Acura rsx type s vs mitsubishi lancer evo viii

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

i learnt to drive on a lancer, i'm fairly sure the integras level of torque wont bother me. its just a nicer place to sit than the evo, i don't like drawing attention. plus i won't lose my license as quickly.

im quite sure an rsx would get just as much attention from the cops as an evo, afterall the evo is a sedan and the rsx a coupe, take the wing of the evo and it looks just like any ordinary lancer sedan, i still wouldnt take the wing off tho, looks too good IMO

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

So thats like saying a Normal Lancer is the same as a base Integra; reliable and used as a daily driver, while the Evo is used for Boy Racers and Tuners.

True, I suppose, but a lot of these cars are used as daily drivers by the people who buy them; I'd prefer the Integra.

the base integra would be a good daily driver and offer spirited performance too, but we're talking about the type s, that's the balls to the wall model, it produces max torque at 7000rpm, 7000!!!!!
it would be hell to drive it as a daily driver wihtout reving the hell out of it

the evo wouldnt be good as a daily driver either cuz of its hard ride but atleast it has some grunt at regular engine speeds (expecially with the new vvt mivec on the IX)

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

I just got back from a Mitsy training course last week and the guy who took the course was responsible for the FQ300 in new zealand and he done it all with software, he also said they could have got alot more if they wanted to. He has also already seen the EVO10

the evo 10 hasnt been designed yet ...

[IBrake4Rainbows]

the base integra would be a good daily driver and offer spirited performance too, but we're talking about the type s, that's the balls to the wall model, it produces max torque at 7000rpm, 7000!!!!!
it would be hell to drive it as a daily driver wihtout reving the hell out of it

the evo wouldnt be good as a daily driver either cuz of its hard ride but atleast it has some grunt at regular engine speeds (expecially with the new vvt mivec on the IX)

The entire point of having such a high Max Torque level is to give the car some civility when it's around town, saving fuel, and when your really pushing it gives you it's best. With the Evo your always on, all the time.

It's like VVT-i in the Celica.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

agreed, its just from a purely performance point of view the evo wins, from a practicality point of view the evo wins.

When you think about it, a Hatch is going to be practical as well. For a good cruiser, with stealth appeal, RSX would be better.

from cost point of view rsx wins but for best bang for the buck the evo still win.

I'm confused how that would work. as in the measurements. As in figuring out the Bang/Buck Ratio.

like i dont care if you like the rsx more then the evo, thats ur choice, but my priorities are different from urs, seriously tho if all i had was enough money to get an evo, i wouldnt get it or an rsx, but if i was moderately rich and already had a bigger sedan id get the evo as a toy, weekend car, pocket rocket, ect.

Thats what the Evo is, a toy for the hardcore.

The RSX is a car you could actually live with, day in/out, and still be able to use it on a track moderately, wouldn't be the hardcore thrills of an EVO, but the banzai wail of Vtec.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

the evo 10 hasnt been designed yet ...

So a person working inside Mitsu Performance HQ wouldn't have seen even a rendering?

Right.......

Chances are their testing it right now.

[Quiggs]

the evo 10 hasnt been designed yet ...

It generally takes 2 years or more to develop a completely new car, as the Evo 10 is rumored to be. I'm willing to bet they've at least got an idea of what it will look like, and what will be under the hood.

[Waatz]

the evo 10 hasnt been designed yet ...

And you know that because you read alot of magazines I bet.
If the head of Mitsubishi Technical NZ tells me he has seen the EVO 10 I belive him.

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

The entire point of having such a high Max Torque level is to give the car some civility when it's around town, saving fuel, and when your really pushing it gives you it's best. With the Evo your always on, all the time.

It's like VVT-i in the Celica.

no... low down torque is a GOOD thing, road car or race, the high torque is due to the aggresive vtec profiles

its BAD for daily driving considering its MAX torque is just 140ft-lbs at 7000rpm, and as with all the vtec systems of old the torque curve is REALLY steep, and it wouldnt be unlikely for torque at 2000-4000 rpm to be just over half of the 140 claimed figure

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

Thats what the Evo is, a toy for the hardcore.

The RSX is a car you could actually live with, day in/out, and still be able to use it on a track moderately, wouldn't be the hardcore thrills of an EVO, but the banzai wail of Vtec.

it is, the type s isnt

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

it takes a while for them to completely design a new car, and since the evo is based on the lancer (sorta) and there hasnt been talk of a new lancer model coming any time soon i doubt the 10 is anywhere near a prototype stage

plus factor in mitsubishis finanical situation right now, they dont have the time money nor resource to dump into a project like the evo, granted the evo is like the only car worth getting in mitsu's lineup but no company can survive with sales from just one car, expecially one thats targeted at a niche market

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

And you know that because you read alot of magazines I bet.
If the head of Mitsubishi Technical NZ tells me he has seen the EVO 10 I belive him.

and just cuz the pope says god is real he's right?

people tend to exhagerate things, i have no doubt that there has been plans for an evo 10 but its highly doubtful its off the drawing board yet so to speak

[Quiggs]

no... low down torque is a GOOD thing, road car or race, the high torque is due to the aggresive vtec profiles

its BAD for daily driving considering its MAX torque is just 140ft-lbs at 7000rpm, and as with all the vtec systems of old the torque curve is REALLY steep, and it wouldnt be unlikely for torque at 2000-4000 rpm to be just over half of the 140 claimed figure

Have you ever seen the dyno graph for a Type S?

http://www.hondata.com/images/05CAIs...04CAIstock.gif

04 and 05 with a CAI. Far from a steep graph on the torque side. Max torque is at 7000, but from 3000rpm on it's got a decent amount. The S weights under 2900 pounds, and it's got very tall gearing. Driving this car every day is no hard task...

What do you say about the RX8's lack of torque and high revving nature?

[IBrake4Rainbows]

and just cuz the pope says god is real he's right?

people tend to exhagerate things, i have no doubt that there has been plans for an evo 10 but its highly doubtful its off the drawing board yet so to speak

Just because someone has inside knowledge of a product, i trust his opinion more than someone on an internet board who "Thinks" it's not off the drawing board yet.

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

HUGE dip in torque at 5500-6500 rpm kinda points at some experimental error, engine problem or something wrong, also there was no note of what car was being dynoed

and i found other dyno sheets for a type s and they're
http://performance.clubrsx.com/dyno/buhda/buhda1.jpg
and
http://performance.clubrsx.com/dyno/buhda/buhda1.jpg
both of which show normal vtec style torque graphs, and as you can see the torque curve is pretty linear until the 2nd stage kicks in

and i believe you mean the type s has short gearing, tall gearing would minimize torque to the wheels while short gearing would increase it

with short ratios the torque level would be adequate but more shfits are needed (bad for a daily driver) but if you lengthen the ratios the torque is minimized, even at optimal gearing one or the other (# of shifts and wheel torque) would be compromised