Japanese Evo Vs. American Evo
Evolved Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
From: New Zealand
The JDM Evo IX has typically been estimated to be closer to 310 hp by most accounts (which also take into consideration what Mitsubishi's engineers have revealed). It was only the 2003-2004 Evo VIII that was rated at 271 hp (which was likely pretty accurate), with both the 2005 Evo VIII and 2006 Evo IX getting noticeable bumps in both hp and torque (276 hp and 286 hp, respectively) due to having better turbos and tunes, though as you all know, the IX got MIVEC and may have been more like 290-300 hp.
The engines were very similar, though again, the tunes were different due to both emissions and available fuel octane. While Japan's octane ratings are higher than ours for comparable gas, the stateside Evos are set up for 91 octane since there is just one factory tune for the whole country, which has to account for places like California since it's such a huge portion of the U.S. market share, despite them not having 92+ octane. The exclusion of S-AYC did allow for more room for not just for emissions-related equipment but also a bigger fuel tank, if I'm not mistaken. Top Gear's reviews always had Jeremy Clarkson criticizing its shorter range due to the smaller fuel tank.
My JDM IX has a 53l tank (14 gallons). USDM is 14 gallons?
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 27
From: Southern California
Yeah, Mitsubishi's literature says ours is also 14 gallons. Does your Evo IX have S-AYC? I was under the impression that their fuel tanks were smaller, for some reason.
The JDM Evos are a tad faster and slightly more nimble than ours. They weigh less to begin with, by something like 100-200 pounds, partially due to not having certain crash beams required in the U.S. (which doesn't only make it lighter but also is removing a good chunk of weight from the front end, making it slightly less nose-heavy). Also, JDM Evos are tuned slightly differently (with different emissions regulations and slightly higher available octane fuel available that give it some extra punch), which despite the hp remaining at 276 hp (280 ps) can be verified by looking at the differences in the torque numbers, with the JDM versions usually being 5-10 lb-ft higher. Also, I think there are JDM models that use different materials for the turbo (I think with the best ones using magnesium components), whereas the U.S. models pretty much have just one turbo available across the board.
There isn't a different name, it's just called S-AWC for the Evo Xs, regardless of the market, but I don't think that there was a name for it in previous Evos, though they would usually just talk about the ACD and/or AYC, like how Subaru mostly highlights the STI's DCCD when talking about its drivetrain.
But on the JDM models that still have rear mechanical LSDs (rather than S-AYC), I think they're set up slightly differently (and in the correct way) to the point where it reduces understeer even further. I'm not 100% sure but I think Mitsubishi set it up the way it is for the U.S. market to reduce potential dealership visits out of concern since the proper set up may be a bit noisier, and the U.S. market at the time was not aware of that, so they figured it would be easier that way.
There isn't a different name, it's just called S-AWC for the Evo Xs, regardless of the market, but I don't think that there was a name for it in previous Evos, though they would usually just talk about the ACD and/or AYC, like how Subaru mostly highlights the STI's DCCD when talking about its drivetrain.
But on the JDM models that still have rear mechanical LSDs (rather than S-AYC), I think they're set up slightly differently (and in the correct way) to the point where it reduces understeer even further. I'm not 100% sure but I think Mitsubishi set it up the way it is for the U.S. market to reduce potential dealership visits out of concern since the proper set up may be a bit noisier, and the U.S. market at the time was not aware of that, so they figured it would be easier that way.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 27
From: Southern California
JDM Evo IX: 1410 kg (3102 lb)
US Evo IX: 1490 kg (3278 lb)
I haven't seen anything to support the US models weighing less, as even though it doesn't have S-AYC, it's not like there's nothing there at all, as it still has the rear mechanical LSD which isn't exactly weightless.
It depends on where you look, I found this with a quick search.
Mitsubishi EVO Specs/Information: EVO 9 /EVO IX
MIVEC, Mitsubishis innovative variable valve timing technology was first seen on the EVO 9. In Japan the GT replaced the RSII. An estate version was also available. In the UK only FQ models were available.
Mitsubishi Evolution Specs: EVO 9 /EVO IX
Engine: 1997cc
Power: 286PS @ 6500rpm
Torque: 289lbs/ft @ 3500rpm
Weight: 1400kg (RS: 1310kg)
Top Speed: 157mph
0-60 mph: 4.4 seconds (RS: 4.2)
Mitsubishi Evolution Specs: EVO 9 FQ-300/EVO IX FQ-300
Engine: 1997cc
Power: 305PS @ 6950rpm
Torque: 297lbs/ft @ 4400rpm
Weight: 1400kg
Top Speed: 157mph
0-60 mph: 4.7 seconds
Mitsubishi Evolution Specs: EVO 9 FQ-320/EVO IX FQ-320
Engine: 1997cc
Power: 326PS @ 6700rpm
Torque: 305lbs/ft @ 4300rpm
Weight: 1400kg
Top Speed: 157mph
0-60 mph: 4.5 seconds
Mitsubishi Evolution Specs: EVO 9 FQ-340/EVO IX FQ-340
Engine: 1997cc
Power: 345PS @ 6800rpm
Torque: 321lbs/ft @ 4600rpm
Weight: 1400kg
Top Speed: 157mph
0-60 mph: 4.3 seconds
You really need to get both on the same scale with no modification.
Mitsubishi EVO Specs/Information: EVO 9 /EVO IX
MIVEC, Mitsubishis innovative variable valve timing technology was first seen on the EVO 9. In Japan the GT replaced the RSII. An estate version was also available. In the UK only FQ models were available.
Mitsubishi Evolution Specs: EVO 9 /EVO IX
Engine: 1997cc
Power: 286PS @ 6500rpm
Torque: 289lbs/ft @ 3500rpm
Weight: 1400kg (RS: 1310kg)
Top Speed: 157mph
0-60 mph: 4.4 seconds (RS: 4.2)
Mitsubishi Evolution Specs: EVO 9 FQ-300/EVO IX FQ-300
Engine: 1997cc
Power: 305PS @ 6950rpm
Torque: 297lbs/ft @ 4400rpm
Weight: 1400kg
Top Speed: 157mph
0-60 mph: 4.7 seconds
Mitsubishi Evolution Specs: EVO 9 FQ-320/EVO IX FQ-320
Engine: 1997cc
Power: 326PS @ 6700rpm
Torque: 305lbs/ft @ 4300rpm
Weight: 1400kg
Top Speed: 157mph
0-60 mph: 4.5 seconds
Mitsubishi Evolution Specs: EVO 9 FQ-340/EVO IX FQ-340
Engine: 1997cc
Power: 345PS @ 6800rpm
Torque: 321lbs/ft @ 4600rpm
Weight: 1400kg
Top Speed: 157mph
0-60 mph: 4.3 seconds
You really need to get both on the same scale with no modification.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 27
From: Southern California
But none of those were the U.S. models, which weigh between 3250-3300 pounds depending on the model, which certainly makes it heavier than all of those other models in other countries.
Evolved Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
From: New Zealand
I just realised that that the wagon was built without SAYC. I don't know what the capacity of the sedan is but the online resources (reviews and such) I can find say it is the same.
Evolved Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 844
Likes: 166
From: canada
So I've been trying to find out the differences in the available options in different countries. For example in Japan you could get a clever rear view mirror I believe. Or the nav system. Anything else available overseas that we couldn't get in North America? There are obviously some fairly big differences with this kinda stuff. Think climate controls...damned slick electronic thing the rest of earth got...
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,080
Likes: 27
From: Southern California
I think the HVAC unit is the main difference along with some available head units that you may have seen in Asia and Europe. The USDM HVAC unit is plain as hell but it doesn't really bother me that much. I don't have a problem with turning a knob when the temperature needs to change.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post