptimes, it really boils down to one thing: Entertainment. Which one is more entertaining to drive?
That's for the individual to answer. Form me, uber aggresive back country drives and track use point in the SST's favor, normal driving and even taking the back way home from work, I still prefer the manual.
Evolved Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO
I hate automatics, and learned to drive a stick when I was 9! I have always preferred to drive a manual car, but when it came to the Evo, I wanted two things out of it. Fast, and convenience. This car gives me the convenience of leaving it in drive, and just letting the tranny do its thing. IMO, it still acts like a typical automatic, shifting at the wrong times, and downshifting when it's in turbo spool range and doesn't need to downshift. However, I find myself driving it like a manual about 90% of the time. I hardly ever use the paddles because you have to have both hands on the wheel at 8-10 and 2-4. That's lame, especially since most of my steering wheel control comes from my left hand which is on the downshift paddle. If they had been really smart, they would have split the paddles on each side of the wheel so there's a +/- on each side, giving the driver three options. However, I find myself shifting with the stick most of the time.
I wouldn't get a stick unless I really wanted to tune the hell out of the car, and that's not my intention.
I LOVE MY MR!
I wouldn't get a stick unless I really wanted to tune the hell out of the car, and that's not my intention.
I LOVE MY MR!
Before I get to the meat of this, let me say that I love manual cars. I currently own a Legacy Turbo and have driven all kinds of cars, from old Nissan's to modern Lotus boxes. I love 'em!
Now, as someone looking at buying the 2010 Evo I had a few chances to drive the GSR and once, on my near perfect winding roads in upstate NY...and just a few days ago I drove a lightly tuned MR on those same roads. Here's what I learned.
The MR tranny is simply amazing. I truly think that most GSR owners have not driven it on a real road with any enthusiasm. How could they unless they know someone with one? And these cars are pretty rare.
The MR is such a radically effective way for the driving enthusiast to have fun that it's only a matter of time before transmissions of this type are found in many sports cars. I've driven the Audi and Porsche...not even close. Even the GT-R falls short of this execution. You've all read about it. The car's on board computer makes shifts bases on over a dozen factors in the car's up to the second geometry. Sounds impressive. And for the extra cash a MR costs it's easy to cry foul and go for the traditional 5 speed. But traditionalists are living in a bubble.
The fact...and it is very much a fact..is that few drivers can outperform what the SST does. It's that good. And yet it still demands skill as your senses and reflexes extend further into the chassis dynamics like never before. Finally...you are left to pilot a fast car with almost no distraction. It's almost like a part of you IS shifting and doing it perfectly, while leaving the major parts of the brain to the exciting business of perfect steering. On a real road, with twists and turns, two good drivers would have fun in the MR and GSR, but I think the MR is MORE fun and will always be quicker. It'll take a very professional driver to extract that perfection from a GSR.
Traditionalists will moan that the 5 speed is all about building skills, but I actually think 99% of drivers with such a car hit a wall. Since they're not pro's they haven't the chance to push the vehicle dynamics further and so they sit in a well populated zone of "better than average" driving ability. But they don't get much beyond that.
An MR changes all of that. It allows you to expand on your abilities to the point that when you DO drive a 5 or 6 speed, your inherent understanding of chassis dynamics have been permanently improved. It's a remarkable experience.
And yet...with all of that said I may STILL opt for the 5 speed! I'm 46...and old man for this type of car....but I still like my women with real breasts and my Cheerios plain. I just want to point out that the transmission in the MR is ALL ABOUT ultimate driving enthusiasts. Perhaps more so than the 5 speed. It elevates the Evo to a whole new level, just like the S-AWD and AYC do. It makes the car into an "Ultimate Driving Machine" in a way even a M3 can't compete with. And yes, I've enjoyed a new M3. As soon as the M3 gets a tranny this good and AWD I may consider one.
Obviously if you want gobs of power, go with the 5 speed. But a lightly tuned MR was very fast and I'd toast a lot of faster cars on a twisty road with no problem. Evo's may be course...but they also have real finesse on such roads. Adding power may make it into a rocket, but the finesse is really what the Evo is all about. The MR takes that to a logical conclusion. It does not reduce driver involvement. It enhances it hugely.
Cheers,
Rob
Now, as someone looking at buying the 2010 Evo I had a few chances to drive the GSR and once, on my near perfect winding roads in upstate NY...and just a few days ago I drove a lightly tuned MR on those same roads. Here's what I learned.
The MR tranny is simply amazing. I truly think that most GSR owners have not driven it on a real road with any enthusiasm. How could they unless they know someone with one? And these cars are pretty rare.
The MR is such a radically effective way for the driving enthusiast to have fun that it's only a matter of time before transmissions of this type are found in many sports cars. I've driven the Audi and Porsche...not even close. Even the GT-R falls short of this execution. You've all read about it. The car's on board computer makes shifts bases on over a dozen factors in the car's up to the second geometry. Sounds impressive. And for the extra cash a MR costs it's easy to cry foul and go for the traditional 5 speed. But traditionalists are living in a bubble.
The fact...and it is very much a fact..is that few drivers can outperform what the SST does. It's that good. And yet it still demands skill as your senses and reflexes extend further into the chassis dynamics like never before. Finally...you are left to pilot a fast car with almost no distraction. It's almost like a part of you IS shifting and doing it perfectly, while leaving the major parts of the brain to the exciting business of perfect steering. On a real road, with twists and turns, two good drivers would have fun in the MR and GSR, but I think the MR is MORE fun and will always be quicker. It'll take a very professional driver to extract that perfection from a GSR.
Traditionalists will moan that the 5 speed is all about building skills, but I actually think 99% of drivers with such a car hit a wall. Since they're not pro's they haven't the chance to push the vehicle dynamics further and so they sit in a well populated zone of "better than average" driving ability. But they don't get much beyond that.
An MR changes all of that. It allows you to expand on your abilities to the point that when you DO drive a 5 or 6 speed, your inherent understanding of chassis dynamics have been permanently improved. It's a remarkable experience.
And yet...with all of that said I may STILL opt for the 5 speed! I'm 46...and old man for this type of car....but I still like my women with real breasts and my Cheerios plain. I just want to point out that the transmission in the MR is ALL ABOUT ultimate driving enthusiasts. Perhaps more so than the 5 speed. It elevates the Evo to a whole new level, just like the S-AWD and AYC do. It makes the car into an "Ultimate Driving Machine" in a way even a M3 can't compete with. And yes, I've enjoyed a new M3. As soon as the M3 gets a tranny this good and AWD I may consider one.
Obviously if you want gobs of power, go with the 5 speed. But a lightly tuned MR was very fast and I'd toast a lot of faster cars on a twisty road with no problem. Evo's may be course...but they also have real finesse on such roads. Adding power may make it into a rocket, but the finesse is really what the Evo is all about. The MR takes that to a logical conclusion. It does not reduce driver involvement. It enhances it hugely.
Cheers,
Rob
As with previous threads, your writing is deep with some good information, but you tend to sensationalize things and gloss over reality.
Why? Because 3600 pounds and 235whp does not a fast car make, no matter how quickly the transmission shifts. Fortunately, people modify their Evos to rectify this problem. And here is where the TC-SST has to eat a bit of crow: Add 120whp to a GSR, and you’ll sizzle the pavement; add 120whp to an MR, and it just might sizzle the rev limiter instead. Many of us chose the manual because we modify our cars, and the manual box has lots more built in insurance to manage the extra power reliably.
For that reason alone, an MR should never be compared to a GTR, because it still comes up shy in the power:weight department, even with an additional 120whp from modifications. One is peppy, the other is stock tire track record crusher.
On a parting note, at 46 years young, I’m saddened by the fact you can’t admit an E90 M3 will easily humiliate an Evo X MR on a racetrack. Maybe the Bimmer you drove had four flats and a disabled left cylinder bank?
Your threads would be a lot better if you put more sugar in that Kool Aid and less baseless hype.
I wish your words would come true and make a future M3 AWD, if that were to happen I'd be all over it as my next car as soon as I could afford it; not that I don't want one right now, cause regardless of it being RWD is still a lot of car, even for the Evo
Nice review you got on the MR. Some people just call it the "soft Evo" or the Evo that has lost it's roots... I think it's all the opposite; it's a true Mitsubishi Racing machine now, just like Ferraris/Lambos/etc and their F1-like paddle shifters;
Nice review you got on the MR. Some people just call it the "soft Evo" or the Evo that has lost it's roots... I think it's all the opposite; it's a true Mitsubishi Racing machine now, just like Ferraris/Lambos/etc and their F1-like paddle shifters;
Last edited by jazket; Sep 14, 2009 at 12:01 PM.
Evolved Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO
As with previous threads, your writing is deep with some good information, but you tend to sensationalize things and gloss over reality.
Why? Because 3600 pounds and 235whp does not a fast car make, no matter how quickly the transmission shifts. Fortunately, people modify their Evos to rectify this problem. And here is where the TC-SST has to eat a bit of crow: Add 120whp to a GSR, and you’ll sizzle the pavement; add 120whp to an MR, and it just might sizzle the rev limiter instead. Many of us chose the manual because we modify our cars, and the manual box has lots more built in insurance to manage the extra power reliably.
For that reason alone, an MR should never be compared to a GTR, because it still comes up shy in the power:weight department, even with an additional 120whp from modifications. One is peppy, the other is stock tire track record crusher.
On a parting note, at 46 years young, I’m saddened by the fact you can’t admit an E90 M3 will easily humiliate an Evo X MR on a racetrack. Maybe the Bimmer you drove had four flats and a disabled left cylinder bank?
Your threads would be a lot better if you put more sugar in that Kool Aid and less baseless hype.
Why? Because 3600 pounds and 235whp does not a fast car make, no matter how quickly the transmission shifts. Fortunately, people modify their Evos to rectify this problem. And here is where the TC-SST has to eat a bit of crow: Add 120whp to a GSR, and you’ll sizzle the pavement; add 120whp to an MR, and it just might sizzle the rev limiter instead. Many of us chose the manual because we modify our cars, and the manual box has lots more built in insurance to manage the extra power reliably.
For that reason alone, an MR should never be compared to a GTR, because it still comes up shy in the power:weight department, even with an additional 120whp from modifications. One is peppy, the other is stock tire track record crusher.
On a parting note, at 46 years young, I’m saddened by the fact you can’t admit an E90 M3 will easily humiliate an Evo X MR on a racetrack. Maybe the Bimmer you drove had four flats and a disabled left cylinder bank?
Your threads would be a lot better if you put more sugar in that Kool Aid and less baseless hype.
How about YOU take a look at the reality of things and understand that not everyone and their mom wants to modify their Evo. However, upgrade the clutches in that tranny, and (you must be a Yoda fan) a fast Evo that CAN make. Nonetheless, it still shifts faster than you can, no matter how much of an expert you are at driving a stick. That alone can shave fractions of a second off of any time.
Evolved Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO
I'm not sure how you can say that because downshifts actually require a gear change (which means it takes just a tad extra time), whereas an upshift does not since that next gear is already engaged. What do you mean exactly?
Fractions of a second faster shifts don't mean a hill of beans when you have to wave that stock C5 Z06 by at a hot lap day because its going 120mph and you have loud pedal pegged and can't even do 100. If we want to keep up with fast cars, we have to increase the power, period.