The evo8 or ls1 firebird trans am??

I dont know the firebirds time but the evo 8 is a little less than 13.4 and if your a really good driver u can get 13.3! 0-60 in 4.8 fastest 0-60 time was 4.589.So tell me what u think.

of course i am going to say LS1! 0-60 times on AWD tend to be better than 2WD... i.e. Eclipse GS-T vs. GS-X, but their 1/4 times are about the same, at that point things tend to even out. Evo=271HP...LS1=330HP LS1, low 13's borderline 12's.

could you be more clear about what you want compared.

Looks like a straight-line freak to me :disappoin

no im not a straight line freak.LOL anyways the evo has way better handling

evo, always...fast in a anyway, any track!!

Trans am. Although Id rather have a Formula with the LS1, less fiddly shit than the trans am has, it's all business. LS1's have a much easier time getting high horsepower with all the aftermarket stuff out there for them. As for the handling, how often are you going to race with handling as a high priority? Especially in America? I'd stick with the firebird. (they look cooler too.)

I second that, and BTW, the evo might take off from the line ahead due to AWD, but as soon as the LS1 is in its powerband, it will soon make up for it. Also, the Trams Am or Formula are both LS1, 98+ and Lt1 for 97 and down. They are just differnt trim levels, trans am being higher.

fucking firebirds are slow i saw the road and track issue#12 and it said 13.8.evo creams it and personally i like the looks of evo better

I wouldn't call 13.8 slow in the 1/4 mile for a STOCK car...
Slight edge to the evo 8 because of their great launches. Of course, some nice dr's on the firebird would even things out.

The EVo8 is the top of the line Lancer.. Now wouldnt it be fair to put up the top of the line Firebird.. The Firehawk? Its like comparing with a Z28 Camaro when there are SS's. Ive seen them run 12.65's @ 112 MPH.. not bad at all if you ask me. I would take the Firehawk straightline anyday.
However.. I am currently stationed in Germany, (though I am temporarily living the desert life in Kuwait)so there is much more to driving here than Stop and Go streetlight racing. The winding roads here, I would go Evo anyday. Mitsubishi has gone and made one HELL of a car. This is from a diehard GM fan.. Im really considering buying the EVO as soon as I get out of this desert, it impresses me that much.
Just my three cents..

fucking firebirds are slow i saw the road and track issue#12 and it said 13.8.evo creams it and personally i like the looks of evo better

Magazine racing is as reliable as an armchair quarterback. :rolleyes:

You can like the looks of whatever better, but since when is a firebird slow? Its slow compared to very few and faster then most.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

I've never heard of an LS1 making a 13.8... all times I've heard are much lower. AWD isn't too big of a straight-line advantage, slicks can take care of it. So who wins, 330hp Firebird, which btw is definitely not slow, or 271hp Evo.

Actually I've been wondering, what are the 'official' times for a WS6 firebird and an SS Camaro?

*Edit*

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_9912_firebird/index.html

says here 13.5 in the 1/4, one reason I'd take a Formula WS6 over a Trans Am WS6, it weighs less.




P.S. Check this out
http://www.motortrend.com/features/news/112_news009/


Man, they may not do it often, but when something fucks up on a Toyota, it fucks up bad!

how much are ls1's? cause you say compare it to the top of the line firebird... well lets compare the top of the line firebird to the top of the line ferrari :screwy: ... yeah lets do that

definately evo8... mitubishi is also known to have better reliabuility... i doubt firebirds break down a lot but the quality of them isnt that great... and i have been in both cars... so evo8 no doubt... and also the evo8 isnt the top of the line either... they have a 300hp model, and it is also reduced to a lighter weight

I respect the power the Evo has but am not impressed at all by its styling. It just looks kinda cheesy to me, especially the wing. But I'd buy a Firebird anyday, they have good styling and are Ls1 powered.

styling? You mean the lovely econo-box, er I mean 'sport compact' styling with the wing, turbo and AWD installed? Yup.... love the 'styling'...

the looks of cars is purely subjective. the evo looks quit different from a ordinary lancer. the car is pure form follow function. it has flare fenders, funtional front air dams, functional under body diffusers, a large front mount intercooler, a functional hood scoop, and a functional rear wing. just becusae you guys car about the bland styling of a camaro where there is no real form or real purpose of its exterior design. ( only exception of the fire bird with the ram air, and large stagered setup ) other then that its bland as hell. i by no mean love big wings, and altezza taillights. in fact i hate those and i hate stickers. but what i do love is fuctional body add ons. if it does something, i don't care if its ugly. as long as it makes the car faster etc.

Reliability- Evo
O-60- Evo
1/4 mile- Close Call
Styling- Subjective (evo in my opinion)
Modability- LS1 (very hard to get much more power out of the EVO for cheap)
Track- Evo (AWD>2WD, weight)

Reliability- let time tell(Since when does 'mitsubishi' mean the same reliability as 'Toyota' or 'Honda'? I've heard no complaints about the LS1's in Camaros and Firebirds and the Evo has a turbo, which adds stress to the engine.)

Weight- Evo by about 200 lbs.
Mileage- Firebird (19/28)
Transmission- Firebird 6spd (Evo= 5spd)
0-60- Evo
Quarter time- very close (13.4/13.1)
Top speed- Firebird (not sure about the 175 on this)
Modability(price, complexity and availability)- Firebird
Price- Evo


http://www.modernracer.com/mitsubishilancerevo8.html
http://www.engine-power.com/pontiac/firebird_ws6.html

modification wise evo wins. have u guys even seen the stage packages for the evo? i mean damn for about 4-5 g u can make a 11 second car.u cant tell me u can make a firebird faster then that for 4-5 more g's.

Yo... you gimme $5000 for my LS1...it'll BarBQ, flame broil, have it your way right away, w/ everything on it, and proceed to eat that evo for lunch!!!!!

5000 into an evo will put it right next to your ls1.

i really wish that people who don't know about BOTH cars wouldn't reply with ignorant posts...

why are you asking him to change his comparo?
it's his, he asked the questions... quit trying to bring other cars into it.

you want to compare a top of the line firebird against a top of the line lancer...
well, you want top of the line? there's rally editions in japan that will eat the firebird.

and if there's a corner in sight, say good bye to the awd car that will outhandle most anything.

this is a really interesting thread, if it were actually full of well thought posts.

yes, 5000 into a firebird will make it quick.
5000 into an evo8, depending on where you put the money, will get you into 11's easy.

or you can upgrade the turbo/ecu/fmic/exhaust, and get even faster.

it's all about where you put the money.

having a turbo on your motor adds extra stress...

ONLY IF THE MOTOR ISN'T BUILT FOR IT!
which the evo is.

Ok, you are right about the $5000 thing... but I was just responding to a comment that that much money wont make a 13sec flat car run into the 11s. I'd also like to point out I think this comparo pertains to America and american editions of cars.
Perhaps even with $5000 the evo can keep close to the LS1, just as it does when both are stock... but no matter how you slice it, the LS1 is faster in the straight line, that what is was made for, that's why it is "muscle". Of course the AWD has the corners, but we have the straight-aways. And if you wanna dump more money into the equation, eventually you get a Twin Turbo v8!!!! Within resonable finacial limits, I think it would be a physics immpossibilty to make a Turbo 4 beat a TT v8.

spend the same amount of money on both cars, and you will still be very even.
it depends on how you spend the money. you can easily drop 5k into an evo with a turbo/ecu/little stuff, and run 11's or lower if you try, but it'll take alot of tuning and work.

at any rate, it's not hard to spend minimal money on either car to make more power.

for me, i prefer a better fit/finish to the car, better styling (IMO) and better interior bits... recaro seats... mmm...

both cars have long backgrounds in racing and durability (JDM 4g63's don't have the same issues that US market ones did *eclipse/talon*)

you'll also find that the evo is very comparable stock in the 1/4, closer than the numbers indicate.
you can hit low 13's easy in an evo...

www.evolutionm.net lots of fast cars there, and they're done inexpensively.

the same way you can hit 12's in a stock firebird... you can hit low 13's and MAYBE a 12 in an evo...
aftermarket clutch would get you 12's easy in an evo...

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?threadid=70257&highlight=1%2F4+mile+times
12.9 stock 1/4

What issues do american v8s have? And I was under the impression that 1st gen DSMs have issues as well... two kids I used to chill w/ were into them, and they said you had to fix something every once in a while. 1/4 mile times are "close"... close but not equal, just want to point that out.. also, the longer the drag race the more advantage the Trans Am has. So I stll say it is better at doing what it does, going in a straight line, you dont see evo drag cars really, or Firebird rally cars. And you didn't mention what happens when the Trans is TT.

I wonder how a 1LE packaged LS1 would do against the evo on the track.

http://www.1le.net/docs/fourthgen_1le_story.html

well i think this guy just wants a fast car, in this case dont get the evo, in alhambra in so cal every guy n his mom has an evo, and the evo engine is strong.. its only a 2.0 inline 4 but u can easily pump 400-500hp outta it.. and im not kidding mitsubishi uses this engine in alot of their 4 bangers and they've been using this engine for many car generations, and the evo is a rally car, why would they gear it for the track? or a straightaway? i think if mitsubishi made a nice track car it wouldn't be rally inspired.. jus go get a 350z or some other rear wheel drive car

and the evo is a rally car, why would they gear it for the track? or a straightaway?

Yea it is a rally car. All the better for gearing it closer so u can get the most speed in a short straight away like the 1/4 mile. Then brake and turn and do it all over agian. Evo is fast in the 1/4 mile and it will beat an LS1. The Evo will beat a VR4 and a VR4 will beat a LS1 in the 1/4 mile. Either way both cars are fast.

Yea it is a rally car. All the better for gearing it closer so u can get the most speed in a short straight away like the 1/4 mile. Then brake and turn and do it all over agian. Evo is fast in the 1/4 mile and it will beat an LS1. The Evo will beat a VR4 and a VR4 will beat a LS1 in the 1/4 mile. Either way both cars are fast.

You sound so sure of yourself that the LS1 will lose to these cars. In the 1/4 mile it's a drivers race.

You sound so sure of yourself that the LS1 will lose to these cars. In the 1/4 mile it's a drivers race.


Well yea everything almost comes down to driver race. Were just looking at cars. Thier's gonna be crappy Evo drivers and Thier's gonna be Crappy Camaro or Fbody drivers. Were looking at the whole picture in the 1/4 the evo is faster. Comming out of the factory everything stock. You get into about the 100+ the LS1 is gonna tear the Evo apart. Evo was built for accelartion and short straight shots like the 1/4 mile. Some guy even said him self it's a rally inspirated car. And that's what thier built for.

When has an evo beat an LS1 in the 1/4??? I forgot... cars w/ over 50-60HP less and far less torque than their opponents usually win races. I dont think an evo has a chance against a VR4 either. Mitsubishi built a RALLY car, not a drag car. They alreadt built a drag car, the VR4, and I doubt they'd make a Rally car beat their flagship!

Well from what I've read..and I've read alot the LS1, Evo and the VR-4 are all in the low to mid 13's stock using a manual. The LS1 has a fairly high horsepower advantage and the Evo and VR-4 have the off the line advantage. And I have read of cases of LS1's and Evo's breaking into the 12's stock or very near stock.

When has an evo beat an LS1 in the 1/4??? I forgot... cars w/ over 50-60HP less and far less torque than their opponents usually win races. I dont think an evo has a chance against a VR4 either. Mitsubishi built a RALLY car, not a drag car. They alreadt built a drag car, the VR4, and I doubt they'd make a Rally car beat their flagship!

hmmmm the evo makes more tq then hp just to let you know, also the power delivery of the evo is also very good and will pull straight to redline in every gear but fifth. and starts to make full 19psi boost by 3.5k all the way up to 7K( granted it tapers off to 16psi by 5K ) its also geared for optimum low end aceleration. also its AWD. stock evos are known to do a 0-60ft time of 1.6-1.7 seconds ( stock meaning stock tires, stock clutch, not like how you f bodies guys need drag radials to get a 1.8) . also they weight less then the F bodys. ( 3200 lbs ) its not aways about power.

edit: you also make it sound like the VR-4 was the best mitsubishi ever made. the car got killed off the market by the evo. the VR-4 only lasted 3 generations even in japan. the evo is goin on to its 9th gen soon. the VR-4 was waaay over weight, and handled sluggishly compared to the evo and cost alot more then a evo. they also perform similarly in the 1/4 mile stock but handles light years better. so why would people pay more money for a less fun car to drive? the only thing the vr-4 is better then the evo in is the looks, and top end and high speed stablity. bottom line, sayin that the evo can't beat the flag ship of mitsubishi is a useless argument because the old flag ship is dead for over 6 years, and the evo has replaced it and always sold better then the vr-4 ever since the evo first came out in 92, and is still going on strong

hmmmm the evo makes more tq then hp just to let you know, also the power delivery of the evo is also very good and will pull straight to redline in every gear but fifth. and starts to make full 19psi boost by 3.5k all the way up to 7K( granted it tapers off to 16psi by 5K ) its also geared for optimum low end aceleration. also its AWD. stock evos are known to do a 0-60ft time of 1.6-1.7 seconds ( stock meaning stock tires, stock clutch, not like how you f bodies guys need drag radials to get a 1.8) . also they weight less then the F bodys. ( 3200 lbs ) its not aways about power.

edit: you also make it sound like the VR-4 was the best mitsubishi ever made. the car got killed off the market by the evo. the VR-4 only lasted 3 generations even in japan. the evo is goin on to its 9th gen soon. the VR-4 was waaay over weight, and handled sluggishly compared to the evo and cost alot more then a evo. they also perform similarly in the 1/4 mile stock but handles light years better. so why would people pay more money for a less fun car to drive? the only thing the vr-4 is better then the evo in is the looks, and top end and high speed stablity. bottom line, sayin that the evo can't beat the flag ship of mitsubishi is a useless argument because the old flag ship is dead for over 6 years, and the evo has replaced it and always sold better then the vr-4 ever since the evo first came out in 92, and is still going on strong

I know read my post. I said the Evo would beat the VR4.

hmm...
back up a second, i never mentioned a ttLS1, b/c obviously, it'd be making a ton of power, and not comparable to an evo.

an evo, though having less weight and less power, can run with an LS1 firebird. end of story.

i already posted proof of a stock evo in the 12's, what else do you want?

the evo is a rally car, so it's got bad gearing for drag racing?

what?

rally cars are designed with super fast acceleration, at the disadvantage of top end, so they're not top speed monsters, but they get there FAST.

anything else?

consider that rally cars, with 350hp, can hit 0-60 in under 3 seconds, ON GRAVEL.

and yes, the WRC cars are limited to 350hp.

also remember that the evo is sick on a race track. paved. outhandles tons of cars...

best of both worlds, easily.

Ok, I don't want a pissing contest here. I don't even hate the evo or anything, if you can tell, Mitsubishi is my fav imports, but snyway.
12.9... honestly, a fluke, it will never be consistant, I mean, strange things can happen, I don't think it is a strong argument.
Evo is 3200lb, well my LS1 is only 3402lb, and 200lb with all my torque is nothing!
Evo does have AWD, which is only an advantage right off the line, and not as big as you think... the longer the race, the smaller it matters. And anything longer than a 1/4 mile and I think it is no contest.
VR4 is better than a evo, it has AWD, plus AW-steering, and it has WAY more potential, this can't even be debated, so I think it is a better car.
I already admitted that the evo can take the LS1 in the corners, why is it so hard for you guys to just admit that the LS1 wins in the straight line. STI vs. LS1 is usually a drivers race, so now you guys think the evo can beat an LS1. ok

what makes you think that an STi is that much faster then an evo? i have a friend that has a sti and another friend with an evo, they take off exactly the same, and they are identical from 1st, 2nd and 3rd, then finally on 4th the STi would inch away by a car. so like in mags they usually do run 1/10 from each other and trap 1 mph from each other. so how would a STi run even with a LS1 and a evo can't? the STi and the Evo is soo similar in speed until you hit 100mph. and about the VR-4 having more potential. i don't think so, the AWS is crude and does little to hide its weight, it also comes with really small tires stock, and the transmissions will break ( just like a DSM ) the evo's tranny is alot more stronger, and gettin and you can get an evo in the 11's with the stock turbo, and the u.s. barely got time to even start wrenching on the thing. how many years have a vr-4 been here? so we obviously will have alot more experience tuning the thing. but just wait a few years and you'll see what they can do with the evo. i don't even know how many 10 second vr-4's are here. i know there are some in the states. but not that much. there are quit a few 10 second evo's in japan, new zealand, australia and europe, and in fact R & R just built a 10 second evo in the states. soo how does a evo have less potential then a VR-4? i bet you they did it with less money too then what it would take to make a vr4 run that time.

Ok, I don't want a pissing contest here. I don't even hate the evo or anything, if you can tell, Mitsubishi is my fav imports, but snyway.
12.9... honestly, a fluke, it will never be consistant, I mean, strange things can happen, I don't think it is a strong argument.
Evo is 3200lb, well my LS1 is only 3402lb, and 200lb with all my torque is nothing!
Evo does have AWD, which is only an advantage right off the line, and not as big as you think... the longer the race, the smaller it matters. And anything longer than a 1/4 mile and I think it is no contest.
VR4 is better than a evo, it has AWD, plus AW-steering, and it has WAY more potential, this can't even be debated, so I think it is a better car.
I already admitted that the evo can take the LS1 in the corners, why is it so hard for you guys to just admit that the LS1 wins in the straight line. STI vs. LS1 is usually a drivers race, so now you guys think the evo can beat an LS1. ok

The Evo is faster than the VR4 in the 1/4 mile. Due to the VR4's weight. Evo is faster in the corners. And your right about the straight shot that the LS1 is faster. But that's after the 1/4 mile. Find someone with an Evo and you will find out what they can do in the 1/4 mile. You will be amazed

No problem, I haven't really encountered any to see. I still say that a VR4 has WAY more potential than an evo, we are talking 4cyl. vs. 6cyl. Twin Tubo no less. A VR4 is pretty heavy, but that can be fixed. I don't see it as crude. I mean, it is v6 TT, it is comparble to supra's, rx-7s, I think it is a little out of the evo's league. An evo is somewhat maxed out, how much more HP do you think you can squeeze out of a 4cyl single turbo. And thank you for admitting that the LS1 is faster straight-away!

No problem, I haven't really encountered any to see. I still say that a VR4 has WAY more potential than an evo, we are talking 4cyl. vs. 6cyl. Twin Tubo no less. A VR4 is pretty heavy, but that can be fixed. I don't see it as crude. I mean, it is v6 TT, it is comparble to supra's, rx-7s, I think it is a little out of the evo's league. An evo is somewhat maxed out, how much more HP do you think you can squeeze out of a 4cyl single turbo. And thank you for admitting that the LS1 is faster straight-away!

Yea i said straight away AFTER the 1/4 mile. LS1 will lose in the 1/4 mile dont get my words mixed. And your right to a point. The Evo is pretty much factory maxed already. You can buy a bigger turbo and tweak stuff here tweak stuff thier and proably get about 400 to 500 HP on the Evo. I mean it comes facotry stock with 19 psi set already. It would take alot more money for the VR4 to beat the Evo modded that much. In the long run i would take the VR4 to but were not comparing those two, we are comparing the Evo agiasnt a LS1 firebird.

i don't know that we're looking for a pissing contest, or trying for it.

i simply posted a person who ran a high 12 in an evo, stock.
you said that you can hit high 12's in a firebird, and i don't think you said that was consistent, so why is my example blown off?

i'm sure the 12 second firebird is flukey, just like this evo, apparently...

but in a comparison forum, i'm comparing both cars, not both 1/4 mile times, and the question wasn't about the 1/4 mile.

stock for stock, i'd take the evo, all day, every day.

No problem, I haven't really encountered any to see. I still say that a VR4 has WAY more potential than an evo, we are talking 4cyl. vs. 6cyl. Twin Tubo no less. A VR4 is pretty heavy, but that can be fixed. I don't see it as crude. I mean, it is v6 TT, it is comparble to supra's, rx-7s, I think it is a little out of the evo's league. An evo is somewhat maxed out, how much more HP do you think you can squeeze out of a 4cyl single turbo. And thank you for admitting that the LS1 is faster straight-away!

the evo's super 16G turbo can make up to 450hp. which is good for a low 12 to a high 11 second run on the stock turbo. the car is far from maxed out from the factory. with bolt ons and a ecu reflash you can get a gain of over 100whp. just cuase its a 4 cylinder don't dimiss it. i mean yes it won't be as strong as a 6. but still its far from maxed out from the factory. trust me if you want to talk about maxing out from factory you talk about the S2K.

hmm...
back up a second, i never mentioned a ttLS1, b/c obviously, it'd be making a ton of power, and not comparable to an evo.

an evo, though having less weight and less power, can run with an LS1 firebird. end of story.

i already posted proof of a stock evo in the 12's, what else do you want?

the evo is a rally car, so it's got bad gearing for drag racing?

what?

rally cars are designed with super fast acceleration, at the disadvantage of top end, so they're not top speed monsters, but they get there FAST.

anything else?

consider that rally cars, with 350hp, can hit 0-60 in under 3 seconds, ON GRAVEL.

and yes, the WRC cars are limited to 350hp.

also remember that the evo is sick on a race track. paved. outhandles tons of cars...

best of both worlds, easily.

the rally cars in the WRC are limited to a 2.0 liter 4 cylinder engine at 300hp not 350 get ur facts straight

Ok, I'm gonna go find someone in the evo forum that has 450-500HP on the stock setup... and honestly, how long do you think it will last like that. And the LS1 supposedly can hit 12's with a really good driver, I'm assuming more than one person has done it... but anyway averages times the LS1 is faster, it was even posted in this thread. So NO, the LS1 will not lose to the evo in the quarter, it weighs only a couple hundred pounds less yet is lacking over 60HP. Whatever, you guys are DIE-HARD evo fans and we are talknig in circles.

soo much BS soo little time..

1st off i hear talk about averages in 1/4 mile times when the evo has been around in the states for what a year? and the LS1 has been around a lot longer... you notice how the averages of the 1/4mile times for the EVO is going up as people learn the car here in the states they're gettin better times.. i believe the EVO was rated at what 13.7 in the 1/4 when it first came out?? hardly the case anymore...

2nd oh wow past 100 the LS1 dominates the EVO yeah this is entirely true but how often is that scenario going to be played out? and seeing how we measure everything in 1/4 mile around here i dont even think a top end contest is a factor...

3rd the EVO is not a drag car.. it just happens to be pretty damn good at it.. you talk about the LS1's high point (straight line) ill talk about the EVO's which is handling... another factor that we use to judge cars by which wins here...the EVO's handling is up there with super cars (ferraris, lambo, porsche) whos going to turn a quicker lap?

4th this is to joesph1082 with his 12's comment... it seems someone ALWAYS brings that up "well an LS1 has hit 12's.." have you seen one do it? have you seen video of a confirmed stock car doing it? i havent hell i've never even heard of someone how claimed they did it... so this obviously is FAR from the norm here, with how many cars they made im sure they're are more then a couple factory "freaks" but they dont make up the average 13.2-13.4 ls1 times by any means

so yeah am i saying that trans ams suck? hell no they're awesome but stock for stock they compete with an EVO on the straight line performance ( hell ill even give you that 80% of the time they beat EVO's) however, the more varibles you throw in there ( corners, traction issues, lap times,) the more the Trans Am slowly fades away

What if the track has long straight aways. The LS1 might beat the Evo there. Where as on a technical track the Evo will win. Not all racetracks are the same... Plus I posted something about the 1le option from the factory that really beefs up the Z28's handling. The 1le cars are pretty rare numbering only in the 100's but it is a factory option none the less...check it out.

http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search?p=1le%20camaro

well thats hte beauty of turbos. the engine can handle 450hp for quit a long time, but the thing is it doesn't have too. for daily cruising you set it to low boost, then when your out racing or when you encounter someone you can just simply raise the boost with a few presses of botton and then you'll be running 27psi. ( by the way thats what the stock 16G can flow up to, even though the turbo won't last very long but you can raise it to that level. but you will also run out of fuel before anything so upgraded injectors are a must ). anyways back to the subject, compared to a 450hp n/a or super charged car where it will always make that kind of power no matter what, so your either stuck with gettin horrible gas mileage, stuck on running race gas, or change your internals.

I didn't know evos had a controllable waste gate...

wow, i was off by 50hp on the rally cars.
so it's only 300 hp. which makes it even MORE impressive that they can be as fast as they are...

joseph, you sound like a hella big v8 fan, just like we're die hard evo fans...

450hp on the stock setup was referring to the stock turbo, not the full stock car.

you can do 500+ on stock internals, and it's documented.

get over it.

spend some time on an evo forum before you shoot it down.

go to www.buschurracing.com and see what they've done with their car as well... you'll be surprised...

or at least ENLIGHTENED.

i'm well aware of the capabilities of both cars.

in this case, as two overall cars (not just DRAG cars, like you keep running back to) i'm going to take the evo.

on a track with straights, there are still corners.
if you can handle better in the corners, you can keep up with faster cars. always been that way.

i've got a video of a lotus elise hanging with an f40 on a track. the f40 walks away on straights, and the lotus catches it in the corners. they turn very similar lap times, yet are 100's of hp apart... hmm...

well flylwsi i asked 2000LS1Z28 to join in on this discussion, since he owned both he should tell us what he thinks of both cars.

sorry flylwsi.. i had to make sure that u knew the real limits.. ima wrc fan.. =D

Hey guys, I use to own a 2000 Z28 (Obviously LS1 powered engine), and now own a 2003 EVO (Well actually the bank owns the car, but I drive it :mad: ). The differences between the two are quite pronounced. On the LS1 powered F-Bodies side you have busloads of low end grunt. The EVO doesn't come alive until a little over 3,300 rpms. After that the little EVO literally scoots. 1/4 mile wise you'd be surprised how close the two are. If any of you go to LACR or Speedway you know how piss poor traction is. With an AWD car you don't have to worry about traction. You don't have to heat up your slicks or drag radials. You just rev the sucker up to above 4500 rpms and hear the clutch fry as you launch out of the hole. Of course it destroys clutches fast, but as anyone knows a 1-2 car lead from a dig is mentally debilitating for other drivers. Don't forget about altitude. LS1's don't function too well at tracks above sea level. My first time slip at LACR was a 14 flat 1/4 mile (That's at 2700 ft. elevation). 1/4 mile wise they are pretty much dead even IMO, in the most ideal conditions (Which you will never find at most tracks). From a roll there's no way a stock EVO is gonna hang with an LS1 (Could be the 70 whp advantage). Modding wise the 4g63 engine has set quite a few records (Below 9 sec. 1/4 mile times). Any turbocharged car is going to be able to squeeze power out of (Via boost controller, larger turbo, intercooler, etc.). Now I sold the Z28 for the EVO partially due to piston slap (It didn't have oil consumption issues, just sounded like a new age diesel engine). Well anyways, if any of you wanna run me at Speedway or LACR let me know. BTW my Z28 had quite a few mods (Still only got a 13.1 sec. 1/4 mile at LACR :( ). The mods I had on the Z28 were: Z06 intake manifold (2001+ had them stock), whipser lid, underhood ram air, pro 5.0 shifter, edelbrock N20 system`100 shot`, MAFT, HPP3, magnaflow muffler, exhaust cutout, and MSD wires.

Yo, does everyone not read my posts... peple are telling me the Evo is better around turns... I ADMITTED THAT A DOZENS TIMES... And StupidBrodie says Evo's are fast and average times are going up??? It is established that LS1 is faster and more powerful, that is all I have said, and I like it better. And please dont tell me that a 450HP stock set-up evo is going to last long.

how long is your definition of lasting? i know a guy with a first gen AWD turbo TALON who upgraded his turbo from a 14b to a super 16G then at 180K miles he upgraded to a 20G, making over 400hp. and its been almost a year and its still running. and the DSM's 4G63 is basicaly a outdated obsolete EVO 4G63, so the EVO's 4G63 is even stronger and makes more power. ( side note don't confuse the DSM 4G63's to the evo's beacsue they are quit different. the cam sprockets are on the opposite side, and nothing from the older engine will fit on the improved one. mitsubishi stoped using those DSM 4G63's since the EVO 4 back in like 95.

It is established that LS1 is faster and more powerful, that is all I have said, and I like it better. And please dont tell me that a 450HP stock set-up evo is going to last long.
It's not faster, it is qicker. Big difference. 1/4 mile wise i'd give the nod to the EVO versus my old Z28. Why, cause traction sucks on LS1 F Bodies. I consistantly ran a 2.3 sec. 60'. That sucks. Most EVO's run a 13.5 sec. 1/4 mile (The one in MT was a freak). That's identical to an SS Camaro. Mind you you are taking out alot of factors with an AWD car. No wheel hop, loss of traction, and reaction time loss due to correcting steering from excessive wheelspin.

Ok, but I've heard of other people gettin their 60' down to 2.0 sec. AWD means better traction, more drivetrain powerloss. And if you are talking about a LS1 SS 13.5 is a little high. I mean, the LS1 needs someone who knows exactly how to handle it. And a year isn't that long I'm assuming he doesn't commute w/ a 400HP Evo. I mean, aside from car preference, let's just talk physics and engineering, imagine the added stress, i can say w/o a doubt that mitsubishi didn't design this car w/ the idea in mind to make it be able to handle that set-up as easily as stock (not the definition of economics). I am not the greatest LS1 driver but I hope to find an Evo to see what all the hype is about. I love/bought a camaro because it is the most HP this side of a Corvette. I also bought it over perhaps a v6 TT car because no matter what you say, FI is extra stress on an engine, every stroke the air pressure inside a cylinder is doubled or more (doubled at 15psi... so boost is the actual corelation factor). This is why I also point out that a 400HP stock engine 4 cyl os working so damn hard it's days are numbered, while a well-treated n/a motor can go on for a long time. When shopping for a turbo car people tend to look for low milage, Y, because of the stress.

i don't know why u guys think a inline 4 engine with 450+ hp will not last, i mean if u use it as a daily driver, the turbo usually doesn't kick in til 3000 rpms and you have more than enough power before the turbo spools to use in everyday driving, well imnot sure exactly when the turbo spools but my friend doesn't even need his boost unless he races, so why wont a car with 450hp last? the 450 hp isn't fully used til after 3k rpms seeeeeeee???

You can turn the boost down to save engine life, and the fact that boost doesn't kick in til over 3K rpm brings me to another reason why I think the LS1 is better...No turbo lag, I have a steady increase in power, don't have to "wait" for it.
This kid in my town had a 500HP 1st gen DSM w/ a 20G turbo... but he had a whole rebuild. I'm looking at things from an objective scientific point of view.
The 4cyl has smaller pistons, which means more pressure (pressure is force per surface area; if force is constant, smaller pistons mean area goes down, pressure goes up), further turbo means more pressure, every 15psi doubles the pressure. You have got HALF the cylinders of a v8. The stress on each of those pistons and cylinders is enormous compared to what they were originaly engineered for.
Simple Math, at 450HP, simply the amount of WORK they have to do is almost doulbed, so whatever mitsubishi engineered as their life-span is pretty much cut in half, not even talking into account the other added stressors. It can't make more sense than this.
Import heads tell me how Supra engines, blah, blah blah, are bulletproof etc. Now let's look at another science, economics. No company is going to make some amazing bulletproof engine etc. This is not how economics work... these companies count on making a fortune for parts, even for their supercars. Remember, we are talking about STOCK, MASS-PRODUCED vehicles. There is only one type of product that is pretty much made geat, and that is consumable products, like food, toilet paper, etc. Everything else is made so that you'll need a new one later on, that is why electronics always seem to break... if they made something so amazing it lasting a lifetime the company would go bankrupt.

you're also talking about a motor DESIGNED to take tons of boost.

no company is going to make a bullet proof bottom end?
yet the supra has made up to 1000hp on stock internals?

stock mass produced vehicles, can, and do, make tons of power.

you CAN run 450hp on an evo all day, and you're not going to break. the same way you can run 500hp in a daily driven ls1 and not have an issue.

i'm going to, again, suggest you spend some more time on evolutionm.net, and then consider what you're talking about.

you can't look at something scientifically if you don't know the facts about both sides.

we're telling you the facts, and you don't want to hear them.

why would a company not build a durable bottom end? supras/skylines/wrx's/evo's all have durable bottom ends that can take a bit of power.

you have to ALSO remember that these cars are not the bread and butter for these companies, and they can afford to build them much more stout than their regular cars. you keep forgetting these things... there's more to it than what you know...