are the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times of the X even corrected numbers? it sure sounds like these times were stopwatch times and without noting the temp, alt, etc. these numbers mean jack ****...

did they also test the USDM IX they had on hand or are they comparing the X's numbers to corrected IX numbers from past tests in the US.

maybe that's where they get the 0.2 sec slower. maybe the real world difference is only 0.2 sec while on paper we see 4.5 sec for IX and 5.2 sec for X and think the X is astronomically slow now.

bottomline is these numbers shouldn't get your panties in a bunch. wait for the real tests to make bold statements on how much the X sucks.

 

we have to wait until we get the production model for US and until some owners start to play with the boost control etc. Maybe the tune is extremly conservative from factory to meet emissions. I believe it may hit low 13's with just a boost controller and good tune. Just like always time will tell

 

 

Spoken like a true member of the new Evo's intended market. It seems Mitsu knows exactly what they're doing, bringing in the "enthusiasts" who really just want a softer car but gives off an image of raciness. I don't blame them (Mitsu), since the Evo is the only name in their line-up worth a damn in the U.S., they'll need to make sure this car sells, and sells the Lancer as well. Too bad for everyone who appreciated a real performance vehicle though. The new STi, on the other hand.....

 

...is a piece of ****.

 

+1

 

one of the articles says the X doesnt feel like a tin can like the old EVO's lol

 

It's going to be more refined. The questions yet to be answered is the performance capabilities. This is the most information anyone knows for sure at this point.

 

I think they compared JDM IX to JDM X