Evo X vs. Evo VIII and IX
Of course, never any hard feelings Rob
I'm not saying it's not a homologation of a a rally car, I know the requirements that the manufacturer has to sell it. I'm saying it's not built and sold for people to drive off the lot and go racing. There is customization that you have to do. That's not a "race car" to me. If it needs modification, any car can be modified into a "race car"
I'm not saying it's not a homologation of a a rally car, I know the requirements that the manufacturer has to sell it. I'm saying it's not built and sold for people to drive off the lot and go racing. There is customization that you have to do. That's not a "race car" to me. If it needs modification, any car can be modified into a "race car"
But it's also subjective. All you have to do is put an approved cage in an Evo X and you're done. Other cars require more modifications. And they most likely didn't follow specifications while building their cars. But you're right no car is technically a race car off of the show room floor. But a question of the percentage of race car it is off of the show room floor is a valid argument. And the Evo X is right there.
Like I said, a matter of definition..
Evolved Member
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
From: CA
But it's also subjective. All you have to do is put an approved cage in an Evo X and you're done. Other cars require more modifications. And they most likely didn't follow specifications while building their cars. But you're right no car is technically a race car off of the show room floor. But a question of the percentage of race car it is off of the show room floor is a valid argument. And the Evo X is right there.
Last edited by tipoytm; Dec 7, 2009 at 04:13 PM.
On topic, I think application makes a huge difference. I'm mainly an auto-x guy, and my experiences/opinions are largely based on auto-x driving - lots of quick interconnected changes in direction, and from that I simply prefer the feel of my IX.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: Hong Kong
I thought it was more like this:
Race cars sold by a manufacturer: GT3 Cup, GT3 Cup S, GT3 RSR, GT3 R
- These still need a lot of prepping work, not for public roads
Street car: GT3, GT3 RS
- Needs 300-400lbs of weight reduction to even consider using them as race cars
If a stock form Lancer Evolution is considered a race car, then there are many other race cars that are being sold directly from manufacturers at any given time
Race cars sold by a manufacturer: GT3 Cup, GT3 Cup S, GT3 RSR, GT3 R
- These still need a lot of prepping work, not for public roads
Street car: GT3, GT3 RS
- Needs 300-400lbs of weight reduction to even consider using them as race cars
If a stock form Lancer Evolution is considered a race car, then there are many other race cars that are being sold directly from manufacturers at any given time
I think the whole argument was really the X is not as "raw" as the previous EVo, in this case the IX.
It is absolutely right. As not one evo ever made "rawer" then a previous version.
The simple reason is ,because as the technologies advancing so as the requirements to stay in the racing competitive
The biggest reason Why the Mitsubishi and others pulled out from the WRC , because their technologies was too advanced for the WRC's stupid rules. In short, the FIA is very much close or biased to France and GB. Those Countries had zero chance against Japan or German cars...
So as today:
two manufacturer running the WRC events; Citroen and Ford... Ta-ta-ta-ta
But this is a totally different story, very sad how money can ruin the sport, and hunger for fame - pride and wealth...
So anyway, i'll be honest here, when people say the X is not a raw car, and lost her edge and so... its just pisses me off.
Why?
Because all my respect for the exceptions, most of them never drove a raw car or even drove like he needs one. Some even have their first Evo and they drove the X when his buddy lend it to him or test drove it at the dealer.
So i'm begging for help here, how he or she can obviously judge the car's rawness like that? Not to mention those well based strong fights they put on." Because i drove it or my buddy have one, or i have seen it on TV or magazine"
Not to mention the feel of the car is very very personal.
For me my Lancia integrale HF turbo Evo 2, was the rawest car ever, even more then an Elise.
And i love that car over the 4 or the VI or the VIII even the IX RS was close second out from the dealer.
Now the X, i love to drive more then anything before, and i never felt raw as the IX or any other car i raced before. But still is an animal, if you go to the limit with it. And she will punish you mercilessly . Its a hard love
Do i miss the rawness of my Lancia? absolutely not.
Why?
because the X is much more forgiving drive, and i can have more fun with less work. That is makes it less raw? I dont think so.
If you go to the limits, then you will feel the character, and a rawness, i would really call it a pure race car feeling more though. That is a adrenalin rush right there. What you cant buy with master card , since its priceless.
So the raw or not raw argument is really cant be a negative or even a positive point against the evo. Simple reason why, because its differs individually.
Those are sounds to me like a "just because " argument or he said she said.
Sooner or later you start thinking why is that? And dont be offended , but most of the times the same people do it.
I can live with legit /fact/ arguments but she said he said arguments doesn't really makes me happy or prove anything for me.
Kill me with facts from which i can learn, and i;m willing to do.
Cheers Rob
It is absolutely right. As not one evo ever made "rawer" then a previous version.
The simple reason is ,because as the technologies advancing so as the requirements to stay in the racing competitive
The biggest reason Why the Mitsubishi and others pulled out from the WRC , because their technologies was too advanced for the WRC's stupid rules. In short, the FIA is very much close or biased to France and GB. Those Countries had zero chance against Japan or German cars...
So as today:
two manufacturer running the WRC events; Citroen and Ford... Ta-ta-ta-ta
But this is a totally different story, very sad how money can ruin the sport, and hunger for fame - pride and wealth...
So anyway, i'll be honest here, when people say the X is not a raw car, and lost her edge and so... its just pisses me off.
Why?
Because all my respect for the exceptions, most of them never drove a raw car or even drove like he needs one. Some even have their first Evo and they drove the X when his buddy lend it to him or test drove it at the dealer.
So i'm begging for help here, how he or she can obviously judge the car's rawness like that? Not to mention those well based strong fights they put on." Because i drove it or my buddy have one, or i have seen it on TV or magazine"
Not to mention the feel of the car is very very personal.
For me my Lancia integrale HF turbo Evo 2, was the rawest car ever, even more then an Elise.
And i love that car over the 4 or the VI or the VIII even the IX RS was close second out from the dealer.
Now the X, i love to drive more then anything before, and i never felt raw as the IX or any other car i raced before. But still is an animal, if you go to the limit with it. And she will punish you mercilessly . Its a hard love
Do i miss the rawness of my Lancia? absolutely not.
Why?
because the X is much more forgiving drive, and i can have more fun with less work. That is makes it less raw? I dont think so.
If you go to the limits, then you will feel the character, and a rawness, i would really call it a pure race car feeling more though. That is a adrenalin rush right there.
What you cant buy with master card , since its priceless.So the raw or not raw argument is really cant be a negative or even a positive point against the evo. Simple reason why, because its differs individually.
Those are sounds to me like a "just because " argument or he said she said.
Sooner or later you start thinking why is that? And dont be offended , but most of the times the same people do it.
I can live with legit /fact/ arguments but she said he said arguments doesn't really makes me happy or prove anything for me.
Kill me with facts from which i can learn, and i;m willing to do.
Cheers Rob
I thought it was more like this:
Race cars sold by a manufacturer: GT3 Cup, GT3 Cup S, GT3 RSR, GT3 R
- These still need a lot of prepping work, not for public roads
Street car: GT3, GT3 RS
- Needs 300-400lbs of weight reduction to even consider using them as race cars
If a stock form Lancer Evolution is considered a race car, then there are many other race cars that are being sold directly from manufacturers at any given time
Race cars sold by a manufacturer: GT3 Cup, GT3 Cup S, GT3 RSR, GT3 R
- These still need a lot of prepping work, not for public roads
Street car: GT3, GT3 RS
- Needs 300-400lbs of weight reduction to even consider using them as race cars
If a stock form Lancer Evolution is considered a race car, then there are many other race cars that are being sold directly from manufacturers at any given time
- These still need a lot of prepping work, not for public roads"
Just as the Evo.
no its not a race car in stock form
But it s build to be a race car vs others. Like the Ralliart. I didnt even go the Porsche because there is many cross over things happenings
Also because we talking about EVo which is a ralli car .
Different rules different ideas and different purpose.
i'm not talking about overal race acr. its a Mitsu forum
But many car build in racing in mind , like Lotus.
They selling prepped cars too for racing, so as Aston Martin - Mercedes - Audi and so on.
that is another story and forum
Basically. The whole argument is kind of ridiculous anyway. The performance of the car doesn't change because it has a badge labeling it a "race car". I wasn't trying to "offend" the X.. I just don't consider any stock Evo a race car per se.
On topic, I think application makes a huge difference. I'm mainly an auto-x guy, and my experiences/opinions are largely based on auto-x driving - lots of quick interconnected changes in direction, and from that I simply prefer the feel of my IX.
On topic, I think application makes a huge difference. I'm mainly an auto-x guy, and my experiences/opinions are largely based on auto-x driving - lots of quick interconnected changes in direction, and from that I simply prefer the feel of my IX.
I think the whole argument was really the X is not as "raw" as the previous EVo, in this case the IX.
It is absolutely right. As not one evo ever made "rawer" then a previous version.
The simple reason is ,because as the technologies advancing so as the requirements to stay in the racing competitive
The biggest reason Why the Mitsubishi and others pulled out from the WRC , because their technologies was too advanced for the WRC's stupid rules. In short, the FIA is very much close or biased to France and GB. Those Countries had zero chance against Japan or German cars...
So as today:
two manufacturer running the WRC events; Citroen and Ford... Ta-ta-ta-ta
But this is a totally different story, very sad how money can ruin the sport, and hunger for fame - pride and wealth...
So anyway, i'll be honest here, when people say the X is not a raw car, and lost her edge and so... its just pisses me off.
Why?
Because all my respect for the exceptions, most of them never drove a raw car or even drove like he needs one. Some even have their first Evo and they drove the X when his buddy lend it to him or test drove it at the dealer.
So i'm begging for help here, how he or she can obviously judge the car's rawness like that? Not to mention those well based strong fights they put on." Because i drove it or my buddy have one, or i have seen it on TV or magazine"
Not to mention the feel of the car is very very personal.
For me my Lancia integrale HF turbo Evo 2, was the rawest car ever, even more then an Elise.
And i love that car over the 4 or the VI or the VIII even the IX RS was close second out from the dealer.
Now the X, i love to drive more then anything before, and i never felt raw as the IX or any other car i raced before. But still is an animal, if you go to the limit with it. And she will punish you mercilessly . Its a hard love
Do i miss the rawness of my Lancia? absolutely not.
Why?
because the X is much more forgiving drive, and i can have more fun with less work. That is makes it less raw? I dont think so.
If you go to the limits, then you will feel the character, and a rawness, i would really call it a pure race car feeling more though. That is a adrenalin rush right there. What you cant buy with master card , since its priceless.
So the raw or not raw argument is really cant be a negative or even a positive point against the evo. Simple reason why, because its differs individually.
Those are sounds to me like a "just because " argument or he said she said.
Sooner or later you start thinking why is that? And dont be offended , but most of the times the same people do it.
I can live with legit /fact/ arguments but she said he said arguments doesn't really makes me happy or prove anything for me.
Kill me with facts from which i can learn, and i;m willing to do.
Cheers Rob
It is absolutely right. As not one evo ever made "rawer" then a previous version.
The simple reason is ,because as the technologies advancing so as the requirements to stay in the racing competitive
The biggest reason Why the Mitsubishi and others pulled out from the WRC , because their technologies was too advanced for the WRC's stupid rules. In short, the FIA is very much close or biased to France and GB. Those Countries had zero chance against Japan or German cars...
So as today:
two manufacturer running the WRC events; Citroen and Ford... Ta-ta-ta-ta
But this is a totally different story, very sad how money can ruin the sport, and hunger for fame - pride and wealth...
So anyway, i'll be honest here, when people say the X is not a raw car, and lost her edge and so... its just pisses me off.
Why?
Because all my respect for the exceptions, most of them never drove a raw car or even drove like he needs one. Some even have their first Evo and they drove the X when his buddy lend it to him or test drove it at the dealer.
So i'm begging for help here, how he or she can obviously judge the car's rawness like that? Not to mention those well based strong fights they put on." Because i drove it or my buddy have one, or i have seen it on TV or magazine"
Not to mention the feel of the car is very very personal.
For me my Lancia integrale HF turbo Evo 2, was the rawest car ever, even more then an Elise.
And i love that car over the 4 or the VI or the VIII even the IX RS was close second out from the dealer.
Now the X, i love to drive more then anything before, and i never felt raw as the IX or any other car i raced before. But still is an animal, if you go to the limit with it. And she will punish you mercilessly . Its a hard love
Do i miss the rawness of my Lancia? absolutely not.
Why?
because the X is much more forgiving drive, and i can have more fun with less work. That is makes it less raw? I dont think so.
If you go to the limits, then you will feel the character, and a rawness, i would really call it a pure race car feeling more though. That is a adrenalin rush right there.
What you cant buy with master card , since its priceless.So the raw or not raw argument is really cant be a negative or even a positive point against the evo. Simple reason why, because its differs individually.
Those are sounds to me like a "just because " argument or he said she said.
Sooner or later you start thinking why is that? And dont be offended , but most of the times the same people do it.
I can live with legit /fact/ arguments but she said he said arguments doesn't really makes me happy or prove anything for me.
Kill me with facts from which i can learn, and i;m willing to do.
Cheers Rob
That's simply what everyone else has been saying. No one is saying the IX is better in any way than the X.. some people were just saying that they like how the old car feels better.. There's no need to get mad or take offense for your car for that. You're assuming that no one here is pushing their cars, and that you have the RIGHT opinion on what the Evo has become.. when it's simply a matter of opinion.
The X is no softie, but even you yourself are saying the IX is more "raw" than the X.. NOT that that's a good thing. And it's true. The X is more forgiving then the IX, and easier to drive, there's no question. ::note, not saying that ANY car is EASY to drive at the limit.
That's simply what everyone else has been saying. No one is saying the IX is better in any way than the X.. some people were just saying that they like how the old car feels better.. There's no need to get mad or take offense for your car for that. You're assuming that no one here is pushing their cars, and that you have the RIGHT opinion on what the Evo has become.. when it's simply a matter of opinion.
That's simply what everyone else has been saying. No one is saying the IX is better in any way than the X.. some people were just saying that they like how the old car feels better.. There's no need to get mad or take offense for your car for that. You're assuming that no one here is pushing their cars, and that you have the RIGHT opinion on what the Evo has become.. when it's simply a matter of opinion.
It is really not far from the IX with the Sayc.
I just drove one grupe A 3 weeks ago
The X is raw no question about that. The question who and how measures the rawness. That is why i willing to admit to a limit the rawness argument. but some reason it became the number one...
And i think is simply because they cant really find other one. Which is show a lack of experience with the X. But there are other legit draw back the X has.
End of the day, the X is just another evo , which eventually will be faster then a previous one. Just like before.
I hope we talk enough about the raw feeling today
Last edited by Robevo RS; Dec 7, 2009 at 07:18 PM.