EVO? Compared to an RX8? Please......get off the drugs!

I drove one just to get the Mitsu $100 bill. I thought it would be tempting to buy an EVO, but the RX8 is in a whole higher class (as is the 350Z). EVO was even cheaper than the RX8 and I still didn't think it was worth the money.

Back to what I'd like from Mazda before I make a decision on THE LETTER.

1. Show us the Dyno of the 11 cars they used to get the 248 HP average and tell us how they got the numbers.

2. We show them the dyno numbers from THOR and Church (and hopefully YAW) and ask for an explanation for the differences.

3. If the RX8 is really making crank 220HP as we suspect, ask Mazda what happened and what they intend to do to get the engine to where it needs to be and when they will do it. There is just too much FUD going around unless we have some proof as to what's happening...247 HP to 238 HP to 2?? HP....what's going on. And why can't I muster more than 15 MPG out of my car, regardless of how I drive?

4. If they can't give feasible answers, well.....mine might be part of the Buy-Back. BTW....this is exactly what I told both MAzda Customer Service and my dealer (who was pretty upset he was going to have to "eat" my deal).

Evo: Faster, quicker, more powerful, better handling, more precise steering, firmer suspension, bone jarring ride, FUN FUN FUN to drive, definition of rocket. The styling is not half as bad as people make it out to be, I have issues with the wing and Altezza tail lamps, but the rest of the car looks rather nice. The front end reminds me of an Orca, and side profile is not bad. Believe it or not but the Evo is a full function 4 door with plenty of space and trunk. Different class? Well, performance wise it sure is~

Ditto what Skyline said.

The cool thing about those wings, even thought I don't like them is you can see it bend at high speeds in an effort to keep the tailend down!


Ike

the evo is faster then the murcialago around the track

And the evo is ugly.

I don't know. I thought the EVO was fast and handling wasn't bad, but not in the league of the RX8. I think the EVO has the looks that every 15 year old fast and furious" fan would love.

Precision, sophistication, refinement trump power all day long, every day.

"The cool thing about those wings, even thought I don't like them is you can see it bend at high speeds in an effort to keep the tailend down!"

And here I've been woried about people on cell phones.

Not even imagining that there were a breed of people out there travelling at a high rate of speed watching their wings bend in the rear view mirror.

the evo it a street race car with the ride to prove it it is very harsh. but it is a propus built street/track car. it is a lancer body but it shares very little with a base lancer. the body frame subspension engin transmision and its even welded diffren. the rx8 is a nice sporty drivers car too but it is aimed at a completly diffrent market the evo it going arter racers that want a race car the rx8 is going for racers that want a good well apointed car with good performance.

Originally posted by graphicguy
Precision, sophistication, refinement trump power all day long, every day.

True in all cases, all day long ... except when

"Power trumps Precision, sophistication, refinement when you really need to go fast, quick, any day.

Originally posted by Spin9k


True in all cases, all day long ... except when

"Power trumps Precision, sophistication, refinement when you really need to go fast, quick, any day.

It depends on what you want.

Personaly I couldnt live with an EVO day to day, even if I ever got over how ugly it looks.

But as a track tool it'd be fun, I'd rather have an Elise or caterham though.

I dont have any illusions about watching EVO's disapear in my RX-8's rear view mirror.

the evo is not going to be lost in the rearview or the rx8 any time soon. the 4g63 that comes in it has already been dynoed at 500+ hp on the stock internals. it is a tunner dream carthat will only get more coverage as time goes on

Originally posted by Skyline Maniac
Evo: Faster, quicker, more powerful, better handling, more precise steering, firmer suspension, bone jarring ride, FUN FUN FUN to drive, definition of rocket. The styling is not half as bad as people make it out to be, I have issues with the wing and Altezza tail lamps, but the rest of the car looks rather nice. The front end reminds me of an Orca, and side profile is not bad. Believe it or not but the Evo is a full function 4 door with plenty of space and trunk. Different class? Well, performance wise it sure is~ For the second time ever I agree with Skyline Maniac. The EVO I tested (see this thread (http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6961)) was shockingly fast and fun in a straight line and in corners. Get it without the wing and in a subdued colour (e.g. black) and it is doesn't hurt the eyes too much (unlike the WRX STi). I seriously considered it for a while (I thought the ride was not too bone-jarring compared to my IS300), but lack of safety features and interior amenities/style removed it from my list of sporty 'family cars', and it seems to be more a young persons car than for an old-fart like myself.

Definitely an appliance for speed - if FAST is all you want there is nothing better below $50k, where the M3 steps in.

Originally posted by graphicguy
I don't know. I thought the EVO was fast and handling wasn't bad, but not in the league of the RX8. I think the EVO has the looks that every 15 year old fast and furious" fan would love.

Precision, sophistication, refinement trump power all day long, every day.

The handling wasn't in the league as the RX8??? You are absolutely right, the EVO is a few classes ABOVE the RX8 in that regard. Your smooth ride, and creature comforts do come with a price my friend. There is no free lunch and in engineering there are always compromises.

Originally posted by tribal azn2
the evo is faster then the murcialago around the track

Actually that was the FQ300, which is not much more expensive than the standard EVO in Europe. The scary thing is that there are 2 FASTER versions than the FQ300 (RS Sprint and Extreme).

The styling is not half as bad as people make it out to be, I have issues with the wing and Altezza tail lamps, but the rest of the car looks rather nice. The front end reminds me of an Orca, and side profile is not bad. Believe it or not but the Evo is a full function 4 door with plenty of space and trunk. Different class? Well, performance wise it sure is~

Yes it is UUUUUGGGGLYY! Orca yes, different class? definitely. It reminds me of a corolla. Sure it goes fast but if you want just fast -get a Mach 1 or for a little more a Cobra!!

The RX 8 is stylish and quick.

Originally posted by RodsterinFL


Yes it is UUUUUGGGGLYY! Orca yes, different class? definitely. It reminds me of a corolla. Sure it goes fast but if you want just fast -get a Mach 1 or for a little more a Cobra!!

The RX 8 is stylish and quick.

The EVO is not a muscle car!!!! It handles with the best of them and has phenominal driving dynamics, something I can't say about most Mustangs!

Sorry RevHappy. I was strong in sharing my view of the EVO's looks. Hey, the 2003 Cobra does handle well with the independent suspension and it is scary fast. The EVO is not a muscle car but it is almost as much $$$ as one. (Mach 1 price) My point on the EVO was only that on this site I have noticed that EVO people quote interior room or acceleration as the betterment over the RX 8. I am sure the EVO is a great drive. I am concerned that it is a super modified economy car. Consider this and see what I mean:

compression 8.8:1 base
turbo 16.24 - 19 psi boost
4 cylinder
synthetic oil required.
Premium gas
18/26 MPG
Okay, the boost is high considering the engine size. and longevity factor. The synthetic oil is probably due to the "hot" engine. I am not a mechanic per se. My father was a stock car racer and we talked about the EVO. His take was that the car would probably be a rocket, while it lasted and then told me stories about vettes and their increase in compression ratio and longevity decrease etc. ALso, requiring a special oil means that something is highly sensitive. I know there is a 5 year warranty on the powertrain but still. SO I say, if you just want to be fast, get a Mach 1 or a Cobra. Style? Get an RX 8 and heck with a second or so - 0-60. Wasn't the NA rotary engine named as the 2nd most reliable engine - 2nd to the Mercedes Turbo diesel? Ya, ist gut!

Originally posted by RodsterinFL
Sorry RevHappy. I was strong in sharing my view of the EVO's looks. Hey, the 2003 Cobra does handle well with the independent suspension and it is scary fast. The EVO is not a muscle car but it is almost as much $$$ as one. (Mach 1 price) My point on the EVO was only that on this site I have noticed that EVO people quote interior room or acceleration as the betterment over the RX 8. I am sure the EVO is a great drive. I am concerned that it is a super modified economy car. Consider this and see what I mean:

compression 8.8:1 base
turbo 16.24 - 19 psi boost
4 cylinder
synthetic oil required.
Premium gas
18/26 MPG
Okay, the boost is high considering the engine size. and longevity factor. The synthetic oil is probably due to the "hot" engine. I am not a mechanic per se. My father was a stock car racer and we talked about the EVO. His take was that the car would probably be a rocket, while it lasted and then told me stories about vettes and their increase in compression ratio and longevity decrease etc. ALso, requiring a special oil means that something is highly sensitive. I know there is a 5 year warranty on the powertrain but still. SO I say, if you just want to be fast, get a Mach 1 or a Cobra. Style? Get an RX 8 and heck with a second or so - 0-60. Wasn't the NA rotary engine named as the 2nd most reliable engine - 2nd to the Mercedes Turbo diesel? Ya, ist gut!

Come on with the Cobra! Beast in a straight line? Sure. Better handling than a Mustang GT or the average car? You betcha. Anywhere near the handling of top sports cars in its price range? No way.

BTW...in the Motor Trend comparison of some high performance cars last spring, the EVO soundly beat the Cobra in just about every category except top speed (159 for the Cobra and 156 for the EVO). The EVO beat it in 0-60 (though the Cobra will undoubtedly pull away in a 1/4 mile run or from a roll), slalom, braking and their "figure 8" overall comparison (the EVO came in 5th, 1/10 of a second behind the Z06 - 24.9 vs. 24.8 seconds). In fact the cars that did beat it in this overall test were pretty damn good - Mosler, Viper, Murcielago and Z06.

That doesn't even take into account the driving dynamics of the two. The Cobra can't hope to compare in terms of shifter, clutch and steering feel. Pedal placement, seating position, seats are all in the EVO's favor. There is a reason Ford is producing a new Mustang line!

I respect your concern for the future reliability of the EVO (it was major point in favor for the S2K when I was cross-shopping the two). Certainly, Mitsu's reliability record isn't that great. That being said, the EVO has been around for 10 plus years and I'm pretty confident that most of the bugs are worked out. On top of that, Mitsu has been buiding turbocharged engines for decades. It actually runs VERY rich at high rpms and many owners have leaned it out without problems and have had huge gains (there is a guy running over 500 WHP with many different mods I believe). Still, its a high performance turbo car and requires care (frequent oil checking, proper warm ups and cool downs). The main "bug" is the clutch so far, but its influenced by high rpm clutch drops by some owners.

19.5 PSI is NOT that huge. The Stock WRX's boost is 14.5 PSI and its been pretty reliable (Cosumer Reports recommended) and the EVO's boost actually drops off in the upper part of the rev range. BTW..the compression ratio doesn't seem too high on the EVO, it seems about right??? I still have more confidence in the reliability of the EVO over any Mustang (I know Fords having an Escort and my family's ownership of three other Fords).

I actually talked to my father, who was a Mechanical Engineer (built military aircraft) and he said "Why would you ever take a chance on a new Wankel when there have been so many advances made with the Piston Engine in recent years?" Based on the data so far (mysterious power deficiency, poor MPG, excessive soot desposits, perhaps the A/C problems), he seems to have a point.

Originally posted by revhappy
I actually talked to my father, who was a Mechanical Engineer (built military aircraft) and he said "Why would you ever take a chance on a new Wankel when there have been so many advances made with the Piston Engine in recent years?" Based on the data so far (mysterious power deficiency, poor MPG, excessive soot desposits, perhaps the A/C problems), he seems to have a point.

Could not agree more...the piston engine dates back to 1690 (steam propelled I think...maybe?) whereas the Wankel Rotary dates back to 1924 (first conception), If 234 years if development don't count, what will?

But that fact doesn't dim the 'peculiarity' of the Wankel, and the fact that in paper it has tremendous advantages over a piston engine. I think most of these 'advantages' have been discussed on a previous thread (yep, I'm lazy)

All considered, with present technology available....it should be pretty simple (a couple decades...who knows) to maximize and perfect (to a point) the Wankel design.

Things against it: Mazda seems to be the only automotive company behind a commercial Wankel implementation. Thus lacking the support of multiple corps & their respective funding.

All in all, I hope it does progress. I am truly amazed on what a small displacement engine can do. And extremely eager to see what a perfected or improved platform could turn into.

And not to get that much out of the topic: Either an Evo or a Subi are a compromise of livability (to a certain point...) against performance. On a similar way the 8 is a compromise between raw sports car performance and comfort.

another point in favor of the EVO is the AWD versus the Cobra and Mach1. Some like RWD but when you get into big horsepower ('03 Cobra) the first couple of gears are useless because you spin the tires so easily. With the AWD all the power is put to the ground. On the track the AWD is almost unfair against the RWD, and throw in foul weather and it's rediculous.

Here's a thread:
http://www.s2ki.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=145109

for those that don't want to follow the link basically, stock EVO beats a 420rwhp '03 Cobra with drag radials from 0-80mph. Put on a few basic mods on the EVO and maybe you take the Cobra up to 90 or 100. Now, the Cobra will hand that same EVO it's ass on the highway but you can't have everything.

Don't let the 19.5 peak boost scare you. This engine has been around for a while. Like revhappy pointed out, there's an EVO running 500+ whp on stock block and head and countless 330+whp EVOs. The internals are capable of 400 whp. Stock it's very very safe and conservative. The reason for the synthetic oil is maintenance. Turbocharged cars need a little more TLC than the N/A cars. It's very important that the oil be clean otherwise the turbo life span can be drastically reduced.

the three most important things with a turbocharged car is:
1.) make sure the turbo has time to cool down before shuting the engine off
2.) change the oil regularly (3000 miles)
3.) make sure the engine has time to warm up before running it hard

Now Mitsu can't control any of these but they can make sure that the oil is high quality.

Originally posted by AbusiveWombat

the three most important things with a turbocharged car is:
1.) make sure the turbo has time to cool down before shuting the engine off
2.) change the oil regularly (3000 miles)
3.) make sure the engine has time to warm up before running it hard

I have to ask, Im totally ignorant about turbo(s):

1. Why does it need to cool down?
2. I know a turbo will compress air, and inject it along with the fuel...(stupidest of my questions!) what part does engine oil play with the turbo equipment.
3. I guess I can understand #3

Please have patience with me....;)

[i]for those that don't want to follow the link basically, stock EVO beats a 420rwhp '03 Cobra with drag radials from 0-80mph. Put on a few basic mods on the EVO and maybe you take the Cobra up to 90 or 100. Now, the Cobra will hand that same EVO it's ass on the highway but you can't have everything.
[/B]

This brings my second question:

How does an Evo stack against an S2K on the track?
Is the Tsukuba battle (with the 8, G35, WRX & S2K) indicative of an Evo's capability? or the STi & Evo are already on a different category altogether in terms of handling (AWD aside) and performance?

Originally posted by RX8-TX


This brings my second question:

How does an Evo stack against an S2K on the track?
Is the Tsukuba battle (with the 8, G35, WRX & S2K) indicative of an Evo's capability? or the STi & Evo are already on a different category altogether in terms of handling (AWD aside) and performance?

From some owners who have (had) both cars, a few that have taken them both to the track had a 2-3 second advantage in the EVO on lap times. If you look around s2ki.com and evolutionm.net you probobly will find some of these posts. Of course, this will vary with different drivers and different tracks.

Originally posted by revhappy

From some owners who have (had) both cars, a few that have taken them both to the track had a 2-3 second advantage in the EVO on lap times. If you look around s2ki.com and evolutionm.net you probobly will find some of these posts. Of course, this will vary with different drivers and different tracks.

Thanks! I understand that a driver can make all the difference!
I wonder when are they planning on taking an STi & Evo and put them on the track.....I personally like Subaru (but that's only a matter of fanatism...nothing fundamented.) And throw in a light RWD such as the Honda....to see what happens.

And thanks again for the reply!

Originally posted by RX8-TX


Thanks! I understand that a driver can make all the difference!
I wonder when are they planning on taking an STi & Evo and put them on the track.....I personally like Subaru (but that's only a matter of fanatism...nothing fundamented.) And throw in a light RWD such as the Honda....to see what happens.

And thanks again for the reply!

On most tracks, the EVO will take the S2000. I'm sure there are some Best Motoring videos with that comparison? Skyline Maniac??

The EVO and STI were compared on the Streets of Willow Springs by Car and Driver and Sport Compact Car (I think it was on this track?) and the EVO won C&D while the STI won on SCC's track test. I beleive the EVO won at the track in most of the other magazines by a close margin.

Originally posted by revhappy


On most tracks, the EVO will take the S2000. I'm sure there are some Best Motoring videos with that comparison? Skyline Maniac??

The EVO and STI were compared on the Streets of Willow Springs by Car and Driver and Sport Compact Car (I think it was on this track?) and the EVO won C&D while the STI won on SCC's track test. I beleive the EVO won at the track in most of the other magazines by a close margin.

Got it!...I'll try to dig up some vids if I find any...Im curious.

Originally posted by RX8-TX


I have to ask, Im totally ignorant about turbo(s):

1. Why does it need to cool down?
2. I know a turbo will compress air, and inject it along with the fuel...(stupidest of my questions!) what part does engine oil play with the turbo equipment.
3. I guess I can understand #3

Please have patience with me....;)

Well, the EVO is an Oil cooled turbo while the WRX/STI is Water Cooled (and does not require a cool down procedure).

My understanding of the cool down procedure for an oil cooled turbo is that hot oil in the turbo breaks down and leaves deposits in the oil supply tubes, which can eventually lead to the turbo not being able to get oil in the future, reducing performance and eventually destroying it.

I'm new to turbo-charged cars, so if anyone can correct me or elaborate, then please do.

Originally posted by RX8-TX


I have to ask, Im totally ignorant about turbo(s):

1. Why does it need to cool down?
2. I know a turbo will compress air, and inject it along with the fuel...(stupidest of my questions!) what part does engine oil play with the turbo equipment.
3. I guess I can understand #3

Please have patience with me....;)

revhappy has it correct. When a turbo has been running really hard it's often glowing hot. when you turn off the engine you turn off the turbo's cooling supply. So it basically fries. It's important to let the engine run for a few minutes after running the engine hard or make a point of not running the car hard for the last few miles.

Also, since the turbo's impeller spins at a very high rate of speed (~100,000 rpms) it's important that the oil be very clean. Any debis can cause damage to the turbo. Thus it's very important to change oil regularly.

Here's a post that I found at www.s2ki.com I thought you might like to see. It shows how a lightly modded EVO VIII (FQ300 = F**king Quick 300 hp) stacks up to other cars on the track. Too bad no S2000:

I've been in the UK for the past couple of weeks on business. I picked up Autocar's annual Best Handling Car issue, and had a great read. 32 cars were driven on the 1.7-mile infield circuit of Rockingham Motor Speedway. The driver lineup included a current F1 driver (Jaguar's Justin Wilson), a F1 test driver (BAR's Takuma Sato), the vehicle dynamics manager from Lotus (Martin Anderson), and two British Touring Car Championship drivers (Michael Bentwood and Phil Bennett).

There's execellent analysis and commentary throughout the article. Buy it if you can find it.

Anyway, here are the lap times:
Skoda Fabia RS 1:33.8
Ford Sport Ka 1:33.2
Vauxhall Astra GSi 1:32.0
Volvo S60R 1:30.5
Honda Accord 2.4 Type S 1:30.0
Peugeot 206 GTi 180 1:29.8
Jaguar XJR 1:29.0
Mazda RX8 1:29.0
Mazda MX5 1:28.9
Renault Clio V6 1:28.5
Mini Cooper S Works 1:28.5
Mercedes E55 1:27.3
Porsche Boxster 1:26.4
BMW Z4 1:25.7
Audi S4 1:25.2
Ford Focus RS 1:24.9
Alfa 147 GTA 1:24.8
Mitsubishi Evo VIII FQ300 1:23.4
Subaru Impreza Type C 1:22.8
Pagani Zonda 1:22.7
Lamborghini Murcielago 1:22.2
Radical SR3 LM 1:21.8
Westfield XTR2 1:21.8
Vauxhall VX220T Sprint 1:21.5
Lotus Elise 135R 1:21.0
Caterham R400 1:21.0
Noble M12R 1:20.6
Porsche 911 GT3 1:20.2
Gardener Douglas GDT70 1:19.5
TVR 350c 1:19.4
Ariel Atom 1:17.6
JP1 1:14.2

The FQ-300 is warrantied car. I think it may be upgraded at the dealer/local aftermarket affiliate. Of course, there are two higher performance models than the FQ-300. The Extreme and RS Sprint.

Also, I wonder why they used the Elise 135R instead of the 190??

Originally posted by graphicguy
EVO? Compared to an RX8? Please......get off the drugs!

I drove one just to get the Mitsu $100 bill. I thought it would be tempting to buy an EVO, but the RX8 is in a whole higher class (as is the 350Z). EVO was even cheaper than the RX8 and I still didn't think it was worth the money.

Back to what I'd like from Mazda before I make a decision on THE LETTER.

1. Show us the Dyno of the 11 cars they used to get the 248 HP average and tell us how they got the numbers.

2. We show them the dyno numbers from THOR and Church (and hopefully YAW) and ask for an explanation for the differences.

3. If the RX8 is really making crank 220HP as we suspect, ask Mazda what happened and what they intend to do to get the engine to where it needs to be and when they will do it. There is just too much FUD going around unless we have some proof as to what's happening...247 HP to 238 HP to 2?? HP....what's going on. And why can't I muster more than 15 MPG out of my car, regardless of how I drive?

4. If they can't give feasible answers, well.....mine might be part of the Buy-Back. BTW....this is exactly what I told both MAzda Customer Service and my dealer (who was pretty upset he was going to have to "eat" my deal).

Where do you live? I went to the the dealship (burlingame, CA) to test drive the EVO. They would not let me test drive. It just not them. I here the same thing for the sti, g35 coupe, etc...
The bayarea sucks.

Did you llike it? How noisy is it? I am not looking for lexus quite, but at the same time I do not want GM interior
squeeks either.

Originally posted by AbusiveWombat
Here's a post that I found at www.s2ki.com I thought you might like to see. It shows how a lightly modded EVO VIII (FQ300 = F**king Quick 300 hp) stacks up to other cars on the track. Too bad no S2000:

I've been in the UK for the past couple of weeks on business. I picked up Autocar's annual Best Handling Car issue, and had a great read. 32 cars were driven on the 1.7-mile infield circuit of Rockingham Motor Speedway. The driver lineup included a current F1 driver (Jaguar's Justin Wilson), a F1 test driver (BAR's Takuma Sato), the vehicle dynamics manager from Lotus (Martin Anderson), and two British Touring Car Championship drivers (Michael Bentwood and Phil Bennett).

There's execellent analysis and commentary throughout the article. Buy it if you can find it.

Anyway, here are the lap times:
Skoda Fabia RS 1:33.8
Ford Sport Ka 1:33.2
Vauxhall Astra GSi 1:32.0
Volvo S60R 1:30.5
Honda Accord 2.4 Type S 1:30.0
Peugeot 206 GTi 180 1:29.8
Jaguar XJR 1:29.0
Mazda RX8 1:29.0
Mazda MX5 1:28.9
Renault Clio V6 1:28.5
Mini Cooper S Works 1:28.5
Mercedes E55 1:27.3
Porsche Boxster 1:26.4
BMW Z4 1:25.7
Audi S4 1:25.2
Ford Focus RS 1:24.9
Alfa 147 GTA 1:24.8
Mitsubishi Evo VIII FQ300 1:23.4
Subaru Impreza Type C 1:22.8
Pagani Zonda 1:22.7
Lamborghini Murcielago 1:22.2
Radical SR3 LM 1:21.8
Westfield XTR2 1:21.8
Vauxhall VX220T Sprint 1:21.5
Lotus Elise 135R 1:21.0
Caterham R400 1:21.0
Noble M12R 1:20.6
Porsche 911 GT3 1:20.2
Gardener Douglas GDT70 1:19.5
TVR 350c 1:19.4
Ariel Atom 1:17.6
JP1 1:14.2

Why do they get so many nice cars in Europe?? Its unfair...totally unfair.

This fake ad. courtesy of sniffpetrol.com (http://www.sniffpetrol.com) just about sums it up:

http://www.sniffpetrol.com/AdEvo.jpg

Yes, you could buy a tarted up family sedan just like grandma drives but wouldn't you rather drive a real sports car? ;)

Okay...Bottom line. I Love the speed/handling of the Evo. But I love the RX8 more. You simply can't compare these two vehicles. They are in completely different catagories. The EVO is a rally car all the way (well, kinda..lol), and the Rex is a street car...I just don't think you can compare them to each other.

Hmm. the EVO has been around for a while but what about the 19psi boosted engine?

I just finished reading one of three books on Mazda and the Rotary - the RX 7 book by Brian Long - excellent book. One of the things mentioned there is that Mazda now holds the rights to the Rotary so other corporations will not be building them unless that has changed. It is mentioned that at one point Toyota actually created a rotary but could not market it due to "rights" ??? It also mentions the MPG as a problem. IT seems that the large gap that existed in gas mileage has been narrowed considerably. If you compare the cars with similar performance to the RX the overall MPG is in line per se. Page 136 of Road and Track gives their overall observed MPG figures as follows:

EVO 21.7 mpg premium/synthetic oil required.
Cobra 12.4 mpg premium required
S2000 18.5 mpg
Boxster S 19.2 mpg
G35 C 20.0 mpg

Mazda RX 8 19.0 mpg.

evo + vishnu stg1 + evo7 tails...

drooooooool.....

I have to say this much... strip the interior and the costly items off the RX-8... the leather, the refinement, the plastics, stereo, etc...

With that money, give it a more firm suspension. Add a turbo running 18PSI.

And put it onto a track with the Evo.

Who wins now? And the bigger question... who cares? If you're all about the lap times, speed, and precision of handling then welp, the RX-8 isn't for you because it's full of compromises. But to me, a neophyte driver working his way to becoming reasonably good with baby steps and an aptitude to learn, the RX-8 is more the car for me that I can live with on a daily basis.

If I wanted a go-fast car that I'd take to the track all day, the Evo would be off the list too. There are better cars on the track than an Evo. There are more fun cars than an RX-8 (S2000 anyone?). But the RX-8 gives me the blend of what I want, and that's why I bought it. revhappy is always kind to point out the shortfalls of the RX-8 but frankly for a lot of people, the Evo and STI are so hideous, no creature comforts, no safety features, and as an added bonus for me, no RWD.. I passed on them. I don't want to be hand-held by the AWD of the Evo/STI. I want to learn how to drive properly, even if it means making mistakes. I leave plenty of room for my errors. Evo does all the work for you.

No thanks.

Originally posted by Hercules
I have to say this much... strip the interior and the costly items off the RX-8... the leather, the refinement, the plastics, stereo, etc...

With that money, give it a more firm suspension. Add a turbo running 18PSI.

And put it onto a track with the Evo.

Who wins now? And the bigger question... who cares?

Another ridiculous post. The EVO is NOT stripped (its not luxorious but its more than adequate for a serious driver who doesn't need to be bothered by weight increasing nonsense such as faux wooded trim,seat warmers, etc).

Mazda already tried a high-powered turbo (and it did not hit 19.5 PSI max boost) on the rotary and it was a disaster from a reliability standpoint (though it was an amazing performance car) to the point where the image nearly killed the rotary in the US. BTW..the stock EVO is tuned very conservative (i.e. runs very rich to keep temperatures down). There have been huge gains from some very affordable mods. Mitsu certianly has their issues, but one thing they do know are turbos and execute them pretty dam well.

Your post insunates the idea you repeatedly espoused in the past -Turbos's take no brain power and are "the easy way out" - is quite erroneous. If it was that easy....everyone would just "slap an aftermarket turbo" on their cars.

Originally posted by Hercules
I If you're all about the lap times, speed, and precision of handling then welp, the RX-8 isn't for you because it's full of compromises. But to me, a neophyte driver working his way to becoming reasonably good with baby steps and an aptitude to learn, the RX-8 is more the car for me that I can live with on a daily basis.

If I wanted a go-fast car that I'd take to the track all day, the Evo would be off the list too. There are better cars on the track than an Evo. There are more fun cars than an RX-8 (S2000 anyone?). But the RX-8 gives me the blend of what I want, and that's why I bought it. revhappy is always kind to point out the shortfalls of the RX-8 but frankly for a lot of people, the Evo and STI are so hideous, no creature comforts, no safety features, and as an added bonus for me, no RWD.. I passed on them. I don't want to be hand-held by the AWD of the Evo/STI. I want to learn how to drive properly, even if it means making mistakes. I leave plenty of room for my errors. Evo does all the work for you.

No thanks.

What street car is better on the track (road course I presume???) than the EVO for $30K or less????

As for the safety features, I haven't seen the EVO's crash test results. I saw the base lancer's and they were reasonable (2-5 stars I think, mostly 3-4 stars). All else being equal, I'd expect the EVO's to be a bit better as it has a MUCH more rigid body.

Now..the EVO handles so good..that its boring!!!! I really think you should test drive it before you make comments like those. The US version is a bit more raw as it lacks the Active Yaw Control (AYC) of its overseas counterparts.

BTW..if you really wanted a car with classic RWD tendencies, why didn't you go with the S2000??? From your signature, you have two other cars with backseats? The RX8 is much more stable and tuned for understeer (mass-market cars are rarely tuned for serious oversteer due to obvious leagal reasons). IMHO, the tuning of the car is as (if not more) important than the what wheels spin when it comes to the handling of the car on the road. Unfortunately, its not easy to get back that tune (at least in terms of "feel") in the aftermarket.

Originally posted by revhappy


Another ridiculous post. The EVO is NOT stripped (its not luxorious but its more than adequate for a serious driver who doesn't need to be bothered by weight increasing nonsense such as faux wooded trim,seat warmers, etc).

Mazda already tried a high-powered turbo (and it did not hit 19.5 PSI max boost) on the rotary and it was a disaster from a reliability standpoint (though it was an amazing performance car) to the point where the image nearly killed the rotary in the US. BTW..the stock EVO is tuned very conservative (i.e. runs very rich to keep temperatures down). There have been huge gains from some very affordable mods. Mitsu certianly has their issues, but one thing they do know are turbos and execute them pretty dam well.

Your post insunates the idea you repeatedly espoused in the past -Turbos's take no brain power and are "the easy way out" - is quite erroneous. If it was that easy....everyone would just "slap an aftermarket turbo" on their cars.

Speaking about turbos & tuners...check out the HKS Mitsu EVO if you have....what was it? I think Motor Trend...or something like that. They were quite impressed by what the HKS guys did to the car.

At least EVO has better handling.

So why do Evo-drivers care about Rx-8 owners anyway?

I don't get this. You get the car that suits you best. That's Evo for some, Rx-8 for others. It just depends on what you value most. Some rather have N/A rotaries. Some rather have Turbos. Some rather have RWD. Some AWD. Some like the Sedan Look. Others like a Sportier look.

good point, why do they care

Originally posted by AbusiveWombat
another point in favor of the EVO is the AWD versus the Cobra and Mach1. Some like RWD but when you get into big horsepower ('03 Cobra) the first couple of gears are useless because you spin the tires so easily. With the AWD all the power is put to the ground. On the track the AWD is almost unfair against the RWD, and throw in foul weather and it's rediculous.

Here's a thread:
http://www.s2ki.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=145109

for those that don't want to follow the link basically, stock EVO beats a 420rwhp '03 Cobra with drag radials from 0-80mph. Put on a few basic mods on the EVO and maybe you take the Cobra up to 90 or 100. Now, the Cobra will hand that same EVO it's ass on the highway but you can't have everything.

Don't let the 19.5 peak boost scare you. This engine has been around for a while. Like revhappy pointed out, there's an EVO running 500+ whp on stock block and head and countless 330+whp EVOs. The internals are capable of 400 whp. Stock it's very very safe and conservative. The reason for the synthetic oil is maintenance. Turbocharged cars need a little more TLC than the N/A cars. It's very important that the oil be clean otherwise the turbo life span can be drastically reduced.

the three most important things with a turbocharged car is:
1.) make sure the turbo has time to cool down before shuting the engine off
2.) change the oil regularly (3000 miles)
3.) make sure the engine has time to warm up before running it hard

Now Mitsu can't control any of these but they can make sure that the oil is high quality.

aight...any evo owner that has owned an evo before the VIII will let you know the boost is 19.5 in low revs and smooths out to 14.5 in high revs to give the torque profile that the evo posesses...the evos are very reliable cars...make a trip to jamaica (evo country) where you have more evos per capita than anywhere else....all of owners there tell you their cars are reliable. go to trinidad...the worlds fastest four cylinder under 2.2 litres is a mitsubishi lancer with an evo engine...the 4G63 is one of the worlds most heavily developed engines...over 10 years of development. the car isn't ugly...its straight to the point...the RX8 is a great car...the evo is out of its league...RX8= luxury sports car, evo = race bred family sedan

the US is very new to the evos and WRX's and the only countries that refuse to give mitsu the credit they deserve for creating such a great car...you guys need to look up some best motoring videos...

if you want real evo performance from the factory look up the RS450 or the RS500.....the 450 the name speaks of the HP and makes close to 500 LB/ft of torque...and the price is in the range of corvettes...but with those horse power figures..upgraded suspension etc...would run circles around those cars


ps. the evo holds the land speed record for fastest caravan tow

Originally posted by R32
So why do Evo-drivers care about Rx-8 owners anyway?

I don't get this. You get the car that suits you best. That's Evo for some, Rx-8 for others. It just depends on what you value most. Some rather have N/A rotaries. Some rather have Turbos. Some rather have RWD. Some AWD. Some like the Sedan Look. Others like a Sportier look.

Good point, different cars for different people. I am suprised this thread is still alive.

I think the reason why there are debates on this thread is because the first post says, he wasn't impressed.

It's strange how this hostility towards other cars just shows up out of the blue. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to validate their purchase by bashing someone elses preference. In all reality I don't think Evo owners care about the RX-8 as much as some people here would like to believe. I might get some backlash for saying this but between Evo owners and RX-8 owners there might be more car enthusiasts driving Evos. I personally enjoy performance cars in many forms. I've driven an Evo extensively (over 6 months to be specific) and loved it. I can say the same for the RX-8 (since the end of October). Hell, I wish I could be like Jay Leno and just have a different car for every day (there would more than likely be an Evo and an RX-8 in the collection). My point is really to say enjoy your car and stop trying to find fault with the cars other people choose.

Originally posted by Hornet
It's strange how this hostility towards other cars just shows up out of the blue. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to validate their purchase by bashing someone elses preference. In all reality I don't think Evo owners care about the RX-8 as much as some people here would like to believe. I might get some backlash for saying this but between Evo owners and RX-8 owners there might be more car enthusiasts driving Evos. I personally enjoy performance cars in many forms. I've driven an Evo extensively (over 6 months to be specific) and loved it. I can say the same for the RX-8 (since the end of October). Hell, I wish I could be like Jay Leno and just have a different car for every day (there would more than likely be an Evo and an RX-8 in the collection). My point is really to say enjoy your car and stop trying to find fault with the cars other people choose.

Very good point, RX8 and Evo can be friends. :cool:

http://www.michaelclee.com/pics/ric_fri_meet_01312004/images/IMG_0917.jpg

Originally posted by revhappy
All else being equal, I'd expect the EVO's to be a bit better as it has a MUCH more rigid body.



Ok, first, revhappy, the Evo is cool and I'm glad you like your car.

But produce numbers on the Evo having a more rigid body than the RX-8. I am curious how you come up with that statement.

I'm not sure that's the case, and hearsay isn't going to cut it.

Numbers... got em?

Originally posted by racerdave
Ok, first, revhappy, the Evo is cool and I'm glad you like your car.

But produce numbers on the Evo having a more rigid body than the RX-8. I am curious how you come up with that statement.

I'm not sure that's the case, and hearsay isn't going to cut it.

Numbers... got em?

The body is certianly rigid, but do I have numbers? No. There is no dispute that EVO has MUCH stiffer springs, has less body roll and is tuned more towards ultimate handling (tune is the key word here).

Ok, that clears it up. Thanks.

I thought you meant chassis rigitidy, in terms of torsional rigidity and bending of the chassis structure itself.

Because I've seen numbers where the 8 was better than the E46 BMW's... by a lot. So the 8's body structure is very rigid.

But yeah, when talking stiffened chassis settings, the Evo is set up stiffer (springs, ARBs) than the 8. Definitely less body roll... but also a harsher ride.

Actually, isn't it cool that we all have these choices? Evo, RX-8, 350z, Integra, etc.

That wasn't the case 20 years ago. Most cars were crap back then.

Sure the EVO is a better performing car than the 8 in just about every catagory but I prefer the driving experience of rear wheel drive versus all wheel drive. I also chose the compliant ride of the 8 over the EVO and I like the looks of the 8 and interior and comfort far better. you don't have to remind me of Mitsu motors either. I had a first gen eclipse with a 20G turbo, and a whole list of other mods and that car was a monster. Maybe I'm getting old too, but I couldn't see my wife,kids and I tearing up the town in a EVO, besides I wanted something different this time. and with the RX8, it will give me and education in enthusiast rear wheel drive control!

I drove the evo, sti,z and decided they were all great cars but for me thr rx-8 took the cake.
Many due to its driving feel,fit,functionality and design I purchased my 8.

But for me comparing these cars is like apples and oranges , I can'nt knock em and whenever I see one of the big three
I just say "congrates on you're ride" and move on.

---Yet i cant help to wonder how the evo or sti would favor aginst the rx-8 if the were n/a :D

Good call Hammy.

I love all enthusiast cars, but there are only a select few I'd want to *own.* But that doesn't mean I don't appreciate other cars for what they can do... or look down my nose at others for what they pick.