Evo
 

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.

EVO
 

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.

Re: EVO
 

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

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

Re: Re: EVO
 

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

For the second time ever I agree with Skyline Maniac. The EVO I tested (see this thread) 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.

Re: EVO
 

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.

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).

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!

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.

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/showthrea...hreadid=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.

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....;)

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.

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.