New Vette
Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 38
hmmm, i don't think you people see the real point in buying an evo.
It's expensive, and yes they have cheep interior.... BUT they have more potencial out of the box than any 4 banger to date. The S2000 is known for it's power but due to high compression isn't very changable without going beyond smog berriers, while the evo benifits from AWD and doesn't have to do the 2 speed dyno test for smog, thus meaning the new gas that's effected by compression (NO or NOx) isn't ever measured. If honda wanted a real winnder they'd make a turbo awd S2000 and they've have a supercar to go down in japan history for all time.
The november 04 issue of car and driver had a comparison article and the evo held more than it's own. It was the main article so you can't miss it if you're looking around for it. The evo had aftermarket differntials, headwork (cams, rod bots, and head studs) bigger turbo, and a performance clutch. With boost up to 25psi it was pushing 475hp and 450 lbs. Umm...wow. Anyways, wasn't lightened much (racing seats) and it was keeping up with the rest of the field (even the cars in the open (not sedan) class). It had a 0-60 of 3.4 (3.7 during the main run, 3.4 was the best recorded 0-60) and a 1/4 mile time of 11.6. Even the course time of 48.7 seconds rivaled the twin turbo viper at 47.8 and beat the lingenfelter twin turbo vette wich ran 49.2 on the course. AND the lancer only got one run in due to an intercooler hose that kept coming undone. So if you can't see the amazing potential in a normal looking sedan rally weapon i'm sorry for you.
True, the evo costs a pretty penny, but it's in the end a japanesse elite. It's compared to cars such as GTR R34 Vspec ll and with the skyline's end of produciton (or rather change of face) and the lift of the gentlemen's agreement we're going to see the lancer bump the ponnies up from factory and start to tune the computer to really fly. Out of ALL cars with 4 doors regardless of price, my heart goes with the evo.
============
Bluemeaniews6
I totally understand your standpoint. But like you pointed out, when you get up to numbers of 1000hp to many other things come into play to start talking about block strength.
Just one quesion though, since you seem to be fairly knowledgeable about GM machines. Have you ever seen a camaro (Z28, SS, or anything else under the camaro name) run faster than 10.00 with the stock engine block and stock bottom end? (rods, pistons, crank). I would think it's possible but i'm not that knowledgeable about chevys.
There is a guy on the mustangworld message known as nitrospete and he ran in the mid 9's on stock internals with a 03 cobra.
Now, it should be noted that the cobra R although had less horsepower was much faster than the 03 cobra on the circut, due to broader powerband (NA vs SC) and stripped down weight.
I know what you mean about reliability issues with mustangs, but a guy a know who absolutlly loves everything chevy has owned 3 irock camaros in the past 2 years becuase of breakdown issues. And yet everytime I see him he says "i'm gonna have the car running any day now" sure enough he gets it running and then something else goes wrong. Granted this is only one person, but i'm just showing that there are always reliability issues attached to a car name that's been around for 50 years and tried to be a "budget" sprots car. Even european exotics like the jaguar XJ12 is known for it's laundry list of issues. A friend that runs a ferrari shop says that EVERY ferrari cost at least 20k a year in maintainence. Half becuase any work done costs lost of money due to the required training and half because you have to bring them in often to avoid problems.
So yea, go ahead and say ford has reliability issues, but i'm sure you could say almost any company has reliabiliy issues.
It's expensive, and yes they have cheep interior.... BUT they have more potencial out of the box than any 4 banger to date. The S2000 is known for it's power but due to high compression isn't very changable without going beyond smog berriers, while the evo benifits from AWD and doesn't have to do the 2 speed dyno test for smog, thus meaning the new gas that's effected by compression (NO or NOx) isn't ever measured. If honda wanted a real winnder they'd make a turbo awd S2000 and they've have a supercar to go down in japan history for all time.
The november 04 issue of car and driver had a comparison article and the evo held more than it's own. It was the main article so you can't miss it if you're looking around for it. The evo had aftermarket differntials, headwork (cams, rod bots, and head studs) bigger turbo, and a performance clutch. With boost up to 25psi it was pushing 475hp and 450 lbs. Umm...wow. Anyways, wasn't lightened much (racing seats) and it was keeping up with the rest of the field (even the cars in the open (not sedan) class). It had a 0-60 of 3.4 (3.7 during the main run, 3.4 was the best recorded 0-60) and a 1/4 mile time of 11.6. Even the course time of 48.7 seconds rivaled the twin turbo viper at 47.8 and beat the lingenfelter twin turbo vette wich ran 49.2 on the course. AND the lancer only got one run in due to an intercooler hose that kept coming undone. So if you can't see the amazing potential in a normal looking sedan rally weapon i'm sorry for you.
True, the evo costs a pretty penny, but it's in the end a japanesse elite. It's compared to cars such as GTR R34 Vspec ll and with the skyline's end of produciton (or rather change of face) and the lift of the gentlemen's agreement we're going to see the lancer bump the ponnies up from factory and start to tune the computer to really fly. Out of ALL cars with 4 doors regardless of price, my heart goes with the evo.
============
Bluemeaniews6
I totally understand your standpoint. But like you pointed out, when you get up to numbers of 1000hp to many other things come into play to start talking about block strength.
Just one quesion though, since you seem to be fairly knowledgeable about GM machines. Have you ever seen a camaro (Z28, SS, or anything else under the camaro name) run faster than 10.00 with the stock engine block and stock bottom end? (rods, pistons, crank). I would think it's possible but i'm not that knowledgeable about chevys.
There is a guy on the mustangworld message known as nitrospete and he ran in the mid 9's on stock internals with a 03 cobra.
Now, it should be noted that the cobra R although had less horsepower was much faster than the 03 cobra on the circut, due to broader powerband (NA vs SC) and stripped down weight.
I know what you mean about reliability issues with mustangs, but a guy a know who absolutlly loves everything chevy has owned 3 irock camaros in the past 2 years becuase of breakdown issues. And yet everytime I see him he says "i'm gonna have the car running any day now" sure enough he gets it running and then something else goes wrong. Granted this is only one person, but i'm just showing that there are always reliability issues attached to a car name that's been around for 50 years and tried to be a "budget" sprots car. Even european exotics like the jaguar XJ12 is known for it's laundry list of issues. A friend that runs a ferrari shop says that EVERY ferrari cost at least 20k a year in maintainence. Half becuase any work done costs lost of money due to the required training and half because you have to bring them in often to avoid problems.
So yea, go ahead and say ford has reliability issues, but i'm sure you could say almost any company has reliabiliy issues.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 907
From: Ireland
Originally Posted by Poseidon' date='Jan 5 2005, 09:45 AM
hmmm, i don't think you people see the real point in buying an evo.
It's expensive, and yes they have cheep interior.... BUT they have more potencial out of the box than any 4 banger to date. The S2000 is known for it's power but due to high compression isn't very changable without going beyond smog berriers, while the evo benifits from AWD and doesn't have to do the 2 speed dyno test for smog, thus meaning the new gas that's effected by compression (NO or NOx) isn't ever measured. If honda wanted a real winnder they'd make a turbo awd S2000 and they've have a supercar to go down in japan history for all time.
The november 04 issue of car and driver had a comparison article and the evo held more than it's own. It was the main article so you can't miss it if you're looking around for it. The evo had aftermarket differntials, headwork (cams, rod bots, and head studs) bigger turbo, and a performance clutch. With boost up to 25psi it was pushing 475hp and 450 lbs. Umm...wow. Anyways, wasn't lightened much (racing seats) and it was keeping up with the rest of the field (even the cars in the open (not sedan) class). It had a 0-60 of 3.4 (3.7 during the main run, 3.4 was the best recorded 0-60) and a 1/4 mile time of 11.6. Even the course time of 48.7 seconds rivaled the twin turbo viper at 47.8 and beat the lingenfelter twin turbo vette wich ran 49.2 on the course. AND the lancer only got one run in due to an intercooler hose that kept coming undone. So if you can't see the amazing potential in a normal looking sedan rally weapon i'm sorry for you.
True, the evo costs a pretty penny, but it's in the end a japanesse elite. It's compared to cars such as GTR R34 Vspec ll and with the skyline's end of produciton (or rather change of face) and the lift of the gentlemen's agreement we're going to see the lancer bump the ponnies up from factory and start to tune the computer to really fly. Out of ALL cars with 4 doors regardless of price, my heart goes with the evo.
It's expensive, and yes they have cheep interior.... BUT they have more potencial out of the box than any 4 banger to date. The S2000 is known for it's power but due to high compression isn't very changable without going beyond smog berriers, while the evo benifits from AWD and doesn't have to do the 2 speed dyno test for smog, thus meaning the new gas that's effected by compression (NO or NOx) isn't ever measured. If honda wanted a real winnder they'd make a turbo awd S2000 and they've have a supercar to go down in japan history for all time.
The november 04 issue of car and driver had a comparison article and the evo held more than it's own. It was the main article so you can't miss it if you're looking around for it. The evo had aftermarket differntials, headwork (cams, rod bots, and head studs) bigger turbo, and a performance clutch. With boost up to 25psi it was pushing 475hp and 450 lbs. Umm...wow. Anyways, wasn't lightened much (racing seats) and it was keeping up with the rest of the field (even the cars in the open (not sedan) class). It had a 0-60 of 3.4 (3.7 during the main run, 3.4 was the best recorded 0-60) and a 1/4 mile time of 11.6. Even the course time of 48.7 seconds rivaled the twin turbo viper at 47.8 and beat the lingenfelter twin turbo vette wich ran 49.2 on the course. AND the lancer only got one run in due to an intercooler hose that kept coming undone. So if you can't see the amazing potential in a normal looking sedan rally weapon i'm sorry for you.
True, the evo costs a pretty penny, but it's in the end a japanesse elite. It's compared to cars such as GTR R34 Vspec ll and with the skyline's end of produciton (or rather change of face) and the lift of the gentlemen's agreement we're going to see the lancer bump the ponnies up from factory and start to tune the computer to really fly. Out of ALL cars with 4 doors regardless of price, my heart goes with the evo.
Mark
Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 38
well, i guess you didn't get my point.
The problem is the S2000 is a HIGH compression NA car. If they made it a turbo engine instead they could run it at lower compression and if it was awd it wouldn't have to pass the 2 speed dyno test for smog.
The S2000 CAN give an evo a run for it's money, but there it alot more potential in an evo (for a street/track car, track only is a different story).
PS. Do you think the evo looks that bad? Hmm, I think it's not too bad. I like the looks of the evo far more than the looks of the new GTO... Well, point taken,. It's and average looking commuter mobile.
The problem is the S2000 is a HIGH compression NA car. If they made it a turbo engine instead they could run it at lower compression and if it was awd it wouldn't have to pass the 2 speed dyno test for smog.
The S2000 CAN give an evo a run for it's money, but there it alot more potential in an evo (for a street/track car, track only is a different story).
PS. Do you think the evo looks that bad? Hmm, I think it's not too bad. I like the looks of the evo far more than the looks of the new GTO... Well, point taken,. It's and average looking commuter mobile.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 635
From: Orange County, NY
Wow, aren't we all special?
Why the hell are evo's being compared with Vette's?
I don't give 2 rats tails, hell, even a gerbils tail, about how their 0-60, 1/4 et, etc compares to the price: they are two very different cars.
A tourqey, RWD, 2 Seater V-8 Equipped sports car of America, that's the Corvette.
I and anyone else who also plans on getting one is NOT (well most of us) pacing back and forth between the ugly (i.e Ugly), and did I mention, ugly Evo box rally car (Rally! Sweet! For all those times I miss a turn and end up taking the dirt/snow/rocky road home!) and the Corvette. They are just different platforms.
ANYWAYS; The Z06 is and always was an impressive machine and quite the performance package. Compared to other "Sports" cars it really holds its own, even against my favorite: Mazda's Rx7. However, I love Rotary engines, turbo's, rare beautiful cars, etc. which leans me towards the FD even if I had ~$50k to spend.
Chevy's aim was to give the Viper something to be afraid of, and I think they did a good job. Given the chioce, I'd much rather drive a C6 z06 with all the comfort and performance at a cheaper price than the new "Clown Shoe" (quite ugly if I may add) Viper. Now, a 97 GTS Viper is a different story :P
Why the hell are evo's being compared with Vette's?
I don't give 2 rats tails, hell, even a gerbils tail, about how their 0-60, 1/4 et, etc compares to the price: they are two very different cars.
A tourqey, RWD, 2 Seater V-8 Equipped sports car of America, that's the Corvette.
I and anyone else who also plans on getting one is NOT (well most of us) pacing back and forth between the ugly (i.e Ugly), and did I mention, ugly Evo box rally car (Rally! Sweet! For all those times I miss a turn and end up taking the dirt/snow/rocky road home!) and the Corvette. They are just different platforms.
ANYWAYS; The Z06 is and always was an impressive machine and quite the performance package. Compared to other "Sports" cars it really holds its own, even against my favorite: Mazda's Rx7. However, I love Rotary engines, turbo's, rare beautiful cars, etc. which leans me towards the FD even if I had ~$50k to spend.
Chevy's aim was to give the Viper something to be afraid of, and I think they did a good job. Given the chioce, I'd much rather drive a C6 z06 with all the comfort and performance at a cheaper price than the new "Clown Shoe" (quite ugly if I may add) Viper. Now, a 97 GTS Viper is a different story :P
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,079
From: union, new jersey
Originally Posted by PhoenixDownVII' date='Jan 7 2005, 02:26 PM
Chevy's aim was to give the Viper something to be afraid of, and I think they did a good job. Given
i have a feeling they did their job...
car and driver just published that the new zo6 is gunna sport 500hp and 475lbs .... better yet... they trimmed the weight down to around 3150lbs. (viper srt10 coupe 500hp/525lbs/3450).
so yeah i
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,108
Originally Posted by Shane.Trammell' date='Dec 24 2004, 01:36 PM
I wonder how the corvette guys modify their suspension systems like we do on our rx7s. Do they make stiffer leaf springs with different ride heights?
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 682
From: Delaware
its obvious that bluews6 (whatev) is a GM fan, and brandon loves da evo's.
corvette's and evo's are cool cars.. i think vettes are more for older people and evo's for kids who want turbo's.
and btw, the new gto is ***.. sorry but the front end looks like every other pontiac ever made, and the body of it really isn't anything special.. it just looks like a 2 door family car.. kinda reminds me of the monte carlo is 95-96 (i think thats the year)
corvette's and evo's are cool cars.. i think vettes are more for older people and evo's for kids who want turbo's.
and btw, the new gto is ***.. sorry but the front end looks like every other pontiac ever made, and the body of it really isn't anything special.. it just looks like a 2 door family car.. kinda reminds me of the monte carlo is 95-96 (i think thats the year)
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 682
From: Delaware
and now that im talking about pontiac.. i think almost almost all pontiacs look like ****.. the only car they put any thought into was the firebird..
all of the they produce look to much alike.. just a little longer or shorter
they have some new little 2 seater convertible coming out, but still, they just copied offa most of the other companies... WHEN WILL THEY THINK BY THEMSELVES !!! i know they are a GM product, but they need to distinguish themselves more
all of the they produce look to much alike.. just a little longer or shorter
they have some new little 2 seater convertible coming out, but still, they just copied offa most of the other companies... WHEN WILL THEY THINK BY THEMSELVES !!! i know they are a GM product, but they need to distinguish themselves more