Mitsubishi Lancer Evo 10: 0-96km in 5.0 seconds, 1/4 mile 13.8 seconds

[MITCHAY]

Originally Posted by Steffo

I've never broken the gearbox in one if that's what you mean. Been in two seperate 02 STi's, one stock, one with basic bolt ons... a standard 99, bolt-ons 96 and standard 94.

Have you actually drove them though? You drive one long enough you learn that you don't have to drop the clutch to get decent performance. You don't need the absolute best launch on the street.

The problem with the AWD is that it grips too much hence the shock to the drive line plus it was under engineered to cope with the stress.

But then again when they were first introduced, I don't think Subaru were building them with respect to hoons picking them up second hand a few years later and dropping the clutch everywhere they go. Nor driving them through shopfronts either :

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by merlin

Steffo, I'm not angry, I just hate innaccuracies sprouted as truth, and there is plenty in this thread. I agree the flower remark was below the belt, but when you say you cant beat 03 Rexes and up it doesn't make sense to me as the classic shapes pre 99 are actually lighter and damn fast. (The 01 and 02 bugeyes are the "slow" models). Power to weight ration is not the be all and end all - gearing and how you get off the line plays a pretty big part (i.e. hence me harping on about the AWD vs FWD launch).

WRX gearbox is not the explosive device many think it basically comes down to driver skill (or lack there of). If you cant drive and do big launches they will break. If you know how to slip a clutch and do a proper big AWD launch they will keep going and going.

But in the end the WRX, EVO, Clio ect are not really staight line cars, as Mitchay said they are circuit cars or twisty cars so I dont really know why we are having this argument...

I have no doubts that if lined up at a drag strip, both cars driven to their absolute maximum potential, a WRX would out drag a Sport Clio. I never said (in this or any other thread) that the Clio is a definitively faster accelerating car then a WRX, simply that it can beat one.... not that it always will. It's quite an awesome race. I've beaten them many a time, much to the surprised look on their face. The WRX doesn't have enough power to run it down if the launch is stuffed and after that its all over.

The only reason I'm arguing is that someone else (with a single-digit name, ahem) mentioned that I said I can beat a WRX in reply to my comment about my lack of faith in Lancer build quality and then people started to attack me. None of this has absolutley anything at all to do with the thread topic and I definitley didn't start it.

And yes, definitley agree 100%, come twisty time... these types of cars... :

[Matty4]

Funny how a thread on the EVO X became a battle for supremacy between a WRX and a Renault!!!!

[chris0]

Half the people in this thread know what they're talking about, the other half haven't the faintest. My old man picked up a IX late last year. He traded a Series One VYR8 (260kw manual) I loved the car, v8 with power to boot,That thing hauled , and if we're quoting magazines i.e motor and wheels, it was clocked anywhere from 5.7 to 6.1 0-100km/hr. The Evo is roughly the same, feels the same 0-100, but has been clocked a little quicker 5.4-5.7 (and not to mention 13.2-13.45 400m sprints). So? If anyone knows Hawkesbury lookout, you will know that a high powered boat such as the clubsport will be sideways every corner. Not the evo. There are numerous quotes from the worlds journo's who have driven this car saying that you WILL run out of go-nads before the car runs out of road. Forget the dragstrip, the evo will take on a clubbie, falcon, typhoon on the 400m, it may be a few tenths slower, but come to a race track, or any road with a bend in it for that matter, and it will come up trumps. As for fuel economy and insuarance, the latest wheels magazine (with the holden ute on the front) has insaurance quoes in the back, the evo ix i'm sure was cheaper to insure then the R8, and was rated 13.0L/100km. My old man (not a hoon) gets 10's/100

[Steffo]

Just an interesting thing, in regards to how all-conquering the Evo is supposed to be...

The good old Nurburgring-Nordschleife, 22km and 172 turns of fun...

HSV GTS300 VTII - 8:15
Mitsubishi Lancer Evo9 - 8:11

Its interesting that the much newer Evo is only 4-sec faster on an 8:10 lap. That's 0.816% difference. Or akin to 5 tenths on a 1-min lap. In other-words, not much faster. Seems the all-conquering Evo can *just barely,* beat a 7-year old 1715kg HSV on the world's most famous race-track, through 172 corners its supposed to be far superior through.

Either the Evo is overrated or the big Aussies are underrated. Either way, its advantage in this instance isn't what one would think it'd be.

It will be interesting to see how much faster the Evo10 is over the 9.

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by Steffo

Just an interesting thing, in regards to how all-conquering the Evo is supposed to be...

The good old Nurburgring-Nordschleife, 22km and 172 turns of fun...

HSV GTS300 VTII - 8:15
Mitsubishi Lancer Evo9 - 8:11

Its interesting that the much newer Evo is only 4-sec faster on an 8:10 lap. That's 0.816% difference. Or akin to 5 tenths on a 1-min lap. In other-words, not much faster. Seems the all-conquering Evo can *just barely,* beat a 7-year old 1715kg HSV on the world's most famous race-track, through 172 corners its supposed to be far superior through.

Either the Evo is overrated or the big Aussies are underrated. Either way, its advantage in this instance isn't what one would think it'd be.

It will be interesting to see how much faster the Evo10 is over the 9.

FFS more quotes from god knows where...

Were they done on the same day, if not how did the track/weather conditions compare ?

Who was driving ?

What model EVO9

RS
GT
GSR
FQ300
FQ320
FQ340
FQ360

Steffo your endless quoting of crap you know nothing about really is pointless :

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

FFS more quotes from god knows where...

Were they done on the same day, if not how did the track/weather conditions compare ?

Who was driving ?

What model EVO9

RS
GT
GSR
FQ300
FQ320
FQ340
FQ360

Steffo your endless quoting of crap you know nothing about really is pointless :

Regular garden variety Evo9. The source isn't specific as to which, but its a Japan sourced model, not an FQ (RalliArt UK). Evo9 by Best Motoring, GTS300 by Motor. Both tests done in the dry. Motor's was done against the E39 M5 and W210 E55 AMG with the track closed, both of which lost to the GTS.

Oh and don't accuse me of "quoting crap I know nothing about," because you're going above your head there. I know more about the "crap," I'm quoting then you could fathom, otherwise I wouldn't post it.

Keep any stereotypes you may believe about me to yourself, they're not needed, reality is they're just that, stereotypes, and the fact that you're so hollow-skulled as to jump on that bandwagon and believe them only goes to discredit you.

[Xitdxr]

Different day, different circumstances. You can not just pull times from different motoring mags and say this is the difference. Same day same driver back to back will give you a better idea. Also remember that Nurburgring has a lot of long straights with sweeping corners, the HSV isnt going to struggle around those as much as tight corners for instance on a hill climb!

Also Steffo, i dont think you would beat a WRX, i have beaten plenty of clio's in my 06 Polo GTI and im on the heals of WRX. Yes you can beat them if the person driving cant drive at all, but thats like me taking the out of my brother and claiming it as a serious win, when he screwed a launch in his BF typhoon and i took 2 to 3 car lengths out of him.

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by Xitdxr

Different day, different circumstances. You can not just pull times from different motoring mags and say this is the difference. Same day same driver back to back will give you a better idea. Also remember that Nurburgring has a lot of long straights with sweeping corners, the HSV isnt going to struggle around those as much as tight corners for instance on a hill climb!

They're not conclusive proof no, but they're a decent indicator as to what's what. (The times)

[Xitdxr]

Originally Posted by Steffo

They're not conclusive proof no, but they're a decent indicator as to what's what. (The times)

I disagree, it doesnt indicate anything, you could change those stats anyway you wanted, ie. you could argue that it was completely dry for the HSV and it was damp for the EVO, which would make the HSV look plain pathetic.

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by Xitdxr

I disagree, it doesnt indicate anything, you could change those stats anyway you wanted, ie. you could argue that it was completely dry for the HSV and it was damp for the EVO, which would make the HSV look plain pathetic.

Except both were done in the dry. I'm not changing anything. You're welcome to look it up for yourself if you don't believe me, its not like I have a copywright to information....

[Xitdxr]

Originally Posted by Steffo

Except both were done in the dry. I'm not changing anything. You're welcome to look it up for yourself if you don't believe me, its not like I have a copywright to information....

How cool/warm was the day? what was the track tempreture at the time both cars were on track? what tyre pressures did each car run? You see what im getting at, too many variables. Nothing against you, but information you have given us is skint, and you just cant compare them.

On the other hand, if anyone would like to sponsor me and get these two cars at the track, i will fly over and give it a ripe old go for the sake of comparing :

Back on topic now, the Evo X is a top looking car and i think it will be much better than what people think. Japan tend to understate there cars and i dont think this will be the exception, so bring on the tests i say!

[XR8-260]

Originally Posted by Steffo

The only reason I'm arguing is that someone else (with a single-digit name, ahem) mentioned that I said I can beat a WRX in reply to my comment about my lack of faith in Lancer build quality and then people started to attack me. None of this has absolutley anything at all to do with the thread topic and I definitley didn't start it.

And yes, definitley agree 100%, come twisty time... these types of cars... :

Oh, that was me lol. I didn't mean to start a fight though. I just thought your comment about the Evo's safety was a little biased and one-eyed. As the others have said, the Evo has a 5 star safety rating and AWD. My mate (on his p-plates) recently lost control of his dad's 230rwkw VU SS ute while going around a corner. AWD probably would have saved him.

About the Clio vs. WRX, street races are not the most conclusive test. I've heard guys in stock VN V6s claim to have beaten XR6 Turbos on the street. Let us know how you go at the drag strip though.

Cheers.

[gunbound]

ive always liked the evos.

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by Matty4

Funny how a thread on the EVO X became a battle for supremacy between a WRX and a Renault!!!!

Could have been worse, could have been a Evo versus a Cordia

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by 3

Oh, that was me lol. I didn't mean to start a fight though. I just thought your comment about the Evo's safety was a little biased and one-eyed. As the others have said, the Evo has a 5 star safety rating and AWD. My mate (on his p-plates) recently lost control of his dad's 230rwkw VU SS ute while going around a corner. AWD probably would have saved him.

About the Clio vs. WRX, street races are not the most conclusive test. I've heard guys in stock VN V6s claim to have beaten XR6 Turbos on the street. Let us know how you go at the drag strip though.

Cheers.

While AWD probably could have helped your mate out, it won't save you if you're not driving to conditions or your ability. It's why there are so many WRX accidents and fatalities. "Oh my God bro, its four-wheel drive bro, watch me take this 30km/h corner at 150 kays bro...."

They think that because the car is AWD, they can do anything, and alot of the time, it gives people a false sense of security. AWD cars can let go too.

XR6 Turbo vs VN hey? Was the XR6T parked? I think RSC v WRX is a bit of a closer race then that.

[Xitdxr]

Originally Posted by Steffo

While AWD probably could have helped your mate out, it won't save you if you're not driving to conditions or your ability. It's why there are so many WRX accidents and fatalities. "Oh my God bro, its four-wheel drive bro, watch me take this 30km/h corner at 150 kays bro...."

They think that because the car is AWD, they can do anything, and alot of the time, it gives people a false sense of security. AWD cars can let go too.

100% agree with you there.

[Bent8]

Just an interesting thing, in regards to how all-conquering the Evo is supposed to be...

The good old Nurburgring-Nordschleife, 22km and 172 turns of fun...

HSV GTS300 VTII - 8:15
Mitsubishi Lancer Evo9 - 8:11

Its interesting that the much newer Evo is only 4-sec faster on an 8:10 lap.

The 'Ring' is a very good measure of a cars performance potential...the fact that the EVO is only 4 seconds faster than an old HSV goes to show being faster round corners doesn't count for much because it loses out on the straights.

[austyphoon]

Originally Posted by Bent8

The 'Ring' is a very good measure of a cars performance potential...the fact that the EVO is only 4 seconds faster than an old HSV goes to show being faster round corners doesn't count for much because it loses out on the straights.

The same could be said about the GTS's power advantage (300kw vs 206kw)...means jack when you have corners to go around.

I suppose we should wait until we can get some proper performance indicators before we write the X off. I was just disappointed that with the amount of hype this car has received it appears to be only slightly better then its predecessor.

In other news http://www.worldcarfans.com/9070924....rest-shots-yet

Will be interesting if it's hype has been blown out of porportion.

[XR8-260]

Originally Posted by Steffo

XR6 Turbo vs VN hey? Was the XR6T parked? I think RSC v WRX is a bit of a closer race then that.

Yes, I agree. That's why street races are not conclusive evidence that one car is faster than the other. There are so many different factors involved. You often hear people with e-series falcons and VN-VS commodores making outrageous claims about the cars that they have beaten on the street. The argument about 'who is faster' is best left to the 1/4 mile track.

[CSV_LS1]

Originally Posted by austyphoon

The same could be said about the GTS's power advantage (300kw vs 206kw)...means jack when you have corners to go around.

I suppose we should wait until we can get some proper performance indicators before we write the X off. I was just disappointed that with the amount of hype this car has received it appears to be only slightly better then its predecessor.

In other news http://www.worldcarfans.com/9070924....rest-shots-yet

Will be interesting if it's hype has been blown out of porportion.

Considering the GTR's benchmark was the Porsche Turbo to begin with. With that easily beaten now they are hunting down the fastest Porsche of all, the Carrera GT supercar. I don't think anyone will be disappointed.

[MITCHAY]

Originally Posted by CSV_LS1

Considering the GTR's benchmark was the Porsche Turbo to begin with. With that easily beaten now they are hunting down the fastest Porsche of all, the Carrera GT supercar. I don't think anyone will be disappointed.

Awesome

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by CSV_LS1

Considering the GTR's benchmark was the Porsche Turbo to begin with. With that easily beaten now they are hunting down the fastest Porsche of all, the Carrera GT supercar. I don't think anyone will be disappointed.

There are no official figures from anyone. So no one knows if its faster then the 911 Turbo's 7:40 yet. Then there's acceleration. 0-100km/h in 3.2 sec and 1/4 in 11.4 @ 120.5mph on an ice-covered runway (Motortrend article, I've got the scans). I'd love to see the GT-R beat that.

PS - There are faster Porsches then the Carrera GT.

[austyphoon]

Originally Posted by Steffo

There are no official figures from anyone. So no one knows if its faster then the 911 Turbo's 7:40 yet. Then there's acceleration. 0-100km/h in 3.2 sec and 1/4 in 11.4 @ 120.5mph on an ice-covered runway (Motortrend article, I've got the scans). I'd love to see the GT-R beat that.

PS - There are faster Porsches then the Carrera GT.

Faster? That come from the factory? I think not.

No doubt the GT-R won't be as good as the Carrera GT (which was US$440 000 mind you)but it's always good to see the japanese and the Americans stick it to the germans when it comes to performance cars for a fraction of the cost. The Corvette Z06 is another example, hands the 911 Turbo, Fezza 430 and Gallardo their asses for under half the asking price of the 3 euros, can't wait to see how the blue devil performs once it's released!

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by austyphoon

Faster? That come from the factory? I think not.

No doubt the GT-R won't be as good as the Carrera GT (which was US$440 000 mind you)but it's always good to see the japanese and the Americans stick it to the germans when it comes to performance cars for a fraction of the cost. The Corvette Z06 is another example, hands the 911 Turbo, Fezza 430 and Gallardo their asses for under half the asking price of the 3 euros, can't wait to see how the blue devil performs once it's released!

1994 Porsche-Dauer 962 LeMans, co-developed by Porsche & Dauer Motorsports as an entrant for the 1994 LeMans 24 Hours which it won. Pretty much a Group C LeMans race-car with a street car interior and a number-plate. Sold 13 of the, they plan to sell 50. Retail for $853,473 US. 545kW 3.0L Flat-Six Twin Turbo, 700Nm, 1082kg. 404.6km/h top whack, hits 100km/h in 2.6 sec, down the 1/4 in 8.9 sec and is doing 400km/h in 15.1 sec.

Technically not a production car, but it is a Porsche product that lays waste to any other road car they have made... 959, 911 GT1 Strassenversion, Carrera GT... you name it, none compare. Also my dream car.

Oh and the C6 Z06 doesn't do any -handing to the 911 Turbo. Its rather reversed. Its about dead even with the F1 F430, and well... Gallardo is the oldest of these cars (2003 release), and understandably gets left behind.

[Rev28K]

Some of the Ring lap times aren’t full laps (toll gate to finish line rather than finish line to finish line). It also has some massive straights which will possibly let a car with more straight line grunt peg back a good handling or short geared car’s lap times back.

I’d be interested to see what a Radical SR8 or the proposed hardtop does around there. The Dauer is based on an old design so it would be interesting to see what a more modern “open” design with numberplates would do around there. I’d certainly expect something like the Caparo T1 to give the lap record a good kicking.

Back to the topic at hand. I’d happily have an Evo 6.5 or Evo 9 the’ve been quick at track days I’ve attended. The extra torque in the Evo 9 seems good (not 2.5 litres worth but still good for a 2.0). While the new Evo X shell is a result of a Daimler/Chrysler/Mitsubishi compromise they have pulled some weight out of it and redone suspension mounting locations. Hopefully the technology and tyre advances can claw back some of the losses caused by weight gain – I’d be thinking 1:37’s to 1:38’s around Winton.

[Homer1]

Originally Posted by Steffo

make sure you never take on an Alfa 147 GTA in your WRX or you might be... disappointed.

That's only if the Alfa doesn't break down before it even reaches 1/4 mile.....which it is verly likely to do so . I would take ANY Japanese car over an Alfa, they are unreliable junk, style over substance!

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by Homer1

That's only if the Alfa doesn't break down before it even reaches 1/4 mile.....which it is verly likely to do so . I would take ANY Japanese car over an Alfa, they are unreliable junk, style over substance!

That's excellent. And you can believe that modern Alfa's are like that, more power to you. Meanwhile, us people back on Earth who don't live in a fantasy world will stick to knowing better. _

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by Rev28K

Some of the Ring lap times aren’t full laps (toll gate to finish line rather than finish line to finish line). It also has some massive straights which will possibly let a car with more straight line grunt peg back a good handling or short geared car’s lap times back.

I’d be interested to see what a Radical SR8 or the proposed hardtop does around there. The Dauer is based on an old design so it would be interesting to see what a more modern “open” design with numberplates would do around there. I’d certainly expect something like the Caparo T1 to give the lap record a good kicking.

It's interesting to note that the outright Nurburgring-Nordschleife record is still held by the Porsche 956 (predecessor to the 962) and was set at 6:11.13, in 1983, by Stefan Bellof, qualifiying for the 1000km Nurburgring-Nordschleife race. The Porsche-Dauer 962 LeMans is the latest, most powerful and fastest version of the 962 that was ever produced with the most advanced suspension and brakes. It used to hit 390km/h on the Mulsanne Straight at LeMans before needing to brake. I have no doubts it could run a 6 dead if not a high 5 lap around there.

Radical's 6:55.06 for street cars still stands strong too, no one's close to beating that. The T1 will be interesting, but the coming-soon 500hp+ Turbo SR8 should give that thing a run for its money.

And yeah... someone pulling a Dauer and making a street-version of an LMP1 car... like Audi with the R10... would be very cool.

[Deadman]

Originally Posted by Steffo

Meanwhile, us people back on Earth who don't live in a fantasy world will stick to knowing better. _

right.... Does that include you Steffo?