2004 EVO RS in the US (0-60/4.4s) but... - Page 3
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 39 of 39

This is a discussion on 2004 EVO RS in the US (0-60/4.4s) but... within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; This is evident even in the cars the mags get. One of the latest MotorTrend's has a write up/small test ...

  1. #31
    Registered User VetteVert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Boone, NC
    Posts
    820
    This is evident even in the cars the mags get. One of the latest MotorTrend's has a write up/small test of the RS. While it improved it's 0-60# over the standard EVO tested a while back, it's trap speed was nowhere close. RS = 99.xx mph while the standard evo last year posted 104 or 105mph traps. Everyone knew that car was a ringer though.

    VV

    Originally posted by Kramit
    Who knows. Every Evo is slightly different. Vishnu has dynoed tons of them and found that stock ones vary greatly in the HP and TQ departments.

    For example: I know plenty of guys who have gotten better than 13.6 (my time) with their stock Evos. And I'm pretty sure I don't suck at driving, so they can't be way better than I am at launching and shifting...

    It's also possible that they gave the mag a "stock tuned" ringer car. I've heard of that being done before as well.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #32
    sht
    sht is offline
    Registered User sht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    401

    comfort is for women

    who need AC when you got your windows down and going from 0-60 in 4.4 sec.
    sh!t if i could get the RS for what i got my rex i would have bought it.
    wrx 04 black

    workin for the man

  4. #33
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    CT/MA
    Posts
    17
    I think its a good idea for Mitsu to do that. Now they have an version of the Evo to compete more with the base WRX
    03 Artic Blue Pearl Acura RSX Type S:

  5. #34
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    www.legacyGT.com
    Posts
    167
    Originally posted by jungdragon
    144lbs in weight reduction will decrease 1/4 by .3s and 0-60 by .7s? Is there any other differences beside the weight?
    How can you get to 60 .7 quicker and then only be .3 quicker at the end of the quarter? What's happening between 60 and 100? Simply doesn't sound right.

  6. #35
    Registered User VetteVert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Boone, NC
    Posts
    820
    Because the 'stock' car they are comparing it to (the last one they tested) was a ringer and pulled like a mother on the big end (6mph faster trap speeds). Sounds to me like a difference in top end boost. The lighter car gets out of the hole quicker, but the ringer was running more boost so it pulled more mph in the taller gears. Conjecture of course.

    VV

    Originally posted by eluminx
    How can you get to 60 .7 quicker and then only be .3 quicker at the end of the quarter? What's happening between 60 and 100? Simply doesn't sound right.

  7. #36
    Moderator fengshui's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,816
    I would love to buy a stripped down STi RA Spec C with crappy seats, wing delete, ac delete, no radio, and just have the roof scoop for cold air. It would be so much easier to add racing seats, and more room in the engine bay for custom FMIC piping and the like. Now if only they could reduce the weight by more than 400 lbs like the E46 M3 CSL. Then it'd be a REAL monster.

    chris
    Moderator: Retired
    2002 Subaru Impreza WRX Sedan 5MT - Road Rally - Best 1/4mi: 13.954 @ 97.36mph (3448 lbs)
    2001 Mazda Miata 5MT - AutoX #99 (NNJ Region SCCA 2005 CStock Champion)
    1988 BMW 325 (2.7L "i" conversion) Sedan 5MT - Daily Driver (AutoX soon!)
    "If you can't drive this car fast you can't drive fast." --British Magazine, CAR, on the WRX

  8. #37
    Registered User WRXRATED7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Posts
    193
    You guys keep calling the EVO tested by the magazines a "ringer"...so tell me what are some real world 1/4 times out of regular EVOs? Are they not as fast as the magazines tested?
    '05 Obsidian Black STi (my dream has come true)
    '93 SE-R (JDM SR20DE waiting...)
    '69 Camaro SS (project car)

  9. #38
    Registered User VetteVert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Boone, NC
    Posts
    820
    As was reported above, the power level of the EVOs seems to vary quite a bit...this was also evident in magazine tested cars. For instance, MotorTrend got a 13.1 @ 105 out of their evo, when Car&Driver only got a high 13 @ 99mph. On the evo boards, I've seen everything from low to high 13s, and mph (a closer measure of actual power and not just driving skill) from 98 - 103/4 mph. I call the initial MT tested EVO a ringer because it showed so much power....not insinuating that it was specifically hopped up by Mitsu for the mag test.

    Originally posted by WRXRATED7
    You guys keep calling the EVO tested by the magazines a "ringer"...so tell me what are some real world 1/4 times out of regular EVOs? Are they not as fast as the magazines tested?

  10. #39
    Registered User EvilCerealBoX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    ATX
    Posts
    2,427
    i still think the damn things not worth that kinda money

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

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