WOW what a disappointment!!!!
Dec 5, 2007, 09:20 PM
#138
did their best to keep weight down. The weight discrepency between the old base lancer (2745lbs) and the Evo IX (3285) was actually greater (540lb difference) than the weight discrepency between the current Lancer (3032) and the Evo X (3517lbs - difference of 485lbs). Proof of their effort is that the weight discrepency is less, yet there are more airbags, drivetrain parts, and other various luxury-esque weight inducing parts. The problem was that the base lancer was already so d*mn big and heavy (3000+ lbs for an econo-car!), it is just physically impossible to decrease the weight anymore than it already is without significantly increasing the price by using more exotic materials.Where Mitsu failed is the motor. 291hp sucks for a car that weights as much as the Evo does. They should have put more R&D into power delivery versus the SST b.s.
.Building from the heavy Lancer chassis was the downfall of the Evo X.
Dec 5, 2007, 10:10 PM
#141
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Aurora, IL
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i thought the new WRX looked soooo ugly... but after i've seen the sti's spec, i started to like it... after i've seen the evo's spec... i like the sti even more.....
Dec 5, 2007, 10:26 PM
#142
I don't find it a disappointment reason being? Remember mitsubishi's mission was to make they're evo's rally cars. and if i remember correctly you have to have a certain amount of horse power to enter rally itself or else you wont be able to participate and i think mitsubishi made the car with the amount of hp it has to enter rally again this year/next year.
Dec 6, 2007, 05:57 AM
#143
I don't find it a disappointment reason being? Remember mitsubishi's mission was to make they're evo's rally cars. and if i remember correctly you have to have a certain amount of horse power to enter rally itself or else you wont be able to participate and i think mitsubishi made the car with the amount of hp it has to enter rally again this year/next year.
Dec 6, 2007, 08:17 AM
#144
Evolving Member
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Jersey
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is just like when mitsu went from the 2g GSX to the ugly *** 3rd gen wit fwd n/a. The Devolution as they have called it. Im not gonna bash the evoX but i can tell u im not buying it just yet if i do. Imma wait for u guys to buy them mod them and tell me how they are 
than wait for all those little problems that start to uncover themselves over the year or years wit this new motor there using (maybe the return of the famous mitsu crankwalk lol)
than wait for all those little problems that start to uncover themselves over the year or years wit this new motor there using (maybe the return of the famous mitsu crankwalk lol)
Dec 6, 2007, 08:47 AM
#145
Evolved Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Boston
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know I sound like a broken record but I think they could have - had they not wasted all their engineering effort developing the SST. In addition, I suspect the torque handling capability of the SST might be the gating factor. We can't have the 5spd more powerful than the SST now can we?
Dec 6, 2007, 09:26 AM
#146
I know I sound like a broken record but I think they could have - had they not wasted all their engineering effort developing the SST. In addition, I suspect the torque handling capability of the SST might be the gating factor. We can't have the 5spd more powerful than the SST now can we?
Mitsu could have gone a similar route to what Mazda does with the RX-8. The manual is more powerful than the automatic. The auto couldn't handle the extra power, so there's somewhat of a "power penalty" if you want to own the automatic. Sounds fair to me since sports car shouldn't have automatics. Mitsu could have done the same thing with the SST and 5-speed.
Dec 6, 2007, 09:57 AM
#148
Evolved Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Boston
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You make a good point about the SST. Audi/VW's DSG can only handle so much power/torque. It's part of the reason why DSG is not in more of their higher power vehicles. For instance, there's a review of the new VW R32 and it talks about how the output of the engine is directly related to what the DSG could handle. It would have cost too much in R&D to develop a more stout DSG to handle more power.
Mitsu could have gone a similar route to what Mazda does with the RX-8. The manual is more powerful than the automatic. The auto couldn't handle the extra power, so there's somewhat of a "power penalty" if you want to own the automatic. Sounds fair to me since sports car shouldn't have automatics. Mitsu could have done the same thing with the SST and 5-speed.
Mitsu could have gone a similar route to what Mazda does with the RX-8. The manual is more powerful than the automatic. The auto couldn't handle the extra power, so there's somewhat of a "power penalty" if you want to own the automatic. Sounds fair to me since sports car shouldn't have automatics. Mitsu could have done the same thing with the SST and 5-speed.
By Mitsu going out of their way to point out that the new 5spd is a "new, better torque handling unit" are they trying to tell us anything about the GSR? Pre-prepped for significant power mods?
Dec 6, 2007, 11:18 AM
#149
I know I sound like a broken record but I think they could have - had they not wasted all their engineering effort developing the SST. In addition, I suspect the torque handling capability of the SST might be the gating factor. We can't have the 5spd more powerful than the SST now can we?
There's only so many engineers to go around and if you have that small engineering team working with the transmission manufacturer to smooth out the wrinkles in your new $50million dollar transmission, there aren't too many engineers left (or budget for that matter) to eke out the additional ponies this car needs.
Dec 6, 2007, 11:46 AM
#150
Evolving Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mitsu.'s betting on the future with the SST. To not design/build one would/ could potentially loose a great deal of future customers. Look at almost every other OE out there today. Almost all of them are in the throws of designing a similar transmission. What else could Mitsubishi have done? And let's not forget that they are still a very small car company with limited engineering and budget resources ( I mean they almost went out of businesss just a few years ago).
There's only so many engineers to go around and if you have that small engineering team working with the transmission manufacturer to smooth out the wrinkles in your new $50million dollar transmission, there aren't too many engineers left (or budget for that matter) to eke out the additional ponies this car needs.
There's only so many engineers to go around and if you have that small engineering team working with the transmission manufacturer to smooth out the wrinkles in your new $50million dollar transmission, there aren't too many engineers left (or budget for that matter) to eke out the additional ponies this car needs.
The problme with all of the CVTs and DSGs or SMT is that they can not handle one of a turbo motor's strentghs torque). I am unaware of any transmission with the exception of Ferrari and the like that can hande much, the last generation M3 with 267 lb-ft was the lone exception. Either way, I think Mitsu could redeem themselves by offering a lower cost higher hp version with a 5 speed, maybe even a 6 speed. The weight will never go away, which means that we better hope the motor can withstand 450 hp the way the 4g63 could.
Paddle shifts are only so cool.
