Mitsubishi Evo almost coming off track...

[wwgkd]

Originally Posted by potato1

We are back online. Anyways, for the record I think they are a very cool car. I assume they go up on three wheels because all the elctronic control sytems are keeping the car from understeering off the track. Plus they look tough and purposful.

It's because they're based off of econo-cars. If you give them a lot of traction, the frame isn't up to the torque and will flex until the tire is off the track completely.

[Sledgehammer]

Originally Posted by clutch-monkey

is that what the girls call you

Some people lean backwards...

[Coventrysucks]

Originally Posted by wwgkd

It's because they're based off of econo-cars. If you give them a lot of traction, the frame isn't up to the torque and will flex until the tire is off the track completely.

No it isn't.

HTH.

[Niko_Fx]

Bunch of haters, EVOs are amazingly hardcore. Ride one before opening your mouth again

[charged]

Originally Posted by wwgkd

It's because they're based off of econo-cars. If you give them a lot of traction, the frame isn't up to the torque and will flex until the tire is off the track completely.

Completley wrong there matey, also the EVO in the pic has a full roll cage, so chassis(monocoque) is even stiffer.

[wwgkd]

Originally Posted by Coventrysucks

No it isn't.

HTH.

Originally Posted by Niko_Fx

Bunch of haters, EVOs are amazingly hardcore. Ride one before opening your mouth again

HTH?

Niko, I have ridden in one, maybe you should ask me if I have next time before automatically dismissing me by saying something like that.

They're pretty quick in low traction conditions, but that doesn't meant hat they're not based off a Lancer, which is an econo-car. I'm a huge fan of the Neon SRT-4, but that doesn't mean it's not also based off of an econo-car. What I was saying is that the chassis isn't up to the standards of sports cars designed from the groung up, like a Lotus Exige or Porsche Cayman.

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by wwgkd

maybe you should ask me if I have next time before automatically dismissing me ............
They're pretty quick in low traction conditions, but that doesn't meant hat they're not based off a Lancer, which is an econo-car.

Subaru doesn't use the EVO chassis ... woudl ahve been interesting if it had
Was that a brain-fart or have you not actually researched the hsitory of the marques and the bodies ?

I'm a huge fan of the Neon SRT-4, but that doesn't mean it's not also based off of an econo-car. What I was saying is that the chassis isn't up to the standards of sports cars designed from the groung up, like a Lotus Exige or Porsche Cayman.

Not true.
THe econo-box chassis isn't ... but the performance version chassis clearly is.
you DO know that these compete on tarmac and rallies with NO permitted modifications ? Group N ??
THe Scoob and the Mitsi are both excellent chassis in their WRX and EVO forms.

What conditino do you think an Exige woudl be in after this .... Trendpimp - Video - 220 KM/H Rally Jump ?
And to rally at those speeds you need a decent chassis

[NSXType-R]

Awesome photos!

Thanks for sharing it with us!

[wwgkd]

Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine

Subaru doesn't use the EVO chassis ... woudl ahve been interesting if it had
Was that a brain-fart or have you not actually researched the hsitory of the marques and the bodies ?

Not true.
THe econo-box chassis isn't ... but the performance version chassis clearly is.
you DO know that these compete on tarmac and rallies with NO permitted modifications ? Group N ??
THe Scoob and the Mitsi are both excellent chassis in their WRX and EVO forms.

What conditino do you think an Exige woudl be in after this .... Trendpimp - Video - 220 KM/H Rally Jump ?
And to rally at those speeds you need a decent chassis

We're talking about a Lancer Evolution, right? Mitsubishi? Maybe I am having a brain fart, but where does Subaru come into this?

Say what you want about rally racing having it's interesting moments (and there are some if you watch long enough,) but being able to hang air isn't the same thing as having a chassis as stiff as a Lotus for maximum handling on asphault tracks. The 'performance' chassis of an Evo is still just a (heavily) modified Lancer's.

And if it comes to air while racing offroad, don't even try to compare rally cars to trophy Baja trucks. The travel on those things are 36 inches, and handle way worse terrain than in any rally. If you're going to go, go extreme.

[The_Canuck]

Originally Posted by wwgkd

We're talking about a Lancer Evolution, right? Mitsubishi? Maybe I am having a brain fart, but where does Subaru come into this?

You said because it was based off an econobox it had less structural rigidity, but the WRX is also based off an econobox and does not. Thats where subaru comes into this.

[Niko_Fx]

Originally Posted by wwgkd

They're pretty quick in low traction conditions, but that doesn't meant hat they're not based off a Lancer, which is an econo-car. I'm a huge fan of the Neon SRT-4, but that doesn't mean it's not also based off of an econo-car.

I never said that the car was or was not based on anything. I just read the comments in this thread like "The EVO sucks" and "Hells yeah" and I just had to laugh... What do YOU drive anyway? You're a huge fan of the SRT-4 which is a complete POS next to an EVO and you can't show some respect for the EVO?

[P4g4nite]

Originally Posted by wwgkd

It's because they're based off of econo-cars. If you give them a lot of traction, the frame isn't up to the torque and will flex until the tire is off the track completely.

Absolutely recockulous.
A chassis that floppy hasn`t been built since horse and cart times.

Way to give a good first impression of yourself, newbie.

[wwgkd]

Originally Posted by The_Canuck

You said because it was based off an econobox it had less structural rigidity, but the WRX is also based off an econobox and does not. Thats where subaru comes into this.

The "bathtub" frame of the Lotus Elise weighs 150lbs and flexes far less in corners than that of an Evo or STI. I'm not saying you're wrong for liking Evo's/STI's, but modifications of existing car frames almost never work as well as frames designed from scratch for that purpose.

Originally Posted by Niko_Fx

I never said that the car was or was not based on anything. I just read the comments in this thread like "The EVO sucks" and "Hells yeah" and I just had to laugh... What do YOU drive anyway? You're a huge fan of the SRT-4 which is a complete POS next to an EVO and you can't show some respect for the EVO?

Oh, hehe, that's ok, I'm not trying to argue with you, then. I wrote hells yeah because I was up drinking with friends and had just had an argument with them over basically the same thing. Kind of a random thing.

I like the SRT-4 because it was the 0-60 per dollar king, and did some other things, too. If I had the money for an Evo, I would not choose the SRT-4 over it, but I wouldn't take an evo, either. You'd have a hard time convincing me something with 4 seats is a true sports car, and no chance at 4 doors.

[baddabang]

Originally Posted by Niko_Fx

I never said that the car was or was not based on anything. I just read the comments in this thread like "The EVO sucks" and "Hells yeah" and I just had to laugh... What do YOU drive anyway? You're a huge fan of the SRT-4 which is a complete POS next to an EVO and you can't show some respect for the EVO?

Jesus its an inside joke, its not like I called your children ugly.

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by wwgkd

The "bathtub" frame of the Lotus Elise weighs 150lbs and flexes far less in corners than that of an Evo or STI. I'm not saying you're wrong for liking Evo's/STI's, but modifications of existing car frames almost never work as well as frames designed from scratch for that purpose.

What cars are you basing that opinion on ?
Modifcations of existing frames produces as capable vehicles IF they are done properly.
Ford, BMW, Seat, Skoda, Renault, Peugeot, Lotus have been doing it successfully for decades

BTW, a Lotus Exige ran in the British Rally cross championship and didn't fare well Rigidity and strength arent' one and the same in chassis design.




Oh, hehe, that's ok, I'm not trying to argue with you, then. I wrote hells yeah because I was up drinking with friends and had just had an argument with them over basically the same thing. Kind of a random thing.

I like the SRT-4 because it was the 0-60 per dollar king, and did some other things, too. If I had the money for an Evo, I would not choose the SRT-4 over it, but I wouldn't take an evo, either. You'd have a hard time convincing me something with 4 seats is a true sports car, and no chance at 4 doors.[/quote]