[Jackygor]

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0801_mitsubishi_lancer_evolution_comparison/acceleration_features.html

 

[Jackygor]

The backlash among Evo enthusiasts was instantaneous. Once word came down that the 10th iteration of the Lancer Evolution (known as Evo X in Japan) was heavier than the outgoing 2006 model (Evo IX) yet possessed about the same level of power, rabid Mitsu fans began posturing that it wasn't only slower but, due to a beefier structure, more sound deadening, and new electronic aids like Active Yaw Control (AYC), also (gasp!) duller than the raw, scalpel-like IX. Heir apparent? If you paid attention to the bloggers who'd been speculating about the performance of the X even before the Concept X bowed at the 2005 Tokyo motor show, it was more like "error apparent."

To dispel (or confirm) these rumors, we grabbed an Evo X at the first opportunity and, in addition to subjecting it to our full battery of road and track analyses, we hauled it up to Reno-Fernley Raceway in the high desert of northern Nevada for a full day of track torture. With four miles of road course composed of 30 turns, 15 configurations, and enough elevation change to empty more stomachs than a Six Flags roller coaster, RFR is an ideal playground for assessing a rally-inspired street car. To raise the stakes, we brought along an Evo IX GSR (more commonly known as the straight IX or just IX) for a baseline comparison. We even had technical editor Kim Reynolds transport our long-term Evo IX MR to see how the new X would stack up against its most potent precursor (see sidebar). While your humble scribe and senior editor Ed Loh would hot-lap all three Evos, we enlisted the help of Erwin Nagl, chief instructor of the Pro Control Driving Academy at RFR and former DTM driver and BMW and Bondurant driving instructor, to slice and dice the best times. Grab your cutting boards; we got the blades.

first page for you guys

 

[ak47m203]

im dissappointed.

 

[Jackygor]

im dissappointed.

+1

I want to cry...

I honestly doubt straight-line performance will be improved much in the production model.

 

[ak47m203]

With all that hype with that new s-awd and sst. The only thing they say is faster than two seconds against evo9 in their test lap. I think mitshu failed the potential first timer buyers and evo 9 owners to really give us an impressive numbers. Look at Nissan they did really improve GTR in all aspects 0 to 60, 1/4 mile, hp/torgue, cdrag, top speed. Nurburg time. Most of this new owners will race this car on red light, on straight and not on lap time. They already did 4.7 sec 0 to 60 why go back to 5 sec mark. Who needs luxury this car breed is performance. GTR did performance and luxury. Im just venting. You know what they should really do is beef up that hp/torque at least 320 to 350hp to compensate the wt added. I just don't get it. The only thing that is better ion that test is the useless braking and lateral g's, useless because it's better than a few points only and still slower in lap time. I just don't get it again. And the basic/ powertrain warranty sucks especially with the new unproven 5speed/sst dual clutch.

 

[Jackygor]

With all that hype with that new s-awd and sst. The only thing they say is faster than two seconds against evo9 in their test lap. I think mitshu failed the potential first timer buyers and evo 9 owners to really give us an impressive numbers. Look at Nissan they did really improve GTR in all aspects 0 to 60, 1/4 mile, hp/torgue, cdrag, top speed. Nurburg time. Most of this new owners will race this car on red light, on straight and not on lap time. They already did 4.7 sec 0 to 60 why go back to 5 sec mark. Who needs luxury this car breed is performance. GTR did performance and luxury. Im just venting. You know what they should really do is beef up that hp/torque at least 320 to 350hp to compensate the wt added. I just don't get it. The only thing that is better ion that test is the useless braking and lateral g's, useless because it's better than a few points only and still slower in lap time. I just don't get it again. And the basic/ powertrain warranty sucks especially with the new unproven 5speed/sst dual clutch.

+1

If they are going to take a step back in terms of performance, at least make it the same speed, not slower...

 

[soopah]

+1

I want to cry...

I honestly doubt straight-line performance will be improved much in the production model.

OK, I agree, there is no improvement in performance. We kinda knew that. What is improved is safety, refinement and looks. This is the first introduction of the Evolution to Canada and this is still an excellent handling and accelerating car, just not quite as good as before. The track results are very comparable so I am not that unhappy about the differences between the IX and the X. In fact, I don't think I could have driven a IX as a daily driver. I do not like that the driving experience is more removed, but such is life.

 

[soopah]

You know what they should really do is beef up that hp/torque at least 320 to 350hp to compensate the wt added. I just don't get it. The only thing that is better ion that test is the useless braking and lateral g's, useless because it's better than a few points only and still slower in lap time. I just don't get it again. And the basic/ powertrain warranty sucks especially with the new unproven 5speed/sst dual clutch.

Yes, especially since they lost the hp race to the STI, they could have bumped it up. Perhaps they should have taken a page from the UK and provided upgraded FQ models for North America.

 

[ak47m203]

Yes, especially since they lost the hp race to the STI, they could have bumped it up. Perhaps they should have taken a page from the UK and provided upgraded FQ models for North America.

That's another thing, why in UK they have that FQ version under factory warranty by Owen Development(correct me if im wrong). Here in U.S we have so many tuners that go to up to 1000hp(im not saying we need 1000hp). Toyota has TRD that can put super charger. Nissan has Nismo. Yes Evo X is safer car. They say it's perfect X but it's not. They should do what Nissan did with their GTR. And actually FQ means Fukin# Quick.

 

[Jackygor]

OK, I agree, there is no improvement in performance. We kinda knew that. What is improved is safety, refinement and looks. This is the first introduction of the Evolution to Canada and this is still an excellent handling and accelerating car, just not quite as good as before. The track results are very comparable so I am not that unhappy about the differences between the IX and the X. In fact, I don't think I could have driven a IX as a daily driver. I do not like that the driving experience is more removed, but such is life.

I agree, but I guess all the hype just got my hopes up.

Truth is I am never going to push the Evo X to the limit on public road, especially in Vancouver, I guess it is just human nature to complain.

And you are right, I probably wouldn't like the spartan interior in the 9 either.

Well, I am driving a civic right now, so I should be pleasantly surprised by the X when i test drive it, since we have no evo 9 to compare to.

 

[redmachine]

As a former evo6 and evo8 owner to me this is most dissapointing. That mitsubishi puts forth this car to the evo faithfull is sad, they will lose as many buyers as they will gain. Are they serious?--4.7 sec. to 60mph to 5.4 sec?, 300 lbs heavier?, 1.7 sec SLOWER than 9mr on this track? I thought that evolution meant going forward in all aspects, not trading one(refinement) for another(its SLOWER). I swear i thought the day would never come that i would consider buying an sti--but it has. I would only hope that mitsubishi feels in lost $$$$ their error and tries to fix it with the evo11. Good job mitsubishi--nice way of being faithful to YOUR faithful.

 

[_Chris_]

Keep in mind that the model they tested is the ' Preproduction car '.

 

[Kansei]

As a former evo6 and evo8 owner to me this is most dissapointing. That mitsubishi puts forth this car to the evo faithfull is sad, they will lose as many buyers as they will gain. Are they serious?--4.7 sec. to 60mph to 5.4 sec?, 300 lbs heavier?, 1.7 sec SLOWER than 9mr on this track? I thought that evolution meant going forward in all aspects, not trading one(refinement) for another(its SLOWER). I swear i thought the day would never come that i would consider buying an sti--but it has. I would only hope that mitsubishi feels in lost $$$$ their error and tries to fix it with the evo11. Good job mitsubishi--nice way of being faithful to YOUR faithful.

:'( I feel for ya man. They may lose buyers, but they will gain many, many more because of the refinement and mostly because of the availability of an automated transmission.

kinda sad. It seems as though this new car is such a departure that it might as well have been sold under a different model name, a la RX-8 vs RX-7.

 

[EzeE1o]

Yes, especially since they lost the hp race to the STI, they could have bumped it up. Perhaps they should have taken a page from the UK and provided upgraded FQ models for North America.

well, to be fair, the usdm versions of the sti always had a power advantage over the evo, yet the evo has (as far as i can remember) won most, if not all, comparisons

 

[ibn]

im dissappointed.

pretty much sums it up.

it seems that the "gains" in comfortability, safety, and technology takes a hefty bit away from performance. too me this is a car that is marketed for people who like think they have performance rather have a performance. eh, i guess it's all about putting more dollars in Mitsu's pocket.

i don't see many Evo IX owners making the switch.

 

[ibn]

oh yeah, don't get me wrong. the numbers for the X are still good, just not what i expected.

 

[ak47m203]

first i like x, from prototype to concept.... hmmm to production. About preproduction alibi. i don't think there will be a big change from the car in the dealership... it's the same engine, hp.trq, same aerodynamics and wheels, same transmission. how about ecu. you know why give a car to the tester that is misfiring. just give the best car they have. still they should do a complete package like nissan did. Maybe they should buy an m3 csl(sorry i don't know the numbers of me csl) and beat that car in all aspects.

 

[Tvall13]

If this car really is that much slower than the old one Mitsu made a huge mistake. People don't buy EVO's for their luxury and style they buy them for one thing, Performance. Why would you ever make a new version of that type of car THIS much SLOWER? So they rationalize substituting huge loss of performance with slight luxury and style upgrades and then jack up the price as well. No one that is looking at a Mercedes C class or BMW 3 series or Lexus IS or Audi is going to think hmm.. I'd rather go with a Mitsubishi. The people that are looking at those cars aren't gonna go for the EVO just because it is faster but way less luxurious. The EVO was and always has been for car enthusiasts that wanted the performance and didn't car about sacrificing some luxuries. I think Mitsubishi is going to lose a lot of loyal customers in an attempt to compete with BMW, Lexus, Audi, and Merc. Not many people are going to pay near 40k for a Mitsubishi especially one thats this much slower than the old one that costs less.

 

[Kansei]

No one that is looking at a Mercedes C class or BMW 3 series or Lexus IS or Audi is going to think hmm.. I'd rather go with a Mitsubishi.

yet everyone looking at the Evo X probably will due to the price similarity. They won't perform as well of course, but people who buy the evo for the status and not just for the performance will glady sacrifice the performance they use maybe once each weekend in the summer (track day and autocross stuff) for the prestige and such.

 

[Kooldino]

+1

I want to cry...

I honestly doubt straight-line performance will be improved much in the production model.

It will be when it doesn't lean out and detonate....