Really? Man, your right, the new Evolution is definetly not a boy racer econo-box. It's definetly a top tier automobile. I mean, when I think "luxury sports sedan", I don't think of a 3 series Beamer, an Infiniti G35, or a Lexus ISF, I think of a Mitsubishi Lancer.....

Get real dude, the IX was a boy racer econobox with a crappy interior, and the X is a slightly bigger overweight boy racer econobox with a ever so slightly better interior (albeit with a hike in price, a crap tune from the factory and a gas pedal that likes to snap). If you want a "mature" adult car that you can be taken seriously in, get a 335i or somthing. Your condescending tone is laughable considering we are talking about a car that is jerkoff fodder for 15 year old Super Street readers, both IX and X.

 

Haha, oh wow. I could just as easily say you don't want to like the IX because you want to reassure yourself that that your X is better. See how easy it is to make assumptions and point fingers?

I'm not blind. I know what the Evo X looks like, and if someone wouldn't take you seriously in a IX, there's no reason they would in a X. It has more scoops in the hood. It has long vents behind the front wheels. For ****s sake, people have already dubbed white ones storm troopers. I wonder why?



Yeah, no one would ever look at that and think boy racer.

I understand you love your X, just like I love my IX. They're both great cars. But you're naive if you think Mitsubishi has magically jumped this canyon and put the car into BMW territory, because they haven't. Like I said before, if you deal with the type of clientele that wouldn't take you seriously in a IX, the X won't help you.

 

Well I guess that I, along with the magazines, along with the salesmen drooling over my car at the porsche dealership, along with everyone that I know would disagree with you two. To each his own. I'm not going to argue with a couple of evo 9 fanboys on the internet about whether or not the X looks more upscale than the 9. The facts speak for themselves.

 

Your right the X is not boy racer at all Seriously dude you quote WAY too many megazine articles. Have you actually tracked your car to see these differences you speak of that are so profound...I doubt it. Except for that fact many times the X is slower around tracks that the IX....of course that just has a mile of excuses ranging from "oh well the X does better on tight tracks". There both evo's there both fast...quit speaking as if the X is the holy grail and leagues better. Most the time they perform so damn closely a typical driver would run the same lap times.

Until I start seeing a mass majority of the way better handling X's then really its a moot point. There is what 2 fast X's setup by robispec and what....70-80+ Robispec VIII/IX's.

You have no facts...you quote biased megazine articles. Go ahead and call me a fanboy but the realization is you are the biggest fanboy on this whole forum. Who is it that EVERYTIME somebody say anything bad about a X you are there?

 

I'm not quoting magazine articles, I'm talking about my own experiences. That was pretty clear in my post, so you might want to work on your comprehension skills. In any case, no, I have not tracked my X yet, but I have enough track days under my belt in all of my previous cars and have driven my friends evo 8 back to back with my X on one of my local backroads enough times to tell the difference in handling performance. I think the X is a better car, you think the 8/9 is better. To each his own, but again, I am not going to argue with evo 9 owners over which is a better car. It's pointless and we should all know that after 97 pages of this crap. You can stay in here and continue to argue if you want but I'm tired of this and I'm out. See ya.

 

Coming from RWD V-8s...The older evos made me respect the evo, and the X made me buy one. If I still lived in the city I would have bought a straight line driver. Living on the twisties, this thing is way better suited for me. So far I love the car, hopefully it holds up to the legacy built by the others.

 

You're entitled to your opinion.

I wasn't aware that magazines made definitive judgments about how upscale a certain car looks. Have any examples to enlighten me?

I've gotten compliments about my car too. OMG, you mean it's possible some people notice VIIIs and IXs, not just Xs? Outrageous!

You must lead an interesting life. I take it you take a picture of a IX everywhere you go and ask everyone you know whether they like it or your car more? Well, I guess that shut me up.

I'll let you call me a fan boy when I make a thread pissing and moaning because my car lost in a performance test to a Cobalt SS and claiming that the test was somehow biased against the Evo. Pot to the kettle, buddy.


You might want to look up the definition of "fact". Last time I checked, subjective things (you know, like a car's styling) didn't fall within the realm of fact. But hey, if the thought that EVERYONE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD BUT ME AND THE OTHER GUY prefers the X's styling to the IX's makes you happy, I'm happy for you.

 

I'm hardly a fanboy, I don't even own an Evo. But my opinion is not based on what a magazine or some douche salesman says.

The thing that gets me is guys like you who don't really accept the car for what it is, but instead have to try to justify themselves to other guys on these forums, and prove how great of a car they purchased, and how much of an upgrade it is over the IX, VIII, VII, ect. ect.

I wouldn't mind if all of you guys just manned up and admitted, "hey, I know it's not that hardcore of an Evo like before, but I personaly like the way it looks, I like the way it drives, and I don't really care if it weighs alot and has a new engine, it is what it is". I would be cool with that. But thats not the case, you keep on citing magazine articles and other BS that just dosn't mean anything.

I think 99% of all the people on these forums, whether VIII, IX or X owners have forgotten somthing important which may or may not give you a different outlook on the whole "real Evo" thing: Mitsubishi is selling you a car that really truely does not perform as good as the old cars. Why? Well, what were these cars made for? Installing HTABiggieStageEleventeen58573 turbochargers and cams, and dynoing them? Doing sweet parking lot racing with cones? How about going to the dragstrip? The answer to all of the above is no. These cars were MADE TO RALLY. Might I remind you that Mitsubishi does not compete in WRC anymore, and unike the old cars, the VIII, IX, and ESPECIALLY the X were not made with rally racing in mind. They were not developed to compete in the WRC like the old cars were, which in my eyes, makes pretty much every Evo after the VI kindof weak.

I laugh when Mitsubishi pulls out the "rally inspired heritage" BS in their adverts, and I feel saddened that most of the people on these forums will never drive or experiance these cars in the way they were truely meant to be driven and competed.

 

^ well put... even kinda made me sad... but now, back to the arguing!

btw, just a feeler, who wants my IX MR SE in the ever elusive tarmac black?? no joke !

 

Actually, pretty sure any EVO (VII, IV, or X) you or I can buy was built for the street, not for the middle of the woods, or some mud pit.

There are so many unrealistic things being said in this thread. Really, when it comes down to it, the cars are so similar it's not even worth arguing.

The same thing happened (moderators put a stop to it, because beating dead horses is a good way to deteriorate a community) over at the STI forums.

You should be happy Mitsubishi is trying to appeal to a larger market with the new cars, because they already weren't selling. Remember when we didn't have the STI or the EVO? I see those days quickly approaching again.

Stop complaining, and buy more Japanese turbocharged cars.

 

What in the holy hell are you blabbering about?

http://www.motorauthority.com/mitsub...p-n-racer.html

"Mitsubishi is expected to obtain the Group N homologation from the FIA for the Exo X by mid next year with the new rally challenger taking part in international rallies during the second half of 2008 or 2009. Development of the race cars will be a joint effort between Mitsubishi and Ralliart, and this early prototype will help verify the potential of new components that will eventually make their way to the final competition cars."

 

Oh, wow, so Mitsubishi is going to get homologation approval from the FIA for a car it has already engineered and decided to produce, after the fact. So basicly, if I understand this correctly, they built a car, then decided to try and rally it. Not as before where they were already competing in rally, and built a car specificly to rally, then produced copies for homologation rules? Sounds just like somthing I said earlier....

I guess you don't know the whole story about the Evolution, or why it is here then. Mitsubishi had been rallying, and decided to stuff their Galant VR4 powerplant into a lighter better handling chassis. So in 1992, the Lancer Evolution was made. FIA rules say a manufacturer must make "X" many examples of your competing car, in order for you to compete, that way manufacturers can't just build some expensive one-off car. So the Lancer Evolution was put into production.

Rally cars and production cars are alot more similar than you think, it's not like NASCAR. Aside from safety equipment, an inlet restrictor on the turbo, special suspension and tires, among a few other things, you ARE essentialy driving a car that was made to be driven "in the middle of the woods". It's just the homologated production unit. Well, when I say "you" I am reffering to IX, VIII and previous gen owners.

 

But the point is that it is in fact going to be competing in Group N which undermines the crux of your point. Are you implying that Mitsubishi is supposed to apply for homologation approval before the car is actually engineered and built? I'm not quite sure what your point is. They built the car. They're rallying it.

That said, I track my cars but have zero intentions of taking my $33,000 daily driver out into the woods and mud and beating it to **** simply because of its connection to homologated rally cars. I suspect having been a member of this forum for 4 years that the "you" you are referring to is a minuscule number of members of this forum regardless of the year of production.

 

its funny when i read all these comments about driving our Evos off road as they "were meant to be", i cant help but remember my one and only time i took the car out in the snow - on my stock Advans.... from a stanstill the car accelerated sideways only, and when it came time to brake, well, it didnt. i know its not a winter tire, i know... but still, kinda weird choice for the company, considering its kinda an AWD car, and all those "offroad roots"

 

ok how about this...


The Evo IX is better at being an Evo than the Evo X.

The Evo X is better at being a car than an Evo IX.

Because being a better car and a better Evo are two different things ?