Not enough power... In 2005

[NDBullitt]

Two things.
wrx-no-mo, what mods do you have done to your rex? my gf just got one and wants to start modding it.

next thing: whoever thinks a stock 2-v 99+ Mustang isn't good for 13's should have been there when a i ran a 13.8 bone stock in my bullitt. and if you think a bullitt has that much hp over a regular GT you're wrong.

 

[jadesville]

15.1 for a GT, right.

 

[SVTdriver]

SVTDRIVER... How much cost a Mach 1 2004? Almost same as a S2000, on a race track it's a rocket... For sure!

I guess it all depends on what you call almost. I would rather have the extra $3k for modding than have a slower S2000.

I'm french Canadian... My english writing is bad! Sorry... But I try to getting better!

Next you'll be using Ehh as a punctuation right?

 

[jadesville]

SVTDRIVER... How much cost a Mach 1 2004? Almost same as a S2000, on a race track it's a rocket... For sure!

GinoGT... You are the idiot.

Hmm, a S2000 that runs the same times as a GT, has half the torque, and thats a rocket?

 

[SVTdriver]

Hmm, a S2000 that runs the same times as a GT, has half the torque, and thats a rocket?

I almost hate to say it for fear of offending some non troll canadians. But maybe the mach1 loses torque when it is converted to canadian.

 

[jadesville]

I almost hate to say it for fear of offending some non troll canadians. But maybe the mach1 loses torque when it is converted to canadian.

This is true.

 

[351CJ]

Check here... Idiot!
This one Mach 1 vs S2000...
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=1938&page_number=1

Great Link Carrol:

In that comparo, C&D ranked the S2000 3rd and the the Mach 1 2nd.

Our own 0-to-60 time of 6.3 seconds was set with a hole shot just south of the redline on a car with only 369 miles on the odo, but that's behavior reserved for people who can do clutch changes on their lunch hour. Regular Joes can expect 60 mph to arrive closer to the 7.6 seconds of the S2000's 5-to-60-mph time, the second-slowest rolling start ahead of the Audi.

Translation, if you drive your S2000 fast, be prepared to keep buying new clutches for it.

The Mach 1 earns its silver medal because it is brute fun. Drop the hammer, and with no especially refined technique, 60 mph is yours in a scalding 5.2 seconds, ............. the Ford walks away from the Z and runs at full gallop from the Audi and Honda

Since the on line article doesn't have all the 1/4 mile times I had to find the printed rag:

Mach 1 14.0 @ 103
S2000 14.9 @ 95

Price as tested:
Mach 1 $29,920
S2000 $36,055

 

[willy_sc5.0]

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0310_frst2_mach1/index.html

"This Mach 1's acceleration off the line is tricky, but resulted in a big-block-humbling 13.88 at 101.91. We recently tested a Mach 1 five-speed and ran a 13.2 at 106.7."

 

[TomServo92]

Great Link Carrol:

In that comparo, C&D ranked the S2000 3rd and the the Mach 1 2nd.


Quote:
Our own 0-to-60 time of 6.3 seconds was set with a hole shot just south of the redline on a car with only 369 miles on the odo, but that's behavior reserved for people who can do clutch changes on their lunch hour. Regular Joes can expect 60 mph to arrive closer to the 7.6 seconds of the S2000's 5-to-60-mph time, the second-slowest rolling start ahead of the Audi.



Translation, if you drive your S2000 fast, be prepared to keep buying new clutches for it.


Quote:
The Mach 1 earns its silver medal because it is brute fun. Drop the hammer, and with no especially refined technique, 60 mph is yours in a scalding 5.2 seconds, ............. the Ford walks away from the Z and runs at full gallop from the Audi and Honda




Since the on line article doesn't have all the 1/4 mile times I had to find the printed rag:


Quote:
Mach 1 14.0 @ 103
S2000 14.9 @ 95

Price as tested:
Mach 1 $29,920
S2000 $36,055

OK. Now we wait for the "CarrollShelby" spin to show us how this doesn't mean what it says...

 

[GinoGT]

OK. Now we wait for the "CarrollShelby" spin to show us how this doesn't mean what it says...

 

[RICKS]

Don't delude yourself into thinking that there's any trace of logic or deductive reasoning in his world, or else it'll start driving you nuts. It's already too late for me, I can't help myself. It's like that blow-up clown I had when I was a kid, with sand in the base of it. I keep punching it down, and punching it down, and no matter how powerful my punch or diligent my effort the damn thing always pops back up with that stupid vacant grin on its face.....

 

[mball]

What "exotics" can this EVO beat?

Well, since you insisted. Here isjust one test with the Evo destroying some exotics and even your precious Cobra as well. MT considered these the top 10 track cars you could buy and look how well the Evo did as I have said. Of course its not as strong in the tests of pure speed because its not built for that, but take a gander at the 600 ft slalom on page 3 and look at how badly the Evo shredded the exotics and muscle cars and try to tell me again that a STOCK Porsche, Vette or Cobra could beat it on a road course...sorry, aint gonna happen

Test

Oh, and I'll save you the time of having to look thru another 6 pages to see what they said about the Evo too. Here ya go:

"The "put-up-or-shut-up" award winner was everyone's favorite giant slayer, Mitsubishi's astonishing Evolution. We had high expectations for this car, but we caught ourselves cheering a little louder for the WRC-derived sedan. Though Justin had pushed it right up to its 156-mph speed limiter, it consistently competed with (and often fed crow to) machinery with pricetags three, five, and, in one case, nearly 10 times larger. Just look at the Evil-ution's slalom times if you don't think an all-wheel-drive compact sedan can't compete with pure exotics and domestic muscle machines. Factor its cost/value/performance ratio, and it becomes even more of a winner, big wing and all."

 

[jadesville]

Well, since you insisted. Here isjust one test with the Evo destroying some exotics and even your precious Cobra as well. MT considered these the top 10 track cars you could buy and look how well the Evo did as I have said. Of course its not as strong in the tests of pure speed because its not built for that, but take a gander at the 600 ft slalom on page 3 and look at how badly the Evo shredded the exotics and muscle cars and try to tell me again that a STOCK Porsche, Vette or Cobra could beat it on a road course...sorry, aint gonna happen

Test

Oh boy, it can slalom faster than a Cobra, everyone bow down to the all mighty EVO. And you're citing a magazine that ran a cobra 13.01 in the 1/4, right, now thats just funny, I know grandmothers who can drive faster than that.

And its not "destroying" exotics, the SRT-10, Z06, Lightning and the Cobra are not exotics, and they didnt even put it up against a decent imports. How about a GT3 or a 360CS? Since it can beat exotics, it should be able to beat the Ford GT too right? Why didnt they test a MB Mclaren or even a BMW with it?

Where do you see the muscle cars at?

 

[jadesville]

, and I'll save you the time of having to look thru another 6 pages to see what they said about the Evo too. Here ya go:

"The "put-up-or-shut-up" award winner was everyone's favorite giant slayer, Mitsubishi's astonishing Evolution. We had high expectations for this car, but we caught ourselves cheering a little louder for the WRC-derived sedan. Though Justin had pushed it right up to its 156-mph speed limiter, it consistently competed with (and often fed crow to) machinery with pricetags three, five, and, in one case, nearly 10 times larger. Just look at the Evil-ution's slalom times if you don't think an all-wheel-drive compact sedan can't compete with pure exotics and domestic muscle machines. Factor its cost/value/performance ratio, and it becomes even more of a winner, big wing and all."

What point are you trying to prove with someones opinion?

 

[mball]

Oh boy, it can slalom faster than a Cobra, everyone bow down to the all mighty EVO. And you're citing a magazine that ran a cobra 13.01 in the 1/4, right, now thats just funny, I know grandmothers who can drive faster than that.

And its not "destroying" exotics, the SRT-10, Z06, Lightning and the Cobra are not exotics, and they didnt even put it up against a decent imports. How about a GT3 or a 360CS? Since it can beat exotics, it should be able to beat the Ford GT too right? Why didnt they test a MB Mclaren or even a BMW with it?

Where do you see the muscle cars at?

Well lets see...the McLaren and GT are considered "super cars" and they were trying to be a little realistic there. I am not saying an Evo will beat a car like the McLaren or GT either but you have to respect what it can do on a road course, its easily the best one you can buy for under $100K and like I said, a Vette or especially a Cobra will NOT beat it on a track like some in here have insisted, I have seen it beat those cars on tracks myself. So you dont consider a CL 55 or that Ferrari there a decent import? thats funny. A BMW or GT3?....The Evo smoked every one of those cars so bad in the slalom and you think a BMW or GT3 would have done any better? They probably would have finished in the middle of that group and not even have come close to the Evo.

 

[jadesville]

Well lets see...the McLaren and GT are considered "super cars" and they were trying to be a little realistic there. I am not saying an Evo will beat a car like the McLaren or GT either but you have to respect what it can do on a road course, its easily the best one you can buy for under $100K and like I said, a Vette or especially a Cobra will NOT beat it on a track like some in here have insisted, I have seen it beat those cars on tracks myself. So you dont consider a CL 55 or that Ferrari there a decent import? thats funny. A BMW or GT3?....The Evo smoked every one of those cars so bad in the slalom and you think a BMW or GT3 would have done any better? They probably would have finished in the middle of that group and not even have come close to the Evo.

EVO

You're funny.

 

[RICKS]

Let's be realistic here. 1st, the slalom displays handling ONLY, not braking or accelleration. The Z06 beats the EVO on the figure 8, which is really the test that best simulates road course performance. If you want a real picture of overall performance, look at the figure 8 results, forget the slalom. SECONDLY, the EVO is an extreme niche-market no-compromise handler. Ride, comfort, harshness, all of those considerations are pretty much ignored in the pursuit of g-forces. It's not for everybody, by a LONGSHOT (as evidenced by the piddly amount of EVO's that sell per-year). It is a car with a very narrow focus, for a certain type of enthusiast. The Cobra is not such a vehicle, it is much more "road car" by design than "club racer". If you lowered and more stiffly sprung a Cobra, bingo, it would probably be munching on the tail of the EVO in the figure 8, but the sacrifice to everyday comfort and driveability is not something SVT or its customers would even consider. Imagine a street Cobra that rode like an R-model, and you get the picture. Imagine a car that communicates every piece of lint on the road to your butt. But hey, it handles.... THAT'S the Evo. So, AGAIN, we have people coming on here INSISTING upon comparing apple cars to orange cars, and it's pointless bunk. Next thing you know, somebody will be on here talking about how the Lotus Elise will smoke the new Mustang on a road course, and we'll all be sitting here with a collective "HUH???" look on our faces, which is French for "who gives a ****". A year from now, the amount of people on this earth that will say "I was going to buy a 2005 GT Mustang, but I bought a Mitsu Evo instead" will be able to be counted on one hand...

 

[jadesville]

Let's be realistic here. 1st, the slalom displays handling ONLY, not braking or accelleration. The Z06 beats the EVO on the figure 8, which is really the test that best simulates road course performance. If you want a real picture of overall performance, look at the figure 8 results, forget the slalom. SECONDLY, the EVO is an extreme niche-market no-compromise handler. Ride, comfort, harshness, all of those considerations are pretty much ignored in the pursuit of g-forces. It's not for everybody, by a LONGSHOT (as evidenced by the piddly amount of EVO's that sell per-year). It is a car with a very narrow focus, for a certain type of enthusiast. The Cobra is not such a vehicle, it is much more "road car" by design than "club racer". If you lowered and more stiffly sprung a Cobra, bingo, it would probably be munching on the tail of the EVO in the figure 8, but the sacrifice to everyday comfort and driveability is not something SVT or its customers would even consider. Imagine a street Cobra that rode like an R-model, and you get the picture. Imagine a car that communicates every piece of lint on the road to your butt. But it handles THAT'S the Evo. So, AGAIN, we have people coming on here INSISTING upon comparing apple cars to orange cars, and it's pointless bunk. Next thing you know, somebody will be on here talking about how the Lotus Elise will smoke the new Mustang on a road course, and we'll all be sitting here with a collective "HUH???" look on our faces, which is French for "who gives a ****". A year from now, the amount of people on this earth that will say "I was going to buy a 2005 GT Mustang, but I bought a Mitsu Evo instead" will be able to be counted on one hand...

You simply dont understand how great the EVO. I mean, we are talking about the EVO here, the EVO! Cobra R is the lose when it comes to the EVO, the EVO is the win. EVO

 

[mball]

A year from now, the amount of people on this earth that will say "I was going to buy a 2005 GT Mustang, but I bought a Mitsu Evo instead" will be able to be counted on one hand...

You can count me on that hand right now. After seeing the high pricing and the patheticaly bad estimated performance times, why bother? Sure the 05's look great and probably ride nice but who cares if its not a top notch performer? If I just wanted a comfortable, pretty car, I might as well go get an Accord For damn near $30K in a supposed "muscle car" it should provide some "muscle" don't you think? If the GT can do the quarter in the low 13's I would get one, but it doesnt sound like it will. I don't know about you guys or Ford but to have a 4 door, econo looking sedan like the Evo and STi more than capable of smoking a 300 hp Mustang, I find that pretty embarrasing.

 

[XtorT'r]

lol, More AWD turbo'd sports cars are commin, EVO might just get spanked by a AWD volvo or Focus. Matter of fact if they are the same as the Euro versions they will spank the Mitsu's.
I like EVO's and STi's but they arn't in the same performance class as our cars or even the corvettes. Our cars... based on drag racing or paved track racing RWD cars, EVO's & STi's based on Rally cars, thus the AWD. All the EVO has goin for it is the AWD, Period! if it didn't have tat it would handle like crap with that amout of power goin to te FW's. Just think, the more car that go to AWD the less the "godly" EVO's will stand out.

Like I said I like EVO's so I'm not startin anything.


BTW why the heck is this thread still going?? DIE THREAD DIE!!!!