VW DSG is insanity. Not apples to apples.

 

That sounds like you are saying the DCT is not an advantage in a 1/4 mile drag race.

Run your numbers on the manual Golf R and compare with the manual RS. Come on man....you should know these things.

Nice posting ..............
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/pr...evo-8-9-x.html

 

Oh ****, STM started a thread in the Build section!!!!

 

Was good to see a data comparison with the X too. Strong numbers

 

Nemsin will do whatever he can, ignores whatever facts or results stand in his way, to convince the world that the RS is a terrible car and everyone should buy a 10 year old Evo instead.

 

And weight is 3422.

 

More info from Cobb.
http://www.cobbtuning.com/ford-focus...d-development/

 

this car makes some serious low rpm tq. 270 at 2000rpm. WTF. its like a nice twin charged setup but without the big turbo.

 

Both are awd hot hatches in the $36K range, seems like apples to me. So you think DSG is more of an advantage than an extra 50hp?

Why do you think the RS runs the same 1/4 mile time as a stock Evo IX?
2016 Ford Focus RS
¼-MILE @ MPH 13.4 sec @ 105
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-5

2006 Mitsubishi Evo IX
¼-mile: 13.4 sec @ 104 mph
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...w-specs-page-2

 

Can't wait to see what happens when people start reaching 100 whp gains.

 

Yea, looking forward to seeing E40 and tuners understanding the car more.

btw, there is a ex-evo owner local that has a RS now and he has been talking to me about tuning it.

Just have to wait for Cobb to release AccessTuner for it.

Hmmm.. this driveshaft size... :-/

 

And the RS beat the R in the Top Gear comparison and the Car and Driver comparison, so what's your point?

Are you upset that the RS didn't win every test?

Has this impacted your decision not to buy an RS?

If you bothered to read either review, you notice that in both cases, the RS is praised for the characteristics car enthusiasts actually care about: driver feel and experience.

You're so ****ing salty, it's hilarious.

 

We can't keep replying then wonder why he keeps posting.

Just sayin.

 

Reminds of some of the early GTR front prop shafts.

RS does look puny...maybe it needs to be billet or CF

Did someone say aftermarket?? .

 

I merely asked for an apples to apples comparison. A DSG R is 3mph and almost a half second faster through the traps than a manual R. That's even considering the DSG car sees a net loss in comparison on the dyno. Those three shifts account for a considerable amount of time accelerating. The days of manual transmission domination for performance are long over.


Your chief problem is your fanboy hate so negatively tints your vision that you can't have a rational discussion. Worse, you've not driven an RS, and everything you're saying is pulled only from crap you've read about it. That's just sad, man.

My stock Evo IX went 13.49@102.1mph with a 1.8x 60' in cool spring air, and it was a healthy car on the rollers compared to so many others I've seen on the same dyno. I've seen some that definitely dyno higher, but we all know you typically were getting more than 286HP with those cars. Factor in that the IX is "supposedly" 50hp less but 200 lbs lighter than the RS, and it's not a big mystery. There have definitely been some soft RS Foci out there, but 105mph is pretty stout. 100% stock vs. stock around a racetrack, an RS will beat an IX.

You like your car and hate this one; you will never buy an RS- that's great! We all totally get it. Stop pooping in this thread, you have nothing to contribute but negativity and whitewash-tailored-to-nemsin's-argument data, and it's become super predictable and boring.