Isnt the SRT-4 sort of a long lost brother of the Evo?
May 13, 2005, 12:57 PM
#31
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (30)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SoCali!
Posts: 1,869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 03BREvo8
The current SRT engine is an A something.. i had and srt.. and no didnt look anywhere similar
May 13, 2005, 12:59 PM
#32
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (30)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SoCali!
Posts: 1,869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
most of the people here dont get what i mean do u? i dont care if its fwd, rwd, 1wd, doesnt matter, im talking ownership wise of the companies of Dodge-Talon-Mitsu-Chrysler, etc... this has NOTHING to do with performance
May 13, 2005, 01:17 PM
#33
yeah but almost every car is related nowadays. how many manufacturers use the chevy trailblazer platorm; chevy, gmc, isuzu, saab,hummer(h3), even subaru is thinking about it!, you can say the are brothers w/ both having mitsu built turbo's, and both companies own part of each other but thats it, for now until the evo X
.
anyway, the car that made turbo's popular was the 86 grand national cause they moved the turbo from the back to the front and ic'd it and made it very easy to add power.
much respect to the grand nat's, GNX's 87turbo t-birds, 89 turbo firebirds, turbo mustangs, Merkur XR4TI, daytona's and starion and the 1G DSM's that paved the way for turbo cars in america...btw, i saw an 89 mazda 323 turbo hatch for a grand i was thinking of picking up as a toy.
.anyway, the car that made turbo's popular was the 86 grand national cause they moved the turbo from the back to the front and ic'd it and made it very easy to add power.
much respect to the grand nat's, GNX's 87turbo t-birds, 89 turbo firebirds, turbo mustangs, Merkur XR4TI, daytona's and starion and the 1G DSM's that paved the way for turbo cars in america...btw, i saw an 89 mazda 323 turbo hatch for a grand i was thinking of picking up as a toy.
May 13, 2005, 01:28 PM
#34
Evolved Member
Considering Mitsu taught Chrysler engineers how to build small engines and small cars, it would not suprise me if the A series is a cribbed version of the 4G63. But regardless of any of that, the term "DSM" is not to be used lightly and cannot - by definition be applied to either the Neon or the Evo.
Brothers?
No.
Distant cousins?
Okay, fine.
Brothers?
No.
Distant cousins?
Okay, fine.
Last edited by GPTourer; May 13, 2005 at 01:31 PM.
May 13, 2005, 01:44 PM
#38
Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by UT_Evo
Wrx has mitsu parts in it too, if I'm not mistaken... Anyway, all you SRT-4 haters need to get a life and complain about something else, like the Evo 9
e.b.
May 13, 2005, 02:33 PM
#39
Evolved Member
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Idaho, not Iowa
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
don't forget about the turbo'ed toyota pickups in the mid 80's. don't see many left, but they're around. I don't think that there is one single car that can be said to make turbo's famous. with the gas crunch, a lot of companies developed turbo'ed cars in the late 70's and into the 80's as a necessity to fuel economy. we can all sit back and be thankful that they did as we boost all over town 
May 13, 2005, 02:41 PM
#41
Evolved Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NA
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bluetouring350
apparently you werent around in the 80's. after the oil crisis, every manufacturer started making 4cyl turbo cars for fuel efficient power. RX-7, Merkur Xr4-Ti, Cosworth, Mustang Turbo, MR-2, 280Z, 300Z, Starion, etc...there were lots way before the eclipse ever came out.
Get off my ***, dammit.
May 13, 2005, 02:51 PM
#42
Evolving Member
Originally Posted by CosEvo
my car on fire. I remember when the Eclipse came out with Talon and everyone said that they have an Eclipse engine in the Talon. I did not even arguee with them, they found out the truth in a short time. ...
Originally Posted by GPTourer
But regardless of any of that, the term "DSM" is not to be used lightly and cannot - by definition be applied to either the Neon or the Evo.
Brothers?
No.
Distant cousins?
Okay, fine.
...
Brothers?
No.
Distant cousins?
Okay, fine.
...
May 13, 2005, 03:27 PM
#43
Evolved Member
Originally Posted by Kevine326
ill agree obviously with the neon/srt4 comment. But the awd DSM is like a lil brother to the evo. Same engine, same drivetrain, same tranny.
That's why I don't understand why so many Evo owners get so miffed if they can't be considered "DSM's" like it is a prestigious mark of excellence or something. It is a closed set of vehicles and nothing else can be added in. Like there will never be another C5 Vette, or Mark IV Supra. The joint venture is over, production has ceased - the mark applies to a finite set of vehicles.
You drive a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, JDM engineering at its finest. No other distinction needs to be made, period.
May 13, 2005, 03:46 PM
#44
Evolving Member
Originally Posted by GPTourer
DSM's are older, obviously so they relate more to EVO III's and Galant VR4's (the latter are considered DSM's). The EVO 4 on up to today's VIII has a much improved drivetrain, plus the chassis is entirely different. But it isn't a DSM, period. You could say that a Pontiac WS6 is a littile brother to a C5 Vette because they have exactly the same drivetrain, but the owner's of the Vette's probably feel they are driving a whole lot better of a car then the typical F-body.
That's why I don't understand why so many Evo owners get so miffed if they can't be considered "DSM's" like it is a prestigious mark of excellence or something. It is a closed set of vehicles and nothing else can be added in. Like there will never be another C5 Vette, or Mark IV Supra. The joint venture is over, production has ceased - the mark applies to a finite set of vehicles.
You drive a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, JDM engineering at its finest. No other distinction needs to be made, period.
That's why I don't understand why so many Evo owners get so miffed if they can't be considered "DSM's" like it is a prestigious mark of excellence or something. It is a closed set of vehicles and nothing else can be added in. Like there will never be another C5 Vette, or Mark IV Supra. The joint venture is over, production has ceased - the mark applies to a finite set of vehicles.
You drive a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, JDM engineering at its finest. No other distinction needs to be made, period.
