Evo X vs. Evo VIII and IX
I was done at the grand opening of PIR last night, and as I drove past a line of Ferrari's and Porsche's, I noticed every single one of the guys that owned those cars was staring at me driving by 
It was kind of a good feeling. This body sure demands attention with its aggressive looks.
It was kind of a good feeling. This body sure demands attention with its aggressive looks.
nah, they were just saying "look at the new evo.. i wonder if it will carry the heritage of the old one.."
what i don't get is, what is your main point? are we talking stock vs stock? mildly tuned vs mildly tuned? or highly tuned vs highly tuned?
stock vs stock we all can agree the IX is faster
mild vs mild even at this early point in time, i think we can all agree that the X is better
high vs high is a toss up at this point. we know what the IX can do but we can only speculate on what the X can do.
what i have noticed with you is that you interchangeably compare different states of tune to play devils advocate. in one breath you can say the 4B11's semi closed deck will be a problem. yes when you approach like 500-600 whp. this assumes you are comparing the X at high tune vs IX at high tune.
then in the next post you talk about the smaller ports and smaller stock turbo being a restriction for the X. so now you compare them in terms of mild vs mild.
it's like you find a "fault" with the X and dwell on that point without considering the overall picture. yes the X has smaller ports and a small stock turbo but it has already been said that there seems to be abundant space to open up the ports, turbos can always be upgraded, etc. and on that same note the X is doing wonderfully with bolt ons, MBC, and NO tune at this point. IMO, for 90% of us, it is becoming increasingly clear that with the X we may very well have our cake and eat it too!!! optimism? you bet!
what we need to talk about IMO are things that you cannot so easily change like the chassis, the head design, engine geometry, the block (although it's very common to resleeve open deck blocks), etc. in that regard, stick with one story or at least put things in perspective when you make comparos.
stock vs stock we all can agree the IX is faster
mild vs mild even at this early point in time, i think we can all agree that the X is better
high vs high is a toss up at this point. we know what the IX can do but we can only speculate on what the X can do.
what i have noticed with you is that you interchangeably compare different states of tune to play devils advocate. in one breath you can say the 4B11's semi closed deck will be a problem. yes when you approach like 500-600 whp. this assumes you are comparing the X at high tune vs IX at high tune.
then in the next post you talk about the smaller ports and smaller stock turbo being a restriction for the X. so now you compare them in terms of mild vs mild.
it's like you find a "fault" with the X and dwell on that point without considering the overall picture. yes the X has smaller ports and a small stock turbo but it has already been said that there seems to be abundant space to open up the ports, turbos can always be upgraded, etc. and on that same note the X is doing wonderfully with bolt ons, MBC, and NO tune at this point. IMO, for 90% of us, it is becoming increasingly clear that with the X we may very well have our cake and eat it too!!! optimism? you bet!
what we need to talk about IMO are things that you cannot so easily change like the chassis, the head design, engine geometry, the block (although it's very common to resleeve open deck blocks), etc. in that regard, stick with one story or at least put things in perspective when you make comparos.
We can compare any scenario. To say that the X is better "overall" is trying to cover every facet of the car in any situation (stock, mild, or highly modded). Since this hasn't been proven, I point out the faults that *could* make this statement false. You can't have "better" performance when your snail isn't putting out the air and your car weighs a bit more than another car. You can't make big whp with an upgraded turbo if the exhaust ports are too small and need to be ported. You can't go HUGE whp gains without the semi-closed deck being sleeved, etc.. etc.. Basically you'd have to mod the crap out the car like you'd do ANY car. So what makes it special? It's all about the "image" that people try to bring to make the X that I have issues with. I'm just putting things in a realistic perspective. EVERY car has a weakness otherwise there wouldn't be many different kinds..so let's not try to talk like it doesn't have any...
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
From: Miami
Yeah....
But! it will still be the "NEW EVO" Ralliart???? Will still be an EVO X in wolves clothing my friend... In fact wait one while I go grab my hater blockerz...
Last edited by acme20000; Feb 24, 2008 at 10:42 PM.
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
From: Miami
Just one last note... I feel your pain killer, but you should admire what you have and whats become.... I've just recently joined the dark side... lol being a long time VW fan and owner I hated on On all evos.... but 8, 9, X truth is When you say Evo everyone deep inside knows that these are some bad *****ez. Now never got to own 8 or 9, but I admire whats been done and what can be done... now sit back and watch the featherz fly cause it's our turn to Fluck dis chicken....
Evolved Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 846
Likes: 0
From: tsukuba turn 4
You can't have "better" performance when your snail isn't putting out the air and your car weighs a bit more than another car. You can't make big whp with an upgraded turbo if the exhaust ports are too small and need to be ported. You can't go HUGE whp gains without the semi-closed deck being sleeved, etc.. etc.. Basically you'd have to mod the crap out the car like you'd do ANY car. So what makes it special?
as for the semi closed deck. other engines have made 500 comfortably on a true open deck block. the x has semiclosed deck with iron sleeves. at the least, 500 hp is no slouch. how many people here are 500+ hp vs those that are not? again i'm talking realistic scenarios.
it's one thing to point out a possible tuning roadblock. but you also have to consider the state of tune and if it will affect the masses, not just those who chase numbers and notoriety.
i don't think you are too realistic. most people will never tune their car up to the point where the ports are a major restriction. yes of course all cars have weaknesses or faults...BUT we should be talking about the ones we can't really fix like a bad chassis, engine geometry, engine configuration, drivetrain components like adding AYC to a non-AYC car, etc. ports can be opened, blocks can be resleeved, rods, cranks, pistons, valves, etc can all be improved. but you can't make a MS3 a RWD or AWD car without massive changes. THAT is more important than nitpicking on things that may or may not be a restriction when hp gets above 500 or whatever number most of us will never see.
it's one thing to point out a possible tuning roadblock. but you also have to consider the state of tune and if it will affect the masses, not just those who chase numbers and notoriety.
it's one thing to point out a possible tuning roadblock. but you also have to consider the state of tune and if it will affect the masses, not just those who chase numbers and notoriety.
Last edited by Red Dragon; Feb 25, 2008 at 04:18 PM.
^ I would agree with Red Dragon. IMO, HP on any USDM Evo so far has been easy to come by. Significant handling improvements have been much harder to come by, especially for the DIY crowd.
l8r)
l8r)
i think without the coilovers the suspension upgrade is not that expensive. And you can make alots of improvements without coilovers too. Of course the coilovers will be the best, but that is just like the big turbo kit on the engine.
of course you can get Penske coilovers ,but you can gat ARC FMIC or UICP or exhaust too.
and i dont think takes more time and work to do them too. I would say these mods are preatty close together ,price wise too.
But i might find myself wrong with these one.
of course you can get Penske coilovers ,but you can gat ARC FMIC or UICP or exhaust too.
and i dont think takes more time and work to do them too. I would say these mods are preatty close together ,price wise too.
But i might find myself wrong with these one.
Last edited by Robevo RS; Feb 26, 2008 at 06:49 AM.
EvoM Community Team Leader
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,135
Likes: 6
From: chicago, michigan, arkansas
i don't think you are too realistic. most people will never tune their car up to the point where the ports are a major restriction. yes of course all cars have weaknesses or faults...BUT we should be talking about the ones we can't really fix like a bad chassis, engine geometry, engine configuration, drivetrain components like adding AYC to a non-AYC car, etc. ports can be opened, blocks can be resleeved, rods, cranks, pistons, valves, etc can all be improved. but you can't make a MS3 a RWD or AWD car without massive changes. THAT is more important than nitpicking on things that may or may not be a restriction when hp gets above 500 or whatever number most of us will never see.
it's one thing to point out a possible tuning roadblock. but you also have to consider the state of tune and if it will affect the masses, not just those who chase numbers and notoriety.
it's one thing to point out a possible tuning roadblock. but you also have to consider the state of tune and if it will affect the masses, not just those who chase numbers and notoriety.
But having said that - what's the point of the "superiority talk" if we all drive around on 350whp EVOs? If you have a X and it makes 400whp and I have an 8/9 making 360whp, they are both equal as far as straight line performance goes... so there is no advantage on either car.
So when people talk about "OMG, I just made 50whp with my X with just intake!!!" I say, "Big deal.. I only need to make 10whp to get the same performance because the weight of your car holds you back from seeing a significant increase in speed compared to my car.." Is that not a fair assessment?A lot of people want to think the X is superior because:
1) It's the new evo
2) They just forked off $40k
3) It has SAYC.
4) It looks more refined and less raw.
5) It runs extremely rich from the factory and gains a tremendous amount of whp with leaning it out.
For the same reasons above, I can come up with a counterlist that mentions why "my car" (could be any car) is superior.
1) I have an older proven evo.
2) My car is paid off.
3) A professional driver won't need SAYC.
4) I like the raw race-car feel of the older evos.
5) The older evos have been able to make 1000whp so I can shoot for any whp number I want.
Then you get the guys defending the X to argue those points.. etc.. etc..
I think we can all agree that the X has some GREAT strengths but also some weaknesses like any other car.
So would you agree that the IX is better then the VIII? Since with just a flash tune and some very minor mods it could get in the 350WHP area without any Meth etc. And maybe I missed this, but what is the validation you are looking for? What makes one car better then another? Without having that definition, this discussion is pointless, and since you are the OP, you should define what it is.
EvoM Community Team Leader
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,135
Likes: 6
From: chicago, michigan, arkansas
So would you agree that the IX is better then the VIII? Since with just a flash tune and some very minor mods it could get in the 350WHP area without any Meth etc. And maybe I missed this, but what is the validation you are looking for? What makes one car better then another? Without having that definition, this discussion is pointless, and since you are the OP, you should define what it is.