I think the headlight and the front end might stay the same just based on how ugly mitsubishi is making cars now. The interior is completely off, i would be shocked if it didn't end up looking like the current evos interior or something close to another car they make. And 20x9inch wheels on an evo this isn't MIdngiht Club .

 

It's almost like their going from 2007 to 3007. looks far to futuristic for me, especially the interior, whats up with that? but the front does look nice. just scary what they might come up with next.

 

tell me again why the lower edge of the windows are chromed?

and what, exactly, is the point of covering the engine with that al plate? If they haven't decided on an engine (or finished designing one) why don't they just not show it?

and can we _please_ keep the steering wheel round?

 

Unlike others, I don't think Mitsu can afford not to sell every single car they can produce. It's not like they don't have a track record for continuing to 'sell what's on the shelf' - the 4G63 must be most profitable engine in their history.

 

Shhhhh... I have my wife convinced that I have to get an EVO this summer before they discontinue the IX. Cause I'm pretty sure I won't be able to afford the X when it comes out. Even if the X is close to the same price as the current IX, you know dealers are gonna pull their "Market Value Adjustment" s***.

Yay! EVO IX this summer for me. Anyone wanna buy a 2003 Nissan SE-R Spec-V?

 

I have read a lot of info on the new X, and honestly can’t remember reading anything from Mitsu that would lead one to believe that the new car will be heavier or less of a driver’s car than the current car. Mitsu has already stated there will also be option for a manual transmission. So if you don’t care for DSG… Don’t get it.
The fact of the matter is, everything that Mitsu has released indicates that the new X will be lighter and more visceral than the current car.
Let me repeat that,” EVERYTHING THAT MITSU HAS RELEASED INDICATES THE NEW X WILL BE LIGHTER AND MORE VISCERAL THAN THE CURRENT CAR.”

I defy anyone here to submit proof that mitsu has stated otherwise.

 

I agree with you 100%...I think the main concern here would be if the car will take well to mods. Will they over-engineer the engine and transmission (DSG included) to handle the power? Will it make power as inexpensive as the current Evo, or will it be sort of like the Sti? And yes, not everybody will mod their Evo, but most enthusiasts do. This is an enthusiast's car

 

Nobody listens to me . My rep has been telling me for 2mos now that Mitsu told him the car will be out spring 07 as an 07. The 06 IX will be in production till that time. That means no EVO IX.5 or 07 IX or TME edition.

Nope!

 

I'd say it's probably the 4G64 SOHC 2.4L It's in the 95-06 Galants, 04 plus Outlanders, 95-99 Ecl. Spyders, 01-05 eclipses.

 

Thanks for the link FLK.

Here are some of the technologies involved in the S-AWC.

Active Braking Control

Mitsubishi's Active Braking Control （ABC） provides the driver with vehicle attitude control
assistance once the limits of Super AYC and ACD have been exceeded. An evolutionary advance
on the Active Stability Control （ASC） system that is already a feature on some Mitsubishi
production models, ABC adds to ASC's vehicle attitude stabilizing capabilities. When the driver
switches ASC to the OFF mode, ABC operates so that braking force at each wheel is regulated by
signals from the 4WD system ECU, the master controller in the S-AWC system, to allow the driver
to more actively control vehicle attitude in sport driving situations.

Active Steering System

This system realizes handling with more linear response by adaptively controlling front wheel turn
angle according to steering input and vehicle speed. At slower vehicle speeds the system
improves response by shifting to a quicker steering gear ratio, while at higher speeds it
substantially improves stability by moving to a slower gear ratio.
For rapid steering inputs, S-AWC momentarily increases front wheel turn angle and Super AYC
control to realize sharper response. In counter-steer situations, S-AWC increases responsiveness
further to assist the driver with steering precision. As a result, the system inspires greater
confidence in the driver by enhancing his sense of being one with his vehicle.

Roll Control Suspension

Roll Control Suspension （RCS） effectively reduces body roll and pitching by hydraulically
connecting all the shock absorbers together and regulating their damping pressures as necessary.
Able to control both roll and pitching stiffness separately, RCS can operate in a variety of ways. It
can, for example, reduce roll only when required during turn in or in other situations while being
set up on the soft side to prioritize tire contact and ride comfort. Since the system controls roll
stiffness hydraulically, it eliminates the need for stabilizer bars.
In the integrated control of its component systems, S-AWC employs information from RCS's
hydraulic system to estimate the tire load at each wheel.

 

Found this article interesting on the Truth about cars regarding the DSG style transmission.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com

If you were going to invent a way to control an automobile, you wouldn’t ask the average driver to develop the skill and coordination of a church organist. Note I said “average.” As far as hardcore automotive enthusiasts and skilled pipe organ players are concerned, there’s nothing more natural or satisfying than making beautiful music with a sublime dance of hands and feet. Yes, well, the average person would rather drive an automatic and download an iTune. Pistonheads and pipe worshippers may sneer, but if the majority of humans didn’t take the path of least resistance our species would still be stuck in the trees. Meanwhile, just as digital sound has invaded God’s house and rocked the organist’s world, Audi’s DSG transmission is here and tripedalists are toast.

The day F1 racing cars switched to paddle shift control, the clutch pedal was doomed. Only the system's violence kept it from a date with old Sparky. Ferrari’s ground-breaking attempts at a passenger paddler were representative rubbish; the clunky F1 system transformed the sublime F355 into a herky-jerky one-track pony. Other early systems were equally obtrusive, equally foul. At the same time, style conscious high-end manufacturers added wheel-mounted button shifts and gate activated “tip shifts.” Although the technology simply handed customers slushbox control, computers eventually transformed the systems into a reasonably convincing halfway house between mindless ease and endless excitement.

Aston's Vanquish got closer to the real deal. If drivers tapped its over-sized plus paddle at the exact right rpm, the V12 GT rewarded them with a perfectly timed gear change. If not, not. Other systems followed: Ferrari, Maserati, BMW, Lamborghini, Aston Martin, even Toyota (MR2 Spyder). All of these paddle shifters downshift magnificently-- even blipping the throttle on your behalf-- but they either slur their upchanges like a drunk handing you a cigarette or smack you in the back of the head like a sadistic schoolteacher. And that’s without considering the challenges of around town ambling or, God forbid, reverse (a non-issue for F1, obviously).

And then BorgWarner and Volkswagen AG developed DSG. The direct shift gearbox (DSG) features two wet plate clutches: one engages the odd-numbered gears, the second the even-numbered gears. When the first clutch is putting down the power, a computer readies the second clutch to engage the next gear (pre-selected according to engine revs and speed). When the driver bangs the paddle for another gear or the automatic calls for another cog, the first clutch is released and the second engages. Gear shifts are fast, smooth and accurate; both up and down the ratios. The DSG’s computer-- complete with 12 sensors-- stands guard against “inappropriate” gear selection; an over-twitchy paddle shifter can’t stall or blow up the engine.

OK rivet counters: Volksie didn’t invent the double clutch. Citroen offered something similar over 70 years ago, and Porsche’s formidable 962 racer also gave it a go. But VW and BorgWarner have just about perfected the DSG. (The only drawbacks are a certain sluggishness when gently tipping-in and a slight hesitation when paddling down more than one gear, as the DSG shuffles through the intervening ratios.) Even with its quirks, the DSG rules-- to the point where the clutch pedal and traditional manual gearbox is a mechanical redundancy, a dead device shifting. In fact, any car manufacturer who doesn’t have a DSG or something similar installed in their performance-oriented products will soon be at a tremendous disadvantage.

And here’s where the culture wars begin. Two years ago, Bob Elton’s editorial “Death to the Stick Shift” suggested that cars equipped with an automatic gearbox were safer, more reliable and more pleasurable than their manual equivalents. Enthusiasts considered the proposition a personal affront. Two years of flame mail leads me to conclude that stickshifters-- a self-selecting community of motorists who cherish the skill and pleasure that only a manual transmission can provide-- consider autoboxers less competent, safe and passionate. Many of these tripedalists will not take kindly to the DSG; it’s a bridge from the know-nothing rabble to the self-proclaimed automotive elite. The barbarians are at the shift gate; The Volkswagen Group has unlocked the door.

It will be some time before this issue plays out, but the stickshifters will lose. Once they get behind the wheel of a DSG-equipped machine like the new Audi A3 or the VW R32, even the hardiest of these manual transmission diehards will be hooked by the system’s clear superiority; in terms of speed, ergonomic ease and, most importantly of all, enjoyment. Eventually, the tide will turn. Automakers will be forced to buy "dual clutch transmission" technology from BorgWarner or their partner Getrag, or develop something at least as good. Of course, there will still be enthusiasts who stick with the stick, for personal pride and sensual satisfaction. In the meantime, a quick message from Paddle Shifters Anonymous to open-minded automotive enthusiasts: get ready for some serious fun.

 

I have driven both true manuals and the smg technology of the bmws, and here is my point of view. The conventional manual is much smoother, gives you more of a connection with the car, but is essentially slower than the smg shift technology.

Its hard to accept, but you just cant beat the technology, it makes perfect shifts everytime, so when you hit the track, the smg guy laughs last. The smg is alot more comforting in daily driving as well, and much easier to park on hills, but again, the connection with the car isnt quite there, in a conventional manual you feel total control, whereas in the smg you sacrifice some control for comfort and oddly enough, performance. Its a tough call...if you want total control and are willing to sacrifice lap times/quartermile performance for it, get a conventional manual, but if your goal is to go as fast as possible, get the smg, you cant beat it, only tie it.

 

 

As a Porsche/Audi/VW employee I find this statement offensive. You should NEVER compair BMW's inferior SMG technology to that developed by VW AG/BW. BMW's SMG takes 80ms upshift gears and 160ms to downshift and is extraordinarily harsh. VW's DSG on the otherhand upshifts in a mere 8ms and downshifts in 32ms. Beyond the time differential the DSG is MUCH smoother as the next gear is already pre-selected by the transmission so the "shift" is much more precise. SMG is not able to pre-shift and simply bangs the car into gear with a resounding thud. I urge you to go drive the VW transmission in any of their offerings (new GTI, GLI, Audi A3) and report back. You'd find it's a very exciting drive. I still prefer the overall control of a manual, but for die-hard track driving the DSG is superior to even the best shifters the world has to offer.

 

power to DSG.