Evo 1/4 Timeslip
08-11-2003, 01:19 AM
#64
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Irvine
Posts: 8,079
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mark_is300
I think he (integrate) meant the EVO isn't exactly designed for highway race or top speed. The 5th gear is a little too long, but you don't need to go 120mph+ on a rally course.
I think he (integrate) meant the EVO isn't exactly designed for highway race or top speed. The 5th gear is a little too long, but you don't need to go 120mph+ on a rally course.
Of course you can have 19 psi all cross the rpm range, but we all know why Mitsubishi probably didn't do that (reliability). Because of this, most of the boost is at lower RPMs which is great for low end power, hence the torque curve.
p.s. My first car had a turbo engine.
08-11-2003, 05:46 AM
#66
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Albany
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How did we go from talking about EVO to comparing EVO vs. s2000 and about this broad compared to this broad? The amount of bad information is building up.
Why are so many people unwilling to believe that their car is superior to everything on the planet? If you don't believe the EVO has better aspects than the s2000, than your nuts.
The comment about the tires and lateral Gs and handling is just dumb. I am still trying to even consider it but it just doesn't work. AWD + balance != HANDLING. There's a lot of other factors besides AWD. Mitsu didn't just find the secret recipe. Why is my VR-4 (AWD) gets 0wn3d by the EVO on a road course? Both are AWDs? I have bigger/wider stock tires...
Other things come into play.
Again, this thread is off topic.
-Shawn
Why are so many people unwilling to believe that their car is superior to everything on the planet? If you don't believe the EVO has better aspects than the s2000, than your nuts.
The comment about the tires and lateral Gs and handling is just dumb. I am still trying to even consider it but it just doesn't work. AWD + balance != HANDLING. There's a lot of other factors besides AWD. Mitsu didn't just find the secret recipe. Why is my VR-4 (AWD) gets 0wn3d by the EVO on a road course? Both are AWDs? I have bigger/wider stock tires...
Other things come into play.Again, this thread is off topic.
-Shawn
08-11-2003, 06:27 AM
#69
www.ultimate-racing.com they have the fastest EVO in the North America......11.9s with only few mods.
I got the turbo kit from them for my S2000 and I ran a 13.2s with bad launch 107mph. If I got a great launch on my "S" I should be in 12's. I think UR turbo S2000 is running 12.6s at 113mph
I got the turbo kit from them for my S2000 and I ran a 13.2s with bad launch 107mph. If I got a great launch on my "S" I should be in 12's. I think UR turbo S2000 is running 12.6s at 113mph
08-11-2003, 07:19 AM
#70
Actually some guy named Al who is from Connecticut has the fastest Evo...it is something like 11.4's.... look on the www.evolutionm.net and you will find it in there somewhere...... he (this guy named Al) is looking for glory on having the fastest Evo....which is fun for him... he apparently has some $ and the knowledge to build it so...good for him.... he always gets pissed when others who are slower get press... ahahahahah...
My mustang (2003 cobra) with very minor mods (not even a pully or slicks) ran 12.4@116mph and that was with me driving it....so I am not sure why people dump huge $ into drag racing an Evo or S2000?? I had a 1.99X 60' time... with slicks i would probably have been in the 11's on stock boost.....
[QUOTE]Originally posted by SuzukaS2K
[B]www.ultimate-racing.com
My mustang (2003 cobra) with very minor mods (not even a pully or slicks) ran 12.4@116mph and that was with me driving it....so I am not sure why people dump huge $ into drag racing an Evo or S2000?? I had a 1.99X 60' time... with slicks i would probably have been in the 11's on stock boost.....
[QUOTE]Originally posted by SuzukaS2K
[B]www.ultimate-racing.com