Evo X vs. Evo VIII and IX
It most certainly is misuse. A 50 hp open-wheel racing go-kart is much more raw than any car you will drive on the street. And for only ~3k too.
Hmmm... That is surprising... I guess it can be a matter of personal opinion, but it rarely would be based on an average/general public opinion
How's that sound?
If you had my grandma drive a stock/base 2003 8 (wasn't aware SSL was even offered in the 03... Unless it was late in the model year, I thought there were no options), a IX MR SE and a X GSR... I am guessing she'd like the comfort level of the X more than the other two.
Hmmm... That is surprising... I guess it can be a matter of personal opinion, but it rarely would be based on an average/general public opinion
How's that sound? If you had my grandma drive a stock/base 2003 8 (wasn't aware SSL was even offered in the 03... Unless it was late in the model year, I thought there were no options), a IX MR SE and a X GSR... I am guessing she'd like the comfort level of the X more than the other two.
Grand ma thig yes maybe, to look at it the X defenietly looks much more comfortable. But then again how about the comfort when it comes to trunk space .. LOL ?
Truth be told, CT9A have significantly better paint quality, and the paint layer is thicker. It's not even something that can be debated. This being said, no paint will ever take care of itself. In terms of interior materials' quality, the CT9A also featured an upgrade over the X. It's a shame, really, as there was really no reason to cover the X is hard, brittle plastics. FWIW, I really think Mitsu dropped the ball on this one.
By virtue of rawness, the VI I drove wins because:
1) It weighed 311 pounds less than the IX we had onhand
2) It had no radio
3) Its suspension was tuned to the point of tailbone massacre.
So if we are comparing their raceworthiness based on that out of the box, 100% stock:
VI >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IX >>> X
1) It weighed 311 pounds less than the IX we had onhand
2) It had no radio
3) Its suspension was tuned to the point of tailbone massacre.
So if we are comparing their raceworthiness based on that out of the box, 100% stock:
VI >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IX >>> X
Truth be told, CT9A have significantly better paint quality, and the paint layer is thicker. It's not even something that can be debated. This being said, no paint will ever take care of itself. In terms of interior materials' quality, the CT9A also featured an upgrade over the X. It's a shame, really, as there was really no reason to cover the X is hard, brittle plastics. FWIW, I really think Mitsu dropped the ball on this one.
The seat coverings in the IX were definitely superior. Its what they were covering that suck. Thankfully, the X Recaros aren't US fat man spec and offer much greater support. And then there is that US SAYC neutering action that all the CT9As got too. I still have almost triple the road miles behind the wheel of CT9As (63k miles vs. 22k miles) compared to CZ4A, and I am still not convinced which is the better car front to back. There are serious pros and cons to each. The older I get, the more I am sure I want both in my garage.
And yes, but that isn't an issue of "rawness" that's an issue of stupid manufacturing... I actually am curious as to the trunk space of the 2011 sedan STi come to think of it... I wonder if it is as dismal as the X.
Yay for fitting 4 tires and 4 wheels (not mounted) in my car, all in the back too!
Raw isn't for everybody. Just because one doesn't want a raw car, it doesn't make him any less of an automotive enthusiast. I've purchased 2 Evolutions, but have never recommend that car to a single individual, because I've yet to meet anyone who'd enjoy the machine for what it is. Folks may think they want a raw car, but when push comes to shove most would be better-off with something a little more forgiving, especially when it's their DD/only car. Notice the multitude of CT9A with 3+ owners. What may look like a romantic proposition on paper doesn't always pan out that way in real life.
It is fast and so , but the TME is not a representation of the VI line. That is a special model before the FQ came a live. So just as the FQ is not a representation of the EVo 8 or IX in this matter the X.
I hope you see my point now.
Rob
And then there is that US SAYC neutering action that all the CT9As got too. I still have almost triple the road miles behind the wheel of CT9As (63k miles vs. 22k miles) compared to CZ4A, and I am still not convinced which is the better car front to back. There are serious pros and cons to each. The older I get, the more I am sure I want both in my garage.
This is an excellent point that shouldn't be missed.
Raw isn't for everybody. Just because one doesn't want a raw car, it doesn't make him any less of an automotive enthusiast. I've purchased 2 Evolutions, but have never recommend that car to a single individual, because I've yet to meet anyone who'd enjoy the machine for what it is. Folks may think they want a raw car, but when push comes to shove most would be better-off with something a little more forgiving, especially when it's their DD/only car. Notice the multitude of CT9A with 3+ owners. What may look like a romantic proposition on paper doesn't always pan out that way in real life.
Raw isn't for everybody. Just because one doesn't want a raw car, it doesn't make him any less of an automotive enthusiast. I've purchased 2 Evolutions, but have never recommend that car to a single individual, because I've yet to meet anyone who'd enjoy the machine for what it is. Folks may think they want a raw car, but when push comes to shove most would be better-off with something a little more forgiving, especially when it's their DD/only car. Notice the multitude of CT9A with 3+ owners. What may look like a romantic proposition on paper doesn't always pan out that way in real life.
welll the TME is based on the RS and even more track oriented as you know. But you know from first hand why i always said the Vi is not the best evo they ever made.
It is fast and so , but the TME is not a representation of the VI line. That is a special model before the FQ came a live. So just as the FQ is not a representation of the EVo 8 or IX in this matter the X.
I hope you see my point now.
Rob
It is fast and so , but the TME is not a representation of the VI line. That is a special model before the FQ came a live. So just as the FQ is not a representation of the EVo 8 or IX in this matter the X.
I hope you see my point now.
Rob
I believe you that it is not a good representation of the line as a whole, but it is all I have to as a basis of comparison.
In spite of that, the idea isn't completely invalid, because even a regular VI GSR is still more than 200 pounds lighter than a VII GSR.
Its that stupid Halloween candy. Then we'll get double whammied with good Thanksgiving and Christmas dinners. I are a fat man too!
See! If you lived closer, I know you would because then you could drive my car, find yourself making less and less fun of it over time, then grow to appreciate it. I want a turbo for this sucker badly to offset a little bit of this weight. I am saving toward that goal. You would flip to see what this head can flow stock in comparison to a 4G63. 
...I'm kinda starting to lean in that direction, as well.
Yes, it is the only VI I have driven, and I agree with you that it is more hardcore (daresay I raw) than all the other VIs. There are actually RS and GSR TMEs, I drove a GSR, but even with aircon it was still more than 300 pounds lighter than that IX.
I believe you that it is not a good representation of the line as a whole, but it is all I have to as a basis of comparison.
In spite of that, the idea isn't completely invalid, because even a regular VI GSR is still more than 200 pounds lighter than a VII GSR.
I believe you that it is not a good representation of the line as a whole, but it is all I have to as a basis of comparison.
In spite of that, the idea isn't completely invalid, because even a regular VI GSR is still more than 200 pounds lighter than a VII GSR.
with that idea, the EVo 1st would be a best of all...but its not.