Screw CTSv, I got an EVO
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 528
From: The land of ice and snow.
Originally posted by bigsteve7
Awesome car man. Guys on the site may rag on you for it (the obvious domestic bias), but when you break it down the Evo is an awesome ride. If do a search in the lounge, you should be able to find a post by Robvas in which a guy drove a bone stock evo to a 13.1 quarter at ~102-104mph. I think most guys are pulling mid 13s with them. Its gonna be awesome when guys are running mid 12s with minimal mods.
I'd love to see some pictures of it.
Awesome car man. Guys on the site may rag on you for it (the obvious domestic bias), but when you break it down the Evo is an awesome ride. If do a search in the lounge, you should be able to find a post by Robvas in which a guy drove a bone stock evo to a 13.1 quarter at ~102-104mph. I think most guys are pulling mid 13s with them. Its gonna be awesome when guys are running mid 12s with minimal mods.
I'd love to see some pictures of it.
Er... 271 HP @6500 rpm, curb weight 3263lbs, AWD (with the associated higher drivetrain losses that go with it)? 13.1 seconds and bone stock?
Not in this universe. Such a claim is pure bull****.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Originally posted by guionM
However, being that loaded Mitsubishi Lancers pretty much top out at $16-18,000, I just really question as to whether there is enough stuff on that car to justify the $12-14,000 price increase, and if it's really worth the 33% premium over the SRT-4. Nothing more, nothing less. That's all.
However, being that loaded Mitsubishi Lancers pretty much top out at $16-18,000, I just really question as to whether there is enough stuff on that car to justify the $12-14,000 price increase, and if it's really worth the 33% premium over the SRT-4. Nothing more, nothing less. That's all.
Isn't it ironic that a Neon has replaced the F-body as the "world's greatest performance value?"
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Those are very nice performance numbers, and I'm not "hating." 
But as with the SRT-4, if I drove one daily, I don't think I could shake the feeling/knowledge that my car's original intended purpose was as an economy runabout. Just a personal opinion.
But as with the SRT-4, if I drove one daily, I don't think I could shake the feeling/knowledge that my car's original intended purpose was as an economy runabout. Just a personal opinion.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,724
From: Hebron, KY
The SRT-4 isn't quite in the same class as the Evo. That $10k premium also buys you a better quality car, awd, much better handling (and no torque steer) and a car with a distinct tradition. I'm sure an Evo enthusiast would also be quick to point out the regular Lancer and Evolution share very few parts, both in skin and underneath it. This is more than a $16k Lancer with a turbo.
Just as you distinquish a class difference in the CTS and Evo, there is also one between the SRT-4 and Evo, despite their .5 second acceleration differences to 60. If you lived on any other continent, you would have no problem accepting this car as a well-engineered, performance bargain.
Just as you distinquish a class difference in the CTS and Evo, there is also one between the SRT-4 and Evo, despite their .5 second acceleration differences to 60. If you lived on any other continent, you would have no problem accepting this car as a well-engineered, performance bargain.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1998
Posts: 171
From: New Lenox, IL
CTSv & Vette vs. EVO?
I'm also into AWD turbo imports, but a stock EVO won't be close to a Vette or CTSv, well, at least at the dragstrip.
Given 3800lb weight & 400hp for the CTSv, I'm confident it'll run high 12's@108mph for the magazines. . .
A C5 would also beat the EVO around a track, not just in a straight line.
I would've waited for the STI. Sounds like Mitsu is really pushing it for hp w/ all the boost. What is it, like 17psi??
Most stock setups (syclones/typhoons, Buicks, DSMs) never go over 14 or 15psi. Heck, Supras only have like 10psi stock.
Anyways, I think the STI will be the bad one, and I think in the right hands it'd go high 12's@ ~106mph, stock w/ some track tricks done.
Mike Green
12.5@114 w/ 2.0
98 Z28 M6 w/ hotcam & headers
Given 3800lb weight & 400hp for the CTSv, I'm confident it'll run high 12's@108mph for the magazines. . .
A C5 would also beat the EVO around a track, not just in a straight line.
I would've waited for the STI. Sounds like Mitsu is really pushing it for hp w/ all the boost. What is it, like 17psi??
Most stock setups (syclones/typhoons, Buicks, DSMs) never go over 14 or 15psi. Heck, Supras only have like 10psi stock.
Anyways, I think the STI will be the bad one, and I think in the right hands it'd go high 12's@ ~106mph, stock w/ some track tricks done.
Mike Green
12.5@114 w/ 2.0
98 Z28 M6 w/ hotcam & headers
Last edited by mgreen; Apr 24, 2003 at 12:50 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 2,072
From: Lilburn, GA, USA
Um, I am going with the reality that a Stock Corvette will blow the doors off that evo. Just because it has a turbo does not make it the fastest car around. I guess you think a Corvette will run slower times than a 13.8 that you quoted? Haven't seen many race have you? As far as around a track, I bet the Corvvete would not have a problem either. Not only that but, I bet the CTSv will also do the same.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Originally posted by jrp4uc
The SRT-4 isn't quite in the same class as the Evo. That $10k premium also buys you a better quality car, awd, much better handling (and no torque steer) and a car with a distinct tradition. I'm sure an Evo enthusiast would also be quick to point out the regular Lancer and Evolution share very few parts, both in skin and underneath it. This is more than a $16k Lancer with a turbo.
Just as you distinquish a class difference in the CTS and Evo, there is also one between the SRT-4 and Evo, despite their .5 second acceleration differences to 60. If you lived on any other continent, you would have no problem accepting this car as a well-engineered, performance bargain.
The SRT-4 isn't quite in the same class as the Evo. That $10k premium also buys you a better quality car, awd, much better handling (and no torque steer) and a car with a distinct tradition. I'm sure an Evo enthusiast would also be quick to point out the regular Lancer and Evolution share very few parts, both in skin and underneath it. This is more than a $16k Lancer with a turbo.
Just as you distinquish a class difference in the CTS and Evo, there is also one between the SRT-4 and Evo, despite their .5 second acceleration differences to 60. If you lived on any other continent, you would have no problem accepting this car as a well-engineered, performance bargain.
Secondly, I've liked the second generation Neon from day one. It's a well designed, inexpensive car. Far better than the Saturn Ion from where I stand. The interior materials, panel fit and paint quality are all 300M quality. Even the rear seating is spacious enough to be adequate. With the new front clip, hot turbo motor and upgraded gearshift, Chrysler has finally answered my last objections against the Neon. For $20k, the SRT-4 is worth every cent.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,022
From: Newhall, CA USA
A Viper is not a POS. A Corvette will not be beat in a straight line, through a turn, on a road course, or anywhere by an EVO. You're comparing two of the finest sports cars on the planet to a tarted-up, turd-polished, jump-on-the-fix-up-the-car-that-mommy-got-me-bandwagon econocrapbox. Sorry. Reality check time.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 499
From: Raleigh, NC
Originally posted by Z28Marcus
Nice car. But I think new car enthusiasm is going to peoples heads a little.
Er... 271 HP @6500 rpm, curb weight 3263lbs, AWD (with the associated higher drivetrain losses that go with it)? 13.1 seconds and bone stock? Not in this universe. Such a claim is pure bull****.
Nice car. But I think new car enthusiasm is going to peoples heads a little.
Er... 271 HP @6500 rpm, curb weight 3263lbs, AWD (with the associated higher drivetrain losses that go with it)? 13.1 seconds and bone stock?
Not in this universe. Such a claim is pure bull****.
http://web.camaross.com/forums/showt...&highlight=evo
Theres the thread with a link to timeslips and the video.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 499
From: Raleigh, NC
For all those who say the Evo isnt worth it, think Mustang Cobra vs. V6 Mustang. One cost less than $20k, the other over $30k. Is the Cobra worth it?
Now think Mustang Cobra vs. Evo. The cars are both top notch. Both have brembo brakes, one has a big supercharged V8, the other a small turbo 4. The evo will outhandle the Cobra, the Cobra out accelerate teh Evo. Subjectively the Evo also has a nicer interior (more modern) Both are high performance cars, just different strokes for different folks. Is the quality of a Mustang Cobra really that good when it shares most of its parts minus drivetrain with a sub 20k car? That seems to be the arguement many are making agasint the Evo.
Hell Camaro SS's and WS6's were going for $30k. How much nicer of a car is a F-body than an Evo quality wise? Theyre just different cars. The Evo will run all kinds of circles around a F-body minus strait line performance.
It seems $30k is a fair price to me. I'm not trying to say the Evo is God or anything. It just seems people are quick to downplay it because of its appearance and its highly regarded status among the import crowd. All I'm saying is that its not a half bad deal.
Now think Mustang Cobra vs. Evo. The cars are both top notch. Both have brembo brakes, one has a big supercharged V8, the other a small turbo 4. The evo will outhandle the Cobra, the Cobra out accelerate teh Evo. Subjectively the Evo also has a nicer interior (more modern) Both are high performance cars, just different strokes for different folks. Is the quality of a Mustang Cobra really that good when it shares most of its parts minus drivetrain with a sub 20k car? That seems to be the arguement many are making agasint the Evo.
Hell Camaro SS's and WS6's were going for $30k. How much nicer of a car is a F-body than an Evo quality wise? Theyre just different cars. The Evo will run all kinds of circles around a F-body minus strait line performance.
It seems $30k is a fair price to me. I'm not trying to say the Evo is God or anything. It just seems people are quick to downplay it because of its appearance and its highly regarded status among the import crowd. All I'm saying is that its not a half bad deal.
Last edited by bigsteve7; Apr 24, 2003 at 01:50 PM.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,024
Here are some interesting #'s from edmunds.com to show how the Evo Stacks up.
Horsepower
lbs/hp
1. BMW M3 coupe - 10.2 lbs/hp
2. Mitsubishi Lancer Evo - 11.1
3. Nissan 350Z track - 11.2
4. Honda S2000 - 11.7
5. Infiniti G35 coupe 6speed - 12.2
6. Subaru WRX sedan - 13.6
7. Acura RSX Type S - 13.9
8. BMW 330i sedan 5spd - 14.6
Torque
This is what lbs/ft lbs looks like:
1. Mitsubishi Lancer Evo - 11.2
2. Nissan 350Z track - 11.7
3. Infiniti G35 coupe 6spd - 12.7
3. Porsche Boxster S (2003 model) - 12.7
5. BMW M3 - 13.0
6. Subaru WRX sedan - 14.2
7. BMW 330i sedan - 15.4
8. Honda S2000 - 18.4
9. Acura RSX type S - 19.6
Horsepower
lbs/hp
1. BMW M3 coupe - 10.2 lbs/hp
2. Mitsubishi Lancer Evo - 11.1
3. Nissan 350Z track - 11.2
4. Honda S2000 - 11.7
5. Infiniti G35 coupe 6speed - 12.2
6. Subaru WRX sedan - 13.6
7. Acura RSX Type S - 13.9
8. BMW 330i sedan 5spd - 14.6
Torque
This is what lbs/ft lbs looks like:
1. Mitsubishi Lancer Evo - 11.2
2. Nissan 350Z track - 11.7
3. Infiniti G35 coupe 6spd - 12.7
3. Porsche Boxster S (2003 model) - 12.7
5. BMW M3 - 13.0
6. Subaru WRX sedan - 14.2
7. BMW 330i sedan - 15.4
8. Honda S2000 - 18.4
9. Acura RSX type S - 19.6
Last edited by slt; Apr 24, 2003 at 01:58 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,472
From: South Bend, Indiana
Originally posted by guionM
\
None the less, you obviously don't like Chrysler (The SRT-4 engine is from Mitsubishi
), so my question's been answered. 
\
None the less, you obviously don't like Chrysler (The SRT-4 engine is from Mitsubishi
), so my question's been answered.
Originally posted by Z28Marcus
Nice car. But I think new car enthusiasm is going to peoples heads a little.
Er... 271 HP @6500 rpm, curb weight 3263lbs, AWD (with the associated higher drivetrain losses that go with it)? 13.1 seconds and bone stock? Not in this universe. Such a claim is pure bull****.
Nice car. But I think new car enthusiasm is going to peoples heads a little.
Er... 271 HP @6500 rpm, curb weight 3263lbs, AWD (with the associated higher drivetrain losses that go with it)? 13.1 seconds and bone stock?
Not in this universe. Such a claim is pure bull****.
Originally posted by centric
A Viper is not a POS. A Corvette will not be beat in a straight line, through a turn, on a road course, or anywhere by an EVO. You're comparing two of the finest sports cars on the planet to a tarted-up, turd-polished, jump-on-the-fix-up-the-car-that-mommy-got-me-bandwagon econocrapbox. Sorry. Reality check time.
A Viper is not a POS. A Corvette will not be beat in a straight line, through a turn, on a road course, or anywhere by an EVO. You're comparing two of the finest sports cars on the planet to a tarted-up, turd-polished, jump-on-the-fix-up-the-car-that-mommy-got-me-bandwagon econocrapbox. Sorry. Reality check time.
...and the Viper is a POS with a powerful engine, exactly what he said. It has no utility use, no luxery, besides the convertable...
And the Evo will keep up w/ a 350 Horse C5 and nearly the 400 HP Z06 in a straight line. So hes just comparing the performance of these cars, and right fully so...
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 2,072
From: Lilburn, GA, USA
Originally posted by Meccadeth
He called the Dodge CARS "pos's" not the engines. He said it was a powerful engine in a POS car...which I agree w/...
Look it up man, their all running right around that time...
He never compared it to either of those cars....
...and the Viper is a POS with a powerful engine, exactly what he said. It has no utility use, no luxery, besides the convertable...
And the Evo will keep up w/ a 350 Horse C5 and nearly the 400 HP Z06 in a straight line. So hes just comparing the performance of these cars, and right fully so...
He called the Dodge CARS "pos's" not the engines. He said it was a powerful engine in a POS car...which I agree w/...
Look it up man, their all running right around that time...
He never compared it to either of those cars....
...and the Viper is a POS with a powerful engine, exactly what he said. It has no utility use, no luxery, besides the convertable...
And the Evo will keep up w/ a 350 Horse C5 and nearly the 400 HP Z06 in a straight line. So hes just comparing the performance of these cars, and right fully so...
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,024
Originally posted by SNEAKY NEIL
So what do youi consider "keeping up"?......................within 15 car lengths?
So what do youi consider "keeping up"?......................within 15 car lengths?
Corvette vs Evo
13.5 sec vs 13.5 sec
5.0 sec vs 5.0 sec
.85g vs .95g
45K vs 30k
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 499
From: Raleigh, NC
Originally posted by slt
What does a corvette run stock, right around 13.5 & 0-60 in 5 sec. what does a stock corvette pull on the skidpad, .85??
Corvette vs Evo
13.5 sec vs 13.5 sec
5.0 sec vs 5.0 sec
.85g vs .95g
45K vs 30k
What does a corvette run stock, right around 13.5 & 0-60 in 5 sec. what does a stock corvette pull on the skidpad, .85??
Corvette vs Evo
13.5 sec vs 13.5 sec
5.0 sec vs 5.0 sec
.85g vs .95g
45K vs 30k
The one place the vette has you beat though is trap speed. Then again, the Vette did cost $15k more...
Its kinda of dumb to argue which is the better car. Theyre so different. Its all in what you want and how much you have to spend.