Thegame

iTrader: (26)

But I don't believe the Bilsteins of the past actually affected performance negatively like they do on the X MR.

Driv200

iTrader: (1)

The brochure I picked up yesterday came with a summary of EVO articles. It states the MR has upgraded Bilsteins and Eibach springs. Does the GSR also have these? Regardless, I would be changing either of them for top track performance anyway if I had the cash.

As for this thread, I think the EVO X had to be changed for the future of the car to survive in the states. I don't like the larger and heavier everything, but the torsion rigidity has improved quite a bit. And I can't resist newer improved technology and engine designs! Happy Mitsu is moving forward on a great history. Just hope it really is better!!!!

S6devil

iTrader: (10)

exactly. Mitsu had to make radical changes b/c of the Us market, not because they truly believed its gonna be a better product, true to its mission.
Gov't crash-worthiness, interior ammeneties/features, keep up with the likes of bmw who offer crazy options like sound insulation and even a cd changer, and of course everyone and their grandma now offers an "F1" tranny, cause gosh forbid, in their exotic cars, they have to use the right hand for more than just the 'obvious', so now we must too.

but once again, and again, with this transition, the Evo lost its purpose if not its whole appeal

MrBonus

iTrader: (4)

You make it sound as if the X is a luxury car. I don't see how an optional navigation system and a bit more sound deadening somehow completely changes the car's appeal.

EzeE1o

haha yeah...i guess a civic ex with leather and a navi is a luxury car too

S6devil

iTrader: (10)

well where do u draw the line. guess where mitsu is going next, to appeal to the mainstream market? perhaps stuffing a 3.8L V6 instead of the 4B11t ? perhaps making it Fwd as an option? u know a crossover/suv lancer is already in the works

MrBonus

iTrader: (4)

I draw the line when the car is no longer fun to drive and isn't nearly as capable as it already is.

STi2EvoX

Oh S6, I liked you so much more when we were talking about politics. In any case, you are focusing on the weight increase of the X and not really looking at what caused the weight increase. The vast majority of the weight increase was in the chassis and new AWD system. This is what I would call "acceptable weight increase." These two things enable the X to reach handling levels that the CT9A just couldn't do and handling is what an evo is all about. Who cares if it sacrificed a little straight line acceleration? That's easily fixed with a couple engine mods.

You act like mitsu turned the evo into a luxury car and that the weight increase is because of a plush interior and all kinds of amenities. Have you seen the X? I assure you the interior is no BMW! Where is this luxury that you speak of? Again, the weight increase was from the chassis and new AWD system and those are welcome improvements IMO. The X is just as much of an EVO as ever, except now it's styling has matured and there are a few more options like NAVI to help it compete with higher end cars. This doesn't mean that the car has been watered down.

It's a better overall performer then the 9 was, trading only straight line speed for improved handling, braking, balance, style, and build quality. That's like trading a fat chick with a great smile for a supermodel that's got crooked teeth; it may not be perfect but I'll be damned if it's not a better package. Go drive one and see what you think before forming an opinion, that's all I ask.

Thegame

iTrader: (26)

The main thing is that (I don't know what to use as the politically correct term so I'll just call them CT9A enthusiasts) the CT9A enthusiasts were not a very large group. Sure the Evo had a cult like following (which hasn't changed by the way with the X), but it wasn't comprised of a huge portion of consumers. Mitsu saw this and said, "hmmm.... I wonder how we can still keep the majority of this following while allowing us to expand our target market." Their answer was an Evo X. Many CT9A enthusiasts, myself included, still respect the X and would definately consider owning one. All while attracting possible BMW, Audi, and various other sportscar / luxury consumers. (The X MR targets the luxury part.) Was this a poor idea? They had to change something to attract more buyers. 95% of most people would agree that this was a wise move for the company. The other 5% are the guys on here that bash the X at every opportunity.

Thegame

iTrader: (26)

I think the only mistake mitsu made was not offering an RS version of the X. An RS version with no ABS, no A/C, no 12 airbag SRS system (only driver and passenger), no radio, no sub, no power windows, no power locks, no HID's etc... Stripping down all of the amenities would reduce about 200 lbs of unecessary weight. That would bring the X very close to the CT9A vehicles in terms of curb weight. AMS just posted some measurements of the weight on some of these items. They add up quickly. And A/C weighs a lot more than you think when you factor in the condenser, lines, compressor, dryer, etc...

If mitsu would've done just this, all while still offering the GSR and MR, almost everyone would've been happy. The exception being the few on here that find small ways to pick on the X.

S6devil

iTrader: (10)

actually i am an example of the opposite of that notion. I have luxury and performance vehicles in my home now, and have owned such in the past. when it came time for me to get a 2nd car, what led me away from the typical choice (if u r in that price range) of an Audi S4, or benz C55, was that I wanted something totaly different. something raw and rough around the edges, loud, and barely comfortable to drive long distances. no Navi, no cd changer, not even side door-beams. just raw performance, oh, and, uniqueness. u see a whole lot less Evos than u do AMG's these days.
So fine, assuming for a moment that u talked me into it, that the X (GSR or MR) is a better performing car in general than the IX was, and it hasnt lost its appeal to enthusiasts who want a small sports sedan with great performance, but then my next point comes in - that now, for the same price of a loaded MR (yes i know u can get a GSR for much less) u can have a base 335i... or if u lease, the monthly payments are nearly identical - my close friend leased a 335i ($51k sticker price) for $670/month... find me an X MR that will lease for less... so, for me personally, the concept of this rennegade, outlaw car, called the Evo, is no more. if i will ever sell my IX (as my 2nd car), i will prolly just go back to the world of cliches and mainstream - lexus/infiniti/bmw

Thegame

iTrader: (26)

But I don't understand what you're saying... You're saying you want rawness in a vehicle but you're criticizing the price of the top of the line MR??? I agree that the MR is a bit much for most. Mitsu should charge less for the MR. And that's why I brought up the fact that it was a mistake not to market the raw RS. For $30,000 or possibly under you could have an RS X that's pretty close as far as rawness goes to a IX. That would be your ticket. Or even the base GSR for $32,000. I totally agree that the MR is a bit steep at nearly $10,000 more than a GSR. But even if they only sell a few thousand MRs... that's a good market increase that they didn't have with past Evo's. All while retaining the guys interested in the GSR and RS.

STi2EvoX

The GSR starts at 33k, the MR starts at 38k. That's 5k difference, not 10. You can't compare a base non SSS, non navi GSR to a fully equiped MR and say that they cost 10k apart. You can equip the GSR with the SSS, navi, interior sport, and aero package and get it up to 38-39k, so the price diference really isn't that much. The only reason for the price difference is the fact that the MR comes with TC SST and leather stock. Aside from that, it's heavier and softer sprung. The GSR is still quite raw and yet refined enough to expand the market.

The MR was a mistake IMO, but that's just my opinion. In any case, the list that AMS gave for weight reduction wasn't luxury items, as the X in general doesn't have much of any. Putting navi in a car doesn't make it a heavy luxury car. The weight savngs that AMS listed are in bumper beams, sound insulation, seats, and things that when stripped wouldn't make the X more like a 9, it would make it into a carpetless, passenger-seatless racecar. Aside from a couple chassis braces that could be replaced with aluminum ones and removing airbags, there really isn't much weight to be shaved off of the X while still keeping it a street car.

The main reason, again, for the weight increase over the CT9A is the wider tracked and stiffer chassis and beefier AWD system and tranny. Again, these weight increases were to boost handling performance so losing a bit of straightline speed is a worthwhile sacrifice IMO especially when it's so easy to get back with just a reflash. To each his own.

Blitz

iTrader: (11)

I wouldn't say that.

STi2EvoX

^Well, then you're in the minority. It was a design goal for mitsu to make the styling more sophisticated and appeal to a more mature demographic, and most people would agree that they succeeded. The magazines all agree, most people that I know agree that it has, and I get compliments from people in their 30s and 40s all the time, which never happened when I was in my old STi.

I was at a porsche dealership the other day looking at a 911 GT3 to purchase for the company that I work for (I'm the VP of sales at a company that rents out exotic sports cars on a members only basis), and while I was talking to the sales manager, I caught one of the other salesmen checking out my car. When I was about to leave, this guy starts asking all kinds of questions about my car and then tells me that he's considering getting one as a second car since he wants to keep the miles off of his 911 turbo. He looked like he was in his late 30s, early 40s. It is what it is.

You just don't want to like the X because you want to reassure yourself that your 9 is better. FWIW, I think the 9 is a great car, but the X is an overall better car IMO and in most people's as well. Not only that, but at my age and with the caliber of clientele that I deal with, I couldn't drive something that looks like such an econo box boy racer and still be taken seriously. Maybe you'll change your views later on when you get older, maybe not. To each his own, I suppose.