Evo X impression from Auto week
Sep 27, 2007 | 02:12 PM
#31
Evolving Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
From: MD
It seem fishy to me that all the reviews quote the exact same 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. C&D and Edmunds normally have vastly different times as they do testing slightly different.
Just having different drivers and atmospheric conditions would change the times a little.
Just having different drivers and atmospheric conditions would change the times a little.
Sep 27, 2007 | 02:19 PM
#32
. Do some reading on how much R&D went into the Veyron trans and you'll understand. Thats' like saying that McLaren's F1 car has a good trans, so a Mercedes E320 must have a good one too. Two different leagues. A fully loaded Evo X probably wouldn't even pay for the housing of the Veyron DSG.
Sep 27, 2007 | 02:31 PM
#33
Evolved Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 858
Likes: 0
From: Cybertron
You are seriously mistaken if you think the Bugatti and the Evo X trannys will have even one part in common . Do some reading on how much R&D went into the Veyron trans and you'll understand. Thats' like saying that McLaren's F1 car has a good trans, so a Mercedes E320 must have a good one too. Two different leagues. A fully loaded Evo X probably wouldn't even pay for the housing of the Veyron DSG.
. Do some reading on how much R&D went into the Veyron trans and you'll understand. Thats' like saying that McLaren's F1 car has a good trans, so a Mercedes E320 must have a good one too. Two different leagues. A fully loaded Evo X probably wouldn't even pay for the housing of the Veyron DSG.That the Veyron uses a similar tranny utilizing 4 turbo chargers.
Sep 27, 2007 | 02:40 PM
#36
You are seriously mistaken if you think the Bugatti and the Evo X trannys will have even one part in common . Do some reading on how much R&D went into the Veyron trans and you'll understand. Thats' like saying that McLaren's F1 car has a good trans, so a Mercedes E320 must have a good one too. Two different leagues. A fully loaded Evo X probably wouldn't even pay for the housing of the Veyron DSG.
. Do some reading on how much R&D went into the Veyron trans and you'll understand. Thats' like saying that McLaren's F1 car has a good trans, so a Mercedes E320 must have a good one too. Two different leagues. A fully loaded Evo X probably wouldn't even pay for the housing of the Veyron DSG.
Sep 27, 2007 | 02:51 PM
#37
Evolving Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
From: Santa Monica, California
Sep 27, 2007 | 03:45 PM
#40
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
From: Earth
Looks like my grandma's next car ......they've REALLY outdone themselves with this one 
.....I wonder what the 335i/Sti fanboys are saying on their fourms.....i hope at they are just baiting subaru and the rest of the crew on the 60,1/4, and HP and then come TMS time they release it with 330 hp....
P.S. it already has R32 boys making fun of it
......they've REALLY outdone themselves with this one .....I wonder what the 335i/Sti fanboys are saying on their fourms.....i hope at they are just baiting subaru and the rest of the crew on the 60,1/4, and HP and then come TMS time they release it with 330 hp....P.S. it already has R32 boys making fun of it
Sep 27, 2007 | 03:50 PM
#41
ON SALE: January 2008
BASE PRICE: $29,000 (est)
DRIVETRAIN: 2.0-liter, 295-hp, 300-lb-ft turbocharged l4; awd, five-speed manual
CURB WEIGHT: 3,344 lb.
0-60 MPH: 5.0 sec (mfr)
FUEL ECONOMY (EPA): 26 mpg (est)
"Despite all the added size, structure and systems, the new Evo MR with the six-speed TC-SST is just 100 pounds heavier (including 11 pounds of sound deadener) than the 2006 Evolution IX MR. The infinitely more tunable GSR with the five-speed manual is just 59 pounds heavier."
Where are the fools that said the X will cost 40K+ and weigh 300 lbs more.
BASE PRICE: $29,000 (est)
DRIVETRAIN: 2.0-liter, 295-hp, 300-lb-ft turbocharged l4; awd, five-speed manual
CURB WEIGHT: 3,344 lb.
0-60 MPH: 5.0 sec (mfr)
FUEL ECONOMY (EPA): 26 mpg (est)
"Despite all the added size, structure and systems, the new Evo MR with the six-speed TC-SST is just 100 pounds heavier (including 11 pounds of sound deadener) than the 2006 Evolution IX MR. The infinitely more tunable GSR with the five-speed manual is just 59 pounds heavier."
Where are the fools that said the X will cost 40K+ and weigh 300 lbs more.
Sep 27, 2007 | 04:17 PM
#42
Looks like my grandma's next car ......they've REALLY outdone themselves with this one .....I wonder what the 335i/Sti fanboys are saying on their fourms.....i hope at they are just baiting subaru and the rest of the crew on the 60,1/4, and HP and then come TMS time they release it with 330 hp....
P.S. it already has R32 boys making fun of it
......they've REALLY outdone themselves with this one .....I wonder what the 335i/Sti fanboys are saying on their fourms.....i hope at they are just baiting subaru and the rest of the crew on the 60,1/4, and HP and then come TMS time they release it with 330 hp....P.S. it already has R32 boys making fun of it
I'm sure Mitsubishi would LOVE to see an Evo X vs. R32 vs. 335i test. Any track, anywhere, anytime.
The last gen. CT9A set the bar so freakin' high in almost every performance test, nothing, save a WELL driven STI, under $50g's could touch it.
So the new X is slower by .2 sec. to 60 and quicker around the Mitsu. proving grounds by a full 2 sec. a lap compared to the Evo IX and you say other ill informed fanboys are laughing? At what exactly?
Sep 27, 2007 | 04:34 PM
#44
Newbie
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
From: LA, Cali
Sep 27, 2007 | 04:52 PM
#45
