Vin is depicted as Dominic Torretto. Fast and the Furious 1 was a great movie. 2 was a joke. They didn't even use a real EVO in that movie ( a hopped up looking lancer from what i had read...). I'm looking foward to F&F III. He made some good movies. Pitch Black, The Chronicles of Riddick... I wasn't happy with Triple X. I can't help in real life that the man prefers to be gay, but the character he portrays on screen is another story.

 

Although this is true, let it go. I said something about this a while back and got flamed to hell for it since nobody really cared. (However, in Japan, they have a GT version which is essentially our regular IX but with the JDM engine. All other mechanicals are pretty much the same.)
SPEED magazine (owned by Road & Track) did a 12.7 in a IX MR. They didn't list a trap speed though, but figure that the IX and IX RS shouldn't be far behind that, if behind at all.

 

Supposedly, the RS would be quicker then the MR. the 05 RS was quicker in the quarter then the 05 MR. Why not the 06 RS vs. 06 MR ? I'm speaking in the sense taking the stock car to its potential limit at the track under optimal conditions and great drag racing skills...

 

Yes, we know Vin was depicted as Dominic Torretto, a lame street racer who spits out corny lines. I wouldn't go so far as to say that The Fast and the Furious was a "great" movie, or even that 2 Fast 2 Furious was a "joke." I'm familiar with both directors' previous work.

Rob Cohen (director of the first one) tends to make his movies more sensational than they would be in real life, sometimes making it too sensational that it's ridiculous. Come on now, guys in Civics pulling over big rigs using harpoon guns? Five-minute quarter-mile races? Guys trying to swap Nissan engines into Civics? And sure, maybe the second one had Lancers dressed up as Evos, but that's how it always is. It's not like you would've known the difference if you never read it. And in the first one, it's not like any of the cars that were supposedly turbo'd (the Civics, Eclipses, Supras) really had turbos in them. Even the musclecar at the end was only a six-cylinder with a non-functional supercharger in reality (you can see the six-cylinder exhaust, as opposed to a dual-exhaust used for V-8s, when it flips over).

John Singleton (director of the first one) tends to integrate street elements from his upbringing into his movies. That might work for movies like Boyz in the Hood and Higher Learning, but not for a street racing movie set in Florida. It just doesn't flow well when you hear Paul Walker refer to Tyrese as "cuh" or "cuz" (slang term for a friend, typically used in Crip neighborhoods). I have always loved rap, but he drenched that entire movie with it, which doesn't work out well either. And let's not forget Tyrese doing the heel-toe backwards in his Eclipse.

Sorry for going off-topic.

But I would love to see an RS vs. IX vs. MR, much like what Motor Trend did but with the new models so we can lay our questions to rest.

 

12.8-12.9 can be done with "fat" normal evos (GSR) and obese MR's as well...

 

i dont really care about flaming. i have a life outside the internet, so people can say what they think they have to here. it's just annoying when people try to call their cars something it isn't. just like when every guy with an integra or civic tries to call his car a type R... instead of falsely identifying the car as a GSR, or saying that you have a GT with the USDM engine...why not just call it what it is? an EVO IX/VIII. so much simpler lol

 

I see so many of these threads about which evo is better, MR, GSR, RS, 03-04 VIII, 05 VIII, 06 IX but when I see the car being praised as the same car listed as the poster's vehicle in their profile, I usually stop reading because I hate that biased-opinion feeling I'm getting when I read. You just know that everyone with a RS will chime into this thread and everyone else with a GSR or MR will say that they can match the RS performance while having the amenities that make the car feel like it's not from the 80s rolling up and down the windows. There's going to be so many different arguments that will be pointed out but in the end everyone will agree that the Evo is an awesome car. I don't get these threads sometimes

 

I appreciate the venacular in your reply! Apparently both movies had meant something to you, or you wouldn't had laced your essay with such colorful metaphors. In other words, Fast and the Furious 1 was better appreciated by the many then Fast and the Furious 2. I wouldn't rush to say that Torretto was a "lame street racer". True, 5 minute quarter miles don't exist (not on this planet and current space time continuum, maybe as an experiment in relative motion between 2 observers from alternate planes of reality which coexist in the same time...), but the whole intent was to express the details of the race. To the person with common sense, you know what was going on, just expressed in another manner. As for motor swapping, anything is possible if you have the money (now don't take this in a literal sense). Sorry, i just couldn't appreciate 2F2F as I did F&F. But that's my own response to each movie.

 

Cant wait for a n00b RS owner to hit the track (not drag) and try to brake late and realize he locked his brakes up ...

 

You bring up a good point, but I would say that there is more validity coming from Evo owners more so than your average Joe on this board who drives a 1986 Ford Citation or a 2003 BMW M3 (but this obviously doesn't apply to the guys who don't own Evos but have driven various models on more than just test drives). And although owners of RSs would be more in favor of an RS (same with the regular IX and the MR and the various versions of the VIII), it's no different than a non-Evo owner stating which Evo he/she thinks is best, except the Evo owner has the experience and ownership to back up his/her claims.

 

But there is the variable of which car is potentially faster in the 1/4 mile. Due to the RS's reduction in weight, this car should utimately be the quickest of the 3 I had mentioned in the 1/4. I know it's based on the driver, but the RS is potentially the quickest. In a sense, if you could extract every last cent this car can put out under the same condtions, the RS should be the victor being that the cars are 100% stock also. That doesn't mean ripping everything out of the MR just to reduce weight! If that's the case, why did you buy an MR in the first case ?
Then we can get into the argument on which gearbox is better for the 1/4...
I don't want to boast upon Magazine Road Tests, but it seems everyone I came across, the RS was quicker 0 - 60 and the 1/4. I just haven't seen anything on the 06's yet.

 

Why would u wish that on anybody?

 

Besides, good drivers don't need ABS at the track

 

true good drivers dont need abs not even formula 1 have them!!

 

LOL............