haha made me lol, good point

 

there's nothing fishy about it. ALL these journalists went to the SAME press event in japan. i'm sure a mitsu test driver did some 0-60 and 1/4mile runs then ALL the mags quote the time the driver got. at press events like these i doubt mitsu would waste time letting EACH mag get a 1/4 mile run just to see if they get different numbers. so far 0-60 in 5 sec (with R&T stating 5.2) and 1/4 mile in 13.8

these numbers will change dramatically once the mags get their own cars to test in different conditions, etc.

 

Agreed. Once the fanaticals get it in their head that what they own is the 'best ever' any kind of change in blasphemy. Just ask the E30 M3 nutters when the E36 M3 came out. Or the Porsche 993 to 996 to 998 series. Or even the Evo VI owners when the 'fat ***' Evo VII made it's first magazine cover.

Mitsu. will pick up a whole new breed of enthusiasts with the X. And with the X a whole new breed of soon to be fanatics. Three years from now those new fanatics will be on this very board bemoaning the changes Mitsu. dealt to the Evo XI, and so on and so on...
Change happens. The Evo IX holds a high place in automotive history. But it is still history. That makes all of us and the cars we own pretty much yesterdays news...

 

and here is a quote from edmunds when the ix came out....

"All Lancer Evo models come with a turbocharged 2.0-liter inline four rated at an impressive 286 horsepower and 289 pound-feet of torque. Power is delivered via a five-speed manual transmission on base and RS models, and a six-speed unit in the MR. An automatic transmission is not available. Standard on every Evo is a full-time all-wheel-drive system with an adjustable active center differential and limited-slip front and rear differentials. Expect 0-to-60 times in the mid-5-second range."

mid 5 seconds. amazing how a whole second was shaved off misteriously huh?
give the true results time to come out on the X before you stick your foot in your mouth.

 

I think people should look at the entire performance # rather than just the HP. Lot of cars are now advertising HP increase but hide the fact that these cars got much heavier. I think the new M3 added around 230lbs and the new skyline (i'm guessing you mean the G coupe and not the GT-R) added 150lbs from previous model and it now has 330 hp up from 298hp. Not to mention some of these cars cost much more than the Evo. The main reason I bought the IX was because it offered more for the money than the competition. I think the X will do the same.

 

That is exactly how it is done. It's called a Long Lead Press Event. All manufacturers have them, and I'm sure they all used the same numbers that were put down by one test driver.

 

so if the IX MR weighs 3285lbs (from mitsubishimotors.com specification page)
the X GSR should weigh 59 lbs more equaling 3344lbs (not that huge of an increase). The X MR edition should be 3385lbs...decently under the 3500 lb mark everybody was expecting to see. (disclaimer, i'm at work and haven't had the time to go through the rest of the thread-sorry if this was already pointed out)

 

Im curious about the X MR or the X MR SE ... Im also curious about the 2nd patch of Evo's released, because from experience I know that when something new comes out, the first patch is always simple, which means the second patch comes more equiped or it is always better (upgraded) so Im gonna hold my thoughts to that. (:

 

another autoweek article from this morning

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...309280001/1065

 

the hp and 0-60 times are also dependent on $ amount of the vehicle. As the $ goes up so does the hp numbers. It's all about market segment competition. I'd love to pay $40-45K for a 4.0 sec 0-60 car.

 

This line really caught my eye.

 

Ya...that caught my eye too. It seems like still follows the 280ps agreement.

 

Did everybody catch this from the Autoweek article "280 hp and 310 lb-ft of torque in Japan-spec models (U.S. spec is 295 hp and 300 lb-ft)." ? That's the first time a review has actually stated two different specs for the different regions.

 

So let's assume that they are still following the agreement and are underrating the J-Spec model in terms of HP. Now the question is what is the difference between the two so that the J-Spec model has 10 more lbs/ft torque? ECU mapping?

 

"BBS wheels, saving about two pounds per wheel. But it doesn’t end there; the package also includes more aggressively tuned Bilstein dampers, a set of lighter two-piece brake discs and very sticky Yokohama A13 tires" + GSR = makeshift 5spd MR that is even lighter.