[moffman93']

Not all of us are broke college students.


Actually I'm pretty sure the original VR4 in '91 was around $30,000-$32,000 retail price.

yes but 91's were their worst year mechanically and the second gens were considerably more expensive. Hence the mention of 40k. FYI, a fully loaded spyder costs over 50k.

O BTW im a broke high school student

 

[mjannusch]

yes but 91's were their worst year mechanically and the second gens were considerably more expensive. Hence the mention of 40k. FYI, a fully loaded spyder costs over 50k.

Do you make this up as you go, or do you have it prepared ahead of time?

Nothing particularly wrong with the '91 cars. Spyder VR4 = $64,500 (no options, they were all loaded).

 

[moffman93']

^sry man I could be wrong but i thought I heard someone on this forum who said they paid 50 something for theirs when it was new off the showroom. regardless of whether you think 91's are better or worse then all other years, 1st gens "were" much cheaper then all years to come. I dont have to write up a year to year break down of all the prices. your correct in saying that 91's were in the low 30k range but the prices went up almost every year from that point on.

 

[Kibwe Walker]

I guess I'm done with this thread. Idle speculation and wishful thinking can be a fun pastime,... for a little while. The reality is, I'm simply going to have to use the resources on 3Si and elsewhere myself, to turn my car into what Mitsu isn't realistically going to produce for at least another 5 years.


Max

You are right, again. Like I have said in several threads already. Everything I could ever want for my 3s ALREADY exists.

The only debate is which turbo setup would give me the most area under the curve for a 3.7 stroker , everything else is support and preference. Should be over 600 AWHP on pump gas if done right and tuned by RAY :eek2: . Then I will go about my weekend HALO stompin , and half the people won't even know what a 3s is by then.

 

[bluemax_1]

You are right, again. Like I have said in several threads already. Everything I could ever want for my 3s ALREADY exists.

The only debate is which turbo setup would give me the most area under the curve for a 3.7 stroker , everything else is support and preference. Should be over 600 AWHP on pump gas if done right and tuned by RAY :eek2: . Then I will go about my weekend HALO stompin , and half the people won't even know what a 3s is by then.

Damn... with Ray's 3.7 kit, I'd think a set of DBB DR-900's would be the absolute shiznit. Probably spool quick as hell with the stroker and 600+awhp on pump.... yeah, not too many supercars out there currently making even 600 at the wheels. The Bugatti makes 800+ crank on 93 I think. It needs 100+ octane to make its claimed 1001bhp. Not sure what octane the CCX needs to make its 8xx crank.

For me, the e16g's will most likely be all the turbo I'll ever need (doubt I'll move up to the stroker kit). The rest for me will go into handling mods. Waiting for SCE Phil to come out with the aftermarket center and rear diffs. Hopefully ek2mfg will be in a better mood when he comes back after X'mas vacation and he'll make that tubular K-member he showed the CG of.

The idea is to build a streetcar that I can also use to smoke just about anything I encounter on a roadcourse.


Max

 

[3startuna]

How important do you think a car companies flagship car is to its overall success? I personally think Mitsubishi took a step backwards when they went from a sexy twin-turbo 3 liter all wheel drive to a boxy, single-turbo 4 door, 4 banger as their flagship model. Companies like BMW and Audi have some very impressive flagship models, Honda/Accura had the NSX and are looking to bring it back, and the big three american manufacturers have the Viper, the Corvette, and the Ford GT. Look at all the good press a company gets from a high performance flagship model, even if it costs more then you'll ever be able to afford, or even if it's so rare that you'll never see one in real life! I wish Mitsubishi would drop the Evo and devote its resources toward a mid-engined, twin-turbo, all wheel drive supercar that would use technology to give the Z06 a run for it's money. Unfortunately, I don't think it will ever happen. Mitsubishi is just trying to keep its head above water at this point.

I strongly dissagree, the Evo is the perfect flagship veeks. Its racing success, and the fact that it can put several supercars to shame shows the power of Mitsubishi. The Evo is a wonderfull, car u should give it a try before u criticize it.

 

[deft spyder]

bluemax is right in his definition of a halo car, or, you may want to use the term "aspirational vehicle" as well. It's the one the designers used when talking about the cars people want to get, so they buy within the brand, or lower models (sl vs vr4).

It seems that one person is arguing that the evo doesnt match up well as a halo car, and the other is saying it doesnt need to, because it is just to demonstrate what they can do. As mitsu wants to currently push their rally performance platform, and the EVO certainly stands on top of that, then it's their perfect car.

The other side is saying that is not attracting me.... it need to be like a VR4... but what you don't get is they aren't trying to attract you with the EVO, you aren't their market.

Neither side is wrong... except the insistence that a halo car must be a sprts car, that isn't true. It's simply the best of that brand; for example please see HUMMER H1.

 

[Miami3000gt]

evo are slow ugly and not aerodynamic. i seen videos of 1991 vr4 walking 06 evos

 

[3startuna]

evo are slow ugly and not aerodynamic. i seen videos of 1991 vr4 walking 06 evos

where did u get that from?

 

[bashivr4]

as far as i know evos beat the skylines gt-rs most of the time in circuit racing in japan.

 

[J-Groove]

evo are slow ugly and not aerodynamic. i seen videos of 1991 vr4 walking 06 evos

You're lucky there are new idiot rules in effect.

-John

 

[jtvr4]

How do some of you people define flagship?

I gather some of you just base your opinions on how good does that car look. Does engineering, capabilities, and lap tests mean nothing?

If car (A) was engineered better, more reliable and had much more capabilities in every performace aspect than car (B) which simply looked better. Would you pick car A? Or B?

The EVO may be ugly, and have 4 doors (god forbid), but its capabilities, laptests and history are flagship material.

The 3000gt may be nicer on the outside and the inside next to an EVO. Yet its a polished dog turd next to the EVO on everything else.

So, yes its an Mitsubishi engineering flagship of performance.

 

[mjannusch]

The EVO may be ugly, and have 4 doors (god forbid), but its capabilities, laptests and history are flagship material.

The 3000gt may be nicer on the outside and the inside next to an EVO. Yet its a polished dog turd next to the EVO on everything else.

So, yes its an Mitsubishi engineering flagship of performance.

Why can't Mitsubishi make an EVO variant that has as much style and visual appeal as it does engineering prowess?

 

[mikes2nd]

Flagship vehicle?

mitsubishi Outlander... most popular SUV in japan...

What do they know that we don't

http://suvs.about.com/b/a/000037.htm

 

[3startuna]

The evo is the flagship. It was built to be a road going rally car. The chassis, electronic drivetrain, engine and body styling are all designed for all out racing. It is obvious that mitsu put alot of time into designing them, do some research into their history and u will see.

How many cars do you know come with carbon fibre bonnets and trunk lids, brembo brakes, AYC STOCK. Mitsu has also put alot of work into redesigning the evos 4G63. IT IS NOT THE SAME ENGINE FOUND IN THE DSMs. This thing comes with hollow cams, to reduce rotational inertia, MIVEC, etc. As for aerodynamics, WHAT THE HELL U THINK THAT BIG ASS SPOILER IS FOR. what about the front airdams, the vortec generator, the pointy nose, the tiny side mirrors, thew fact that the body is so narrow etc. why do u thing its not aerodyanmic, because its not pretty?

The evo is a turbocharged, 2L 4wd monster, that weighs less than an NA 3000GT base!
the evo will outperform a VR4 at the tracks ALWAYS.

you guys need to stop hating, ive seen first hand what the series can do, back home we have all models, from 1-9 and ive watched them "evolve" over time, and these things absolutely DOMINATE, all the local races from drag to circuit to rally where they are GODS. Subaru imprezas, integra Rs, skyline GTRs, RX7s all have gotten there asses RAPPED by these machines.

Look at WRC, the evo has set the record winning 4 consequtive rallies with driver tommi makkenien! It is being used by many teams in SuperGT. There are ALOT of aftermarket tunners available

Even in street racing, the evos absolutely dominate. There closest rivals are the impreza STis and MAYBE the 91 pulsar GTiRs

Its different here, cause i honestly dont think some one can truly maximise an evo on typical american roads. It is built for corners and complex tracks. On long straight roads, like we have here, they will get beaten by VR4s since they have longer gearing and more displacement. and most modded american muscle cars

bottomline evos AREN'T built for american roads. So for highways, VR4s are better, for twisty roads, complex tracks, unpaved roads, snowy mountain roads EVOS ARE KING.

If u want a car to do circuit racing, or rallying the evo is the best choice. For all that ur getting for 30K the evo is a bargain!

 

[3startuna]

shit ill go as far as to say that the evo series are the best set of cars mitsu has ever built.

trust me if u guys see an Evo 3 backfiring while it flys around a corner, at a rally, u'll understand what i'm talking about

 

[VR-4ever]

When I see that happening, I'm waiting to see the manifold or turbine housing fail.

Anti-lag is fun to watch, but I'd never use it. heh

As far as the thread topic goes, I'd love to see another mitsu sports coupe, but I doubt I'll ever buy another mitsu.

 

[jtvr4]

Why can't Mitsubishi make an EVO variant that has as much style and visual appeal as it does engineering prowess?

Because it would cut EVO sales, and be stuck with a car that most people couldnt afford or buy. Top of the line EVO is over 35k. This magic stream lined fancy car many of you are talking about would be pushing the 50-60k mark. It doesnt take a wizard to relize thats c6 vette territory. 9 out of 10 people would go for the vette over a redone 3000gt variant. It would or could be a production nightmare for an already hurting company. When your low on money, you dont take risks.

The EVO is a safe bet. It has a history and a somewhat low production cost. In short it sales, and its sure thing.

Would I like to see Mitsu make another 3000gt type car? Sure! Would I buy it? No.

 

[brattesani]

also, the "sports car" isnt what keeps the big car companies in business, its the econo 4doors that keep people in business. 9 out of ten regular people would probably rather have a civic than a 3000gt.

 

[deft spyder]

also, the "sports car" isnt what keeps the big car companies in business, its the econo 4doors that keep people in business. 9 out of ten regular people would probably rather have a civic than a 3000gt.

It's true that the midline cars may keep a company in business, but that is their "bread and butter"... not a flagship or halo car or aspirational vehicle UNLESS they want it to be.

Typically those cars tend to be a sports car because that is what can push the envelope for equipment (viper), but like I said H1 is not a sports car, and HUMMER has it as their halo, and then has lesser models for regular people to buy.