Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 76

Thread: Mitsubishi Evo almost coming off track...

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wishing I was in Moscow, Idaho
    Posts
    2,585
    Quote Originally Posted by potato1 View Post
    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.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA, Colorado, Vallecito Lake
    Posts
    3,831
    Quote Originally Posted by clutch-monkey View Post
    is that what the girls call you
    Some people lean backwards...
    "Horsepower sells motor cars, but torque wins motor races."
    -Carrol Shelby

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,272
    Quote Originally Posted by wwgkd View Post
    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.
    Thanks for all the fish

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Deerfield Beach, Florida
    Posts
    5,802
    Bunch of haters, EVOs are amazingly hardcore. Ride one before opening your mouth again

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    2,496
    Quote Originally Posted by wwgkd View Post
    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.
    SA IPRA cars 15, 25, 51 & 77
    Sharperto Racing IP Corollas
    http://www.sharperto.com.au/

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wishing I was in Moscow, Idaho
    Posts
    2,585
    Quote Originally Posted by Coventrysucks View Post
    No it isn't.

    HTH.
    Quote Originally Posted by Niko_Fx View Post
    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.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    Quote Originally Posted by wwgkd View Post
    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
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Coast of the United States
    Posts
    12,007
    Awesome photos!

    Thanks for sharing it with us!

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wishing I was in Moscow, Idaho
    Posts
    2,585
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
    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.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    True North
    Posts
    7,682
    Quote Originally Posted by wwgkd View Post
    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.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Deerfield Beach, Florida
    Posts
    5,802
    Quote Originally Posted by wwgkd View Post
    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?

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ozland
    Posts
    912
    Quote 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.
    Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.

    http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wishing I was in Moscow, Idaho
    Posts
    2,585
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Canuck View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Niko_Fx View Post
    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.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    NEW YORK
    Posts
    6,985
    Quote Originally Posted by Niko_Fx View Post
    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.
    John says:
    so i had to dump acid into the block tank today
    i'm afraid to fap
    cause i got it on my hands

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    Quote Originally Posted by wwgkd View Post
    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]
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. all cars all years 0-60 and 1/4mile time
    By matheus in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 04-26-2015, 06:29 PM
  2. Mitsubishi Eclipse (4G) Spyder 2006-2011
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 03-08-2007, 02:26 PM
  3. C&D review Evo 9.
    By Quiggs in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-05-2006, 05:44 AM
  4. Mitsubishi Sportback Concept 2005
    By porlamfer in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-27-2005, 12:09 AM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-16-2005, 08:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •