Mitsubishi's Supercar Killer...?

[SlowToady]

The Evolution FQ-400. The skinny: 400BHP, AWD w/yaw control, 2.0 turbo. 0-60: 3.5s. Top speed: 175mph.

Check it out on Top Gear...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOVDGccBxzg

Wicked...wicked fast.

[svandamme]

that's like from 2 years ago or something

[SlowToady]

I know....

[M.D. Holloway]

I just can't get past the looks. She delivers all the goods and is cheap considering what it can do but she really is ugly...

[sketchers356]

A car that is slower than a diesel wagon? No thanks.

[Tobra]

My buddy had a small block 400 V-8 in a Vega that was like that. Ran 11's, ugly as a mud fence but the noises it would make were awesome.

Lancer Evo is an extremely competent vehicle with incredible potential. Read an article where they put an Evo up against some big dollar German iron. 911, M-3 among others. Stock vs stock, it was a close battle, very lightly modded Evo(chipped and new brake pads as I recall) mopped them up

[sketchers356]

Ricers seem to have edited the above video such that it doesnt have Clarkson's destruction of the car. Starts at about 6:30.

[SlowToady]

I hadn't seen that one before. Thanks for posting it. Although, I'd have to say, the "destruction" isn't quite so great.

Boohoo, the clutch is hard. I wonder what the clutch in a Murci is like. Or a Ferrari. IMO, not a big deal.

4MPG while flogging it? Well, duh. I'd imagine that under WOT conditions, similar cars (in performance) wouldn't fare much better. Anyone know the petrol use of a GT3 at WOT? There's really no reason to be driving it 'round town at WOT all the time anyhow.

Turning radius? I can't believe it was that bad...legitimate gripe.

Gas? I have no idea what this Shell OptiMax petrol is. Is that what shell calls VMax in the states? I suppose this could be a legitimate gripe. Remember, though, performance cars have for quite some time been requiring 93 octane.

The part about it undressing itself shouldn't happen, either.

The rest of it? Just griping to take it down a notch, basically. Notice no comments on the crazyness that is a Murci or Ferrari.

Tobra, was that a regular Evo in that article? I hate to say it, but the FQ-400 would likely put them to quite shame on a track, nothing close about it.

Slower than a diesel wagon? How entirely misleading. 0-60 in 3.5s. Hmmm...Come on now, who DOESN'T realize that turbo cars have...turbo lag? Seriously, my 2.0L stock Golf would probably **** its internals on the ground if I had it in 5th at 30, let alone go anywhere. The comparison in the video was NOT legitimate at all. How come did they didn't do a 60-120 roll on starting in....3rd?

I think I'd still rather like a 911 (993) although the performance for the dollar of some of the Japanese cars is undeniable.

[Tobra]

It was the top performance Evo from a few years ago, Sport Compact Car, neighborhood of 275 hp as I recall. What exactly is the gripe against Japanese cars, no soul or something?

[sketchers356]

The point of the diesel segment is torque. The Evo has great power, but only in a very small rev band. Not exactly an easily street-able car.

[sketchers356]

Also, it is interesting how Clarkson typically goes from hating a car to loving it or vice versa in his reviews.

Take the M5

[Tobra]

Here is a link to that comparo article

Evo vs Deutschland

[Mule]

Pos

[SlowToady]

Yea right. The EVO is the 911 Porsche used to build.

From time to time on here, guys crow about the good ol' days when Porsches were light and went fast without all the added bull****. Like PSM and all the other P related buzzwords. Take that **** out. Throw it away. Except that they won't, and they're not going to.

But Mitsubishi will. If that car had either a V8 or a Porsche badge on it, you guys would nut yourselves talking about it, if maybe bashing it slightly for the styling.

I realize the point of the diesel wagon was to show torque. That's great, we get that. What we also get is that turbo cars have lag associated with them. If you can't figure out what gear you should be in at a specific point in time, you should be driving a diesel wagon, not a performance car; and especially not a performance car.

Tobra, thanks for the link. They tested a standard Evo8, not the FQ-400 which is an altogether different beast.

Originally Posted by Mule

Pos

[flashgordon13]

My last car was a Galant VR4 and I can tell you that those 2.0 mitsubishi engines are monsters and everyone underestimates them. I was putting 475 hp to the ground with a stock bottom end and 35 psi of boost. The newer evo's can do way more without even breaking a sweat. I should have never sold my galant. It handled way better than my 944 and was fast as hell. The brakes were the only thing lacking on the entire car.

[Komenda Fan]

It's true. The mitsubishi 4 is the small block V8 of today, you can get tremendous power out of them quite reliably. The EVO was and is an incredible performance value, and if you don't like the styling of the previous generations, the new one is quite different (EVO X). To me, there is something fantastic about an inexpensive car that can show expensive "supercars" the way around a track.

The FQ-400, however, was a UK only model, and for the EVO IX they dropped the horsepower from 400bhp to 360bhp in order to go to a smaller turbo, and thereby reduce the turbo lag that Clarkson so ably demonstrated.

The only thing I am not enamoured with is that Mitsubishi has decided to offer the EVO X only with the flappy paddle gearbox, which they will tell you is superior (ok, no argument there - it does shift faster than I can) but in reality, they and other manufacturers are in love with it because it takes control away from the driver by allowing the computer to control the clutch and therefore the shock loads to the drivetrain...which cuts down on warranty claims.

For me, that's a deal breaker. I buy cars for fun, and I don't think you can have fun unless you have a clutch under your left foot.

[Mule]

Let's see, clutch take up that kills the torqueless engine, turbo lag from hell, service every 4500 miles, $70K price tag, suspension that will knock your fillings out & 35 #'s of boost. Sounds like a pleasure to drive & a real formula for longevity. There's a video on youtube showing one going 0-60 in about a second. Should see 'em in top fuel next year.

Watch the sales boom!

[MFAFF]

SlowT,

Gas over here...regular is 95...Premium is 98... Shell VMax...99/100.

Price 1:1.1:1.5 hence the gripe...

The FQ400, being primarily aimed at the UK market, is pretty specific...so Mule's comments, whilst perhaps correct for a US perspective are irrelevant...to the predicted purchasers...they have zero interest in what Mule is favouring..they want the tech inherent in the Mitsu...there are few few, if any v8 powered cars that could keep up with a FQ400 over a decent British B road, with variable and unpredictable surface grip vairation 'cos is a damp day.....certainly nothing from Maranello or Munich, you might stand a hope with a GT3 RS.. but your average B road is going favour the upright driving position, 4 square visibility and the grip and all the electronics are favouring.

Certainly in these conditions there is nothing that has a 'traditional' US philosophy is going to be able to deal with the pace...not even the Ford GT.

Seriously guys threading a car quickly down a decent UK B road favours this type of car, over the trad cars...even thing like an M3 are disadvantaged over a 4WD machine, 911s turbos are simply to wide, visibility too limited to make the most of their performance...its why Lotus Elise's are so popular...they are small and light, nimble and stop far better than they go..

They are also no more interested in the service interval and clutch issues as they are likely to have a 911 in the garage as well...and drive these beasts as 'fun cars'...

[Tobra]

Originally Posted by Mule

Let's see, clutch take up that kills the torqueless engine, turbo lag from hell, service every 4500 miles, $70K price tag, suspension that will knock your fillings out & 35 #'s of boost. Sounds like a pleasure to drive & a real formula for longevity. There's a video on youtube showing one going 0-60 in about a second. Should see 'em in top fuel next year.

Watch the sales boom!

You should click on the link I posted. Older model Evo, similar philosophy. The FQ 400 is based on the last iteration of the Evo, and I would not be interested in it due to its peakiness.

How could you not be interested in similar performance to a 911 4S Carrera for less than half the money up front, probably a quarter or less of the money for maint?

[onewhippedpuppy]

Anybody that watches Clarkson often knows that he slobbers all over his favorite cars, and finds any excuses to bash those that he dislikes. Just watch him review a Porsche, except the Carrera GT. He especially hates the 911.

I won't debate how good the car is, the numbers speak for themselves. Hard to go faster for less money. Our previous "rice" debate was fun, where I learned that a Chevelle is better than an Evo, thanks to the magical "displacement". Which we all learned, circa 1955, there's no replacement for.