Okay, this might range from scooped to welcome to last year moron, but I get my regular email form R&T detailing the manual trans Evo X, Seems to me MT and more than a few people thought the next EVO would be a twelve second car in stock trim despite the very real gain in mass for this chassis.

Heres a link to the article http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=6029 hopefully it works

here's the the pertinant stuff.

----------------------------

Acceleration
0–60 mph: 5.2 sec

0–100 mph: 13.8 sec

0–1320 ft: 13.8 @ 100.0 mph

Braking

60–0 mph: 117 ft

80–0 mph: 196 ft

Handling

Skidpad: 0.96g

Slalom: 67.2 mph

 

In the article they referenced the engine as a 4g63. didn't they get the memo that this is the first evo not to use the 4g63?

 

Not terribly interesting to me. For almost $10,000 more than a base GT I would expect better than a 13.8 1/4 mile and an ugly car to boot. Plus, with the 0-60 times vs. the 1/4 mile times, you can tell most of that 13.8 is from the 5500 rpm launch and the AWD. The MPH is not impressive for the ET. Stock for stock, I wouldn't put any money on a race from a stop, but from 30-100mph...I would have no worries.

 

I think MT called it under 4 sec to 60. Numbers do seem a little low though, then again its magazine drivers so who the hell knows. I never liked Mitsu cars as a company from previous shoddy quality, but that is definitely cooler then the new Sti hands down. Looks like this one is not so mickey mouse and all the JDM techo goodies come with this car. **** good looking car for the type. If I had the bucks that would probably be car #2 in the garage(unless I had more bucks then it would be an Exige, if more then a z06, if even more a Aston V8...).

From page 1 of the article:

"As we predicted five months ago, the latest Evo is powered by a turbocharged version of Mitsubishi's new-generation 2.0-liter inline-4, known in-house as the 4B11. While displacement remains unchanged from the 4G63 (in the Evo IX), this new aluminum-block powerplant is vastly improved. For one, it's lighter by about 27 lb., thanks to its aluminum construction. It also features Mitsubishi's variable-valve control technology (MIVEC) on both the intake and exhaust — the 4G63 had it on the intake side only. "

 

at least they look way better than they used to...

 

:gay:

 

Hugely disappointing. I really want a better performance bargain than a stripper S197 GT to come out. The **** Mustang has been on the market for nearly three calendar years, with no improvements or mid-cycle refreshenings, and it is still miles ahead of the next best bang for buck cars (350Z, Mazdaspeed3, ...??) I mean, I'm starting to feel like a Mustang fanboy.

 

Its ugly, its expensive, just par performance, and its a Mitsubishi...

 

You know, the Evo was not designed to go fast in a straight line. The fact that it DOES go pretty **** fast in a straight line is just a bonus. It's designed to go wherever you point your steering wheel - and I mean wherever. No matter how fast you happen to be going.

Yes, if your goal is to go fast in a straight line, you probably wouldn't start off with a turbocharged 2.0L engine. Or add hundreds of pounds of awesome suspension goodies.

I love my stang, but this is the car I fell in love with first... and if the "'08 evo" didn't get delayed so long, I might even be driving one..

Stock for stock, I would put all my money on the Evo in a road race. (not drag race)

 

No one disagrees with that. What I am complaining about is the $6k price increase, acceleration decrease, weight gain, and ever so slight handling improvement compared to the previous Evo. Yeah this one is much more refined, nicer, more luxurious blah blah blah. But none of those words were ever meant to describe an Evo. Mitsu took the car in the wrong direction. What was once a bargain rally car is now a bargain M3. Both cool, but there are enough M3 wannabes out there, before the X the Evo was one of two WRC carbon copies.

 

Holy FuManChu is that thing ugly. Did someone put the Mustang RAGE bodykit on that thing. Maybe Hulk Hogan would drive it... if he could fit.

 

Keep it.

 

ah i missed that part.

I saw

So i thought they were talking about the new engine and called it 4g63.

 

so it's slower than the last one????????hahaha.

 

kinda like when the 1994 mustang gt came out.

 

 

Road racing is cool and all...but I don't think I've EVER been challenged to a road course style race. Stoplights? Yes. Interstate rolls from 65-70? All the time. Pikes Peak? No.

 

how many times do you get out to pikes peak?

 

Never. So why would an super duper road course monster interest me? Anything that I would want to compete against would only be raced in a basically straight line (not counting the small jog to the right my rear end makes in 1st gear )