RE: The Final Evolution
Discussion
Evos do seems to be significantly more track-focussed these days with rock-hard suspension etc, while the Subarus keep a bit more suspension travel (learnt from rallying) for a bit more poise on rougher roads. Interesting that the things which Subaru are often criticised for in tests against the Evos are the things which tend to make them better road cars, but as the likes of TopGear etc base more of their tests on track they prefer the Evo.
Mr Whippy said:
Andrew Noakes said:
Mr Whippy said:
Mpg is quite irrelevant on a brand new car of this type, anything worth driving that will come close in performance terms will only be averaging 25mpg anyway at best... it's nothing really.
It isn't irrelevant. The trouble with the Evo's fuel consumption is that you only get 200 miles or so between fuel stops. Which is irritating. Doesn't matter how fast your 0-60 time is when your car's stationary in a petrol station.
Come on, it's an Evo. Who even buys such a car and then worries about that? It's just more fuel to weigh you down afterall
Dave
I took my P1 around Europe last year on a 3000 miles in 9 days hoon. Great fun but the one thing that irritated was stopping every 180 miles or so for petrol. On the 'bahn cruising at 140 you could literally count the minutes before you'd be stopping again.
Granted - it was never designed to be a GT and the trip was epic nevertheless - but it's the one thing that really stops it being all things to all people.
smifffy said:
Mr Whippy said:
Andrew Noakes said:
Mr Whippy said:
Mpg is quite irrelevant on a brand new car of this type, anything worth driving that will come close in performance terms will only be averaging 25mpg anyway at best... it's nothing really.
It isn't irrelevant. The trouble with the Evo's fuel consumption is that you only get 200 miles or so between fuel stops. Which is irritating. Doesn't matter how fast your 0-60 time is when your car's stationary in a petrol station.
Come on, it's an Evo. Who even buys such a car and then worries about that? It's just more fuel to weigh you down afterall
Dave
I took my P1 around Europe last year on a 3000 miles in 9 days hoon. Great fun but the one thing that irritated was stopping every 180 miles or so for petrol. On the 'bahn cruising at 140 you could literally count the minutes before you'd be stopping again.
Granted - it was never designed to be a GT and the trip was epic nevertheless - but it's the one thing that really stops it being all things to all people.
Fair point, but even at 90 mph thats a good two hours of running for a five minute stop to fill. Like you say not all things to all people, but I doubt even with a 25% bigger tank it'd transform it. I think it's mainly down to wank fuel economy when using it's performance that counts against it
Look how other GT's manage, they have 80l+ fuel tanks, adds weight and a load of inertia in a not so good place in a 4wd 4 door saloon (behind rear diff), and is simply not needed when your not crossing Europe. Tough one though. I wonder what the perfect balance would be...
Dave
If i drive like Miss Daisy's chauffer then i might see 250 - 270miles per tank. Problem is i need some new shoes as the old ones seem to be full of lead 
At Bedford Autodrome i got through a tank full in an afternoons blat around the full circuit and averaged about 8mpg. Thats not too bad really
At Bedford Autodrome i got through a tank full in an afternoons blat around the full circuit and averaged about 8mpg. Thats not too bad really
article said:
..the final version of the 4G63 in-line four which dates back to 1987...
The 4G63 powered the original Colt Lancer 2000 Turbo which was launched in the UK in 1981. The engine actually dates back to the 1970s where it evolved through the Lancer's successes in the East African Safari rallies.
I ran an Evo VIII FQ for nearly 2 years...
Awesome car, unmatched handling, etc etc, but (and it's a big BUT!):
a) Mitsubishi UK release a new 'version' on average every 20 weeks and every time they do this, they accelerate the depreciation for existing owners. Depreciation was shocking enough without MMUK helping it along...
b) The servicing is a COMPLETE RIP OFF and is 4,500 mile intervals or 6 months. My E60 M5 costs about 75% LESS than the Evo was costing to run and both were/are main dealer serviced.
c) Warranty was unlimited mileage (at the time), but is patchy to say the least - my front discs warped after about 6k miles and they refused to cover them under warranty. Even Ford cover warped discs! And has to be Mitsubishi approved servicing or invalidates the warranty.
Summary - cheap to buy, but they bend you over the table as an owner of a warranty'd car!
However; as an A/B road charger, they cannot be beaten - best story was being overtaken one night by 3 fast bikes on a twisty'ish A road near me (excuse = I was having a fag and didn't even see them coming!). I then proceeded to catch them up and chase them at close'ish quarters for the next 7-8 miles. Stopped at traffic lights and the lead guy does a U-turn on the bike, comes up next to me and just says 'Respect for that mate! I couldn't lose you in that car!'. I couldn't/wouldn't have done that in many other 4-door saloons!
Awesome car, unmatched handling, etc etc, but (and it's a big BUT!):
a) Mitsubishi UK release a new 'version' on average every 20 weeks and every time they do this, they accelerate the depreciation for existing owners. Depreciation was shocking enough without MMUK helping it along...
b) The servicing is a COMPLETE RIP OFF and is 4,500 mile intervals or 6 months. My E60 M5 costs about 75% LESS than the Evo was costing to run and both were/are main dealer serviced.
c) Warranty was unlimited mileage (at the time), but is patchy to say the least - my front discs warped after about 6k miles and they refused to cover them under warranty. Even Ford cover warped discs! And has to be Mitsubishi approved servicing or invalidates the warranty.
Summary - cheap to buy, but they bend you over the table as an owner of a warranty'd car!
However; as an A/B road charger, they cannot be beaten - best story was being overtaken one night by 3 fast bikes on a twisty'ish A road near me (excuse = I was having a fag and didn't even see them coming!). I then proceeded to catch them up and chase them at close'ish quarters for the next 7-8 miles. Stopped at traffic lights and the lead guy does a U-turn on the bike, comes up next to me and just says 'Respect for that mate! I couldn't lose you in that car!'. I couldn't/wouldn't have done that in many other 4-door saloons!
Deadly Dog said:
article said:
..the final version of the 4G63 in-line four which dates back to 1987...
The 4G63 powered the original Colt Lancer 2000 Turbo which was launched in the UK in 1981. The engine actually dates back to the 1970s where it evolved through the Lancer's successes in the East African Safari rallies.
Mitsubishi's press pack said:
The Evolution IX MR FQ-360 represents the final application of Mitsubishi’s world-renowned 1997cc 4-cylinder 4G63 twin scroll turbo engine, which originally made its debut in the Galant VR-4 of 1987.
I guess the subtle distinction is that the 1981 engine didn't have a twin-scroll turbo. Either way, the interesting subtext is that the Evo X will have a new engine.
The engine has evolved over those years, though. The Evo 9 was a fair leap because it introduced a Mivec variable valve head - featured on the old FTOs.
Incidentally, a lot of the cabin noise is down to the Yokohoma A046 tyres. When I changed mine to Toyos (A046 is not approved for sale in UK - it is missing some rating or other) the ride and noise improved hugely. Turn in isn't as sharp, though.
Incidentally, a lot of the cabin noise is down to the Yokohoma A046 tyres. When I changed mine to Toyos (A046 is not approved for sale in UK - it is missing some rating or other) the ride and noise improved hugely. Turn in isn't as sharp, though.
GravelBen said:
Evos do seems to be significantly more track-focussed these days with rock-hard suspension etc, while the Subarus keep a bit more suspension travel (learnt from rallying) Yeah, Mitsubishi's rally experience only goes as far as using Group A cars to beat the WRC works specials used by the likes of Subaru.
johnnystorm said:
GravelBen said:
Evos do seems to be significantly more track-focussed these days with rock-hard suspension etc, while the Subarus keep a bit more suspension travel (learnt from rallying) Yeah, Mitsubishi's rally experience only goes as far as using Group A cars to beat the WRC works specials used by the likes of Subaru.
Wow, you can get your facts wrong and completely miss the point, both at the same time! Impressive.
The point I was making is that Subaru seem to still be carrying over more between their rally and road cars than Mitsi, who are making newer Evos more suited to the track than a bumpy B-road.
If you have a look at current WRC, Production WRC and other such rally comps you'll find Subaru whipping EVO's ar5e everytime. Road EVO's are more track focused as they ride so badly over rough roads and the suspension is rock hard and unforgiving. Ben is right when he says Subaru take a lot more of what they rally and apply it to road cars.
I would be confident that if i took a standard EVO and a standard STi out of the box and stuck them on a rally course the EVO would fall apart or shake the occupants to death. Subaru's suspension is much more compliant and perfect for crappy UK roads. Fact!! Chuck some Prodrive springs onto the standard suspension and it gets even better
I would be confident that if i took a standard EVO and a standard STi out of the box and stuck them on a rally course the EVO would fall apart or shake the occupants to death. Subaru's suspension is much more compliant and perfect for crappy UK roads. Fact!! Chuck some Prodrive springs onto the standard suspension and it gets even better
ScoobieWRX said:
I would be confident that if i took a standard EVO and a standard STi out of the box and stuck them on a rally course the EVO would fall apart or shake the occupants to death.
Have you ever driven a UK STi? I have - it was a 2004 model which I borrowed for a day long test ride. The ride was incredibly harsh and my Evo MR (which admittedly has more compliant Bilsteins than its predecessors) feels like a limo in comparison. People have even commented on how good the ride is (relatively speaking).
It was the damping which seemed OTT on the STi. Every bump would send a jarr up your spine.
The Prodrive upgrade is supposed to significantly improve things.
Both cars are set up for fast road work, not off roading.
Both cars would be (are) hopeless over some of the crappily surfaced Hertfordshire roads I traverse every day, though.
The best road compromise I've been in was a WRX with prodrive goodies, formerly owned by my boss.
I've passengered in a few Evo's and Scoobies and never found them that bad. Once the pace picks up they work even more magic over the bumps it seems.
Then you passenger in something like a new ish S-line Audi and it's just all over the place, seeming to roll lots but have tons of high speed damping, so it's just crashy everywhere, and fidgety over almost every bump.
I think the VII of which I've been in the most is a damn good compromise. I'd certainly not call it stiff, but I guess when pushing on your just need to increase your level of attention on bumpier roads...
Dave
Then you passenger in something like a new ish S-line Audi and it's just all over the place, seeming to roll lots but have tons of high speed damping, so it's just crashy everywhere, and fidgety over almost every bump.
I think the VII of which I've been in the most is a damn good compromise. I'd certainly not call it stiff, but I guess when pushing on your just need to increase your level of attention on bumpier roads...
Dave
I've driven STi's and Evo's and my experience is the EVO has a harsher ride. The only think with the STi, and this was a 2006 2.5L model is that it has an unusual bobbing up and down motion to it on the motorway which i thought would probably make me sick after a while but the EVO 260 i test drove was harsh in comparison, specially over small bumps and potholes. And yes, the prodrive upgrade makes a heap of difference to the STi, so much so that it then becomes a real pleasure to drive no matter how smooth or harsh the road gets.
However...i have never felt jarring in any STi i have driven, so that's a new one on me.
However...i have never felt jarring in any STi i have driven, so that's a new one on me.
What you need to do is buy a 2nd hand VIII MR for £17k ish - get it remapped, which will give more power than this IX 360, and also better fuel economy.
Looking at 24 mpg and 300 miles per tank (not driving like miss daisy either).
Plus the car has taken the big hit on the depreciation and along with the Makinen, is one of the most sought after / admired models.
Looking at 24 mpg and 300 miles per tank (not driving like miss daisy either).
Plus the car has taken the big hit on the depreciation and along with the Makinen, is one of the most sought after / admired models.
Edited by gsrgeoff on Wednesday 16th May 21:44
Gassing Station | Japanese Chat | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff