judge upholds ticket on stock evo wing

[sniperruff]

Originally posted by: DaWhim
wow! should've got a STi 😀

so they can fine you for the big giant wing and the huge hood scoop?and the huge hood scoop?

 

[Ornery]

Mitsubishi?s stripper Evo may be the ultimate sleeper

• ...Mitsubishi trimmed 146 pounds of ?nonessential? items from its already-stellar Lancer Evolution for even more performance. Those items include the wing; HID lights...
  
  ...the rear wing starts generating downforce at 86 mph...

 

[slick230]

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: SampSon
I don't believe that person, or their post.

Sounds like a 17yr old kid who got a speeding ticket.

100% Agree. I'm wondering what kind of evidence he gave to the judge. I think he just shrugged the ticket off and assumed he would get removed in court with little to no evidence.

You wouldn't be wondering if you had bothered to read the posts on that forum :

During the proceedings I had pictures of my car and cars that were still on a dealershio lot, I brought in my window sticker that this was not an aftermarket item.

 

[acemcmac]

Originally posted by: slick230
Someone should find out where the judge lives and nail a picnic bench to his trunk lid.

ahhahahhhahah great!

 

[Triumph]

Originally posted by: Spencer278
Would down forces on rear wheels even help in a turn. Wouldn't that make less force on the front wheels and if the front wheels lose traction then you will just go striaght. Lose of traction in the rear wheels would kick them out so you would coner better.

Yes, it would and does help in a turn. Sliding around a turn is not the best way through it. A little bit of slipping at the apex can help point you in the right direction for exiting the turn, but generally you don't want to be sliding all the way through it. And no, adding rear downforce won't necessarily unload the front end. You are adding force from the wind, not from moving the center of gravity of the car.

 

[sniperruff]

Originally posted by: Ornery
Mitsubishi?s stripper Evo may be the ultimate sleeper

• ...Mitsubishi trimmed 146 pounds of ?nonessential? items from its already-stellar Lancer Evolution for even more performance. Those items include the wing; HID lights...
  
  ...the rear wing starts generating downforce at 86 mph...

not really nonessential

You've got to wonder why so many front-wheel-drive cars have deck lid spoilers installed, but with the Lancer its optional carbon-fiber rear spoiler serves two purposes: First, it increases rigidity, and second, it adds downforce to the rear wheels -- something an all-wheel-drive car can actually benefit from.

edmunds

 

[PowerMac4Ever]

Originally posted by: slick230

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: SampSon
I don't believe that person, or their post.

Sounds like a 17yr old kid who got a speeding ticket.

100% Agree. I'm wondering what kind of evidence he gave to the judge. I think he just shrugged the ticket off and assumed he would get removed in court with little to no evidence.

You wouldn't be wondering if you had bothered to read the posts on that forum :

During the proceedings I had pictures of my car and cars that were still on a dealershio lot, I brought in my window sticker that this was not an aftermarket item.

Actually I did read that part of the thread and I'm not impressed at all by the evidence he provided. It sounds like he took an hour of his time a few days before his court date and got those pictures. He should have gotten records and quotes directly from Mitsubishi.

 

[Ornery]

"...it adds downforce to the rear wheels..."

How much, and at what speed? That's the question. ...the rear wing starts generating downforce at 86 mph...

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: slick230

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: SampSon
I don't believe that person, or their post.

Sounds like a 17yr old kid who got a speeding ticket.

100% Agree. I'm wondering what kind of evidence he gave to the judge. I think he just shrugged the ticket off and assumed he would get removed in court with little to no evidence.

You wouldn't be wondering if you had bothered to read the posts on that forum :

During the proceedings I had pictures of my car and cars that were still on a dealershio lot, I brought in my window sticker that this was not an aftermarket item.

Actually I did read that part of the thread and I'm not impressed at all by the evidence he provided. It sounds like he took an hour of his time a few days before his court date and got those pictures. He should have gotten records and quotes directly from Mitsubishi.

He should have taken a picture of his rear view mirror to show that his wing didn't block his vision.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: Amused
The kid is going about this all wrong. He needs to first file a lawsuit against Mitsubishi for selling him an illegally equiped car, and then contact all the news orgs.

Of course he will not win against mits, but the attention will get him waht he wants.

Seeing that many commercial trucks don't have rear windows at all, on what basis are you claiming that the evo is an illegally equipped car?

 

Originally posted by: slick230

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: SampSon
I don't believe that person, or their post.

Sounds like a 17yr old kid who got a speeding ticket.

100% Agree. I'm wondering what kind of evidence he gave to the judge. I think he just shrugged the ticket off and assumed he would get removed in court with little to no evidence.

You wouldn't be wondering if you had bothered to read the posts on that forum :

During the proceedings I had pictures of my car and cars that were still on a dealershio lot, I brought in my window sticker that this was not an aftermarket item.

I read that thread, and the "original thread", just because he posted that does not mean it's reality.

I cannot find the scan of the ticket that was claimed to exist in thoes posts. I cannot believe this person hired a lawyer and then did not have him on the courthouse floor while he was in trial. I cannot believe a single word this poster has to say.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: Amused
The kid is going about this all wrong. He needs to first file a lawsuit against Mitsubishi for selling him an illegally equiped car, and then contact all the news orgs.

Of course he will not win against mits, but the attention will get him waht he wants.

Seeing that many commercial trucks don't have rear windows at all, on what basis are you claiming that the evo is an illegally equipped car?

Seriously. I could paint all my windows black except for the windsheild, drive and passenger windows and be perfectly legal as I have two side mirrors.

 

Originally posted by: Triumph
fine, legal speeds, whatever. the point is, people have this misconception that a spoiler can't do anything for you unless you're driving an F1 car at 150 mph. and that's just ignorance.

Fine, but under no circumstances do you need a spoiler on a car for driving on public highways.

Reality is that wings don't provide any significant downforce until you go over 80mph.

 

[Ornery]

Originally posted by: SampSon

I read that thread, and the "original thread", just because he posted that does not mean it's reality.

I cannot find the scan of the ticket that was claimed to exist in thoes posts. I cannot believe this person hired a lawyer and then did not have him on the courthouse floor while he was in trial. I cannot believe a single word this poster has to say.

Ever get tired of being a TOTAL ASS?

 

[mb]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: Amused
The kid is going about this all wrong. He needs to first file a lawsuit against Mitsubishi for selling him an illegally equiped car, and then contact all the news orgs.

Of course he will not win against mits, but the attention will get him waht he wants.

Seeing that many commercial trucks don't have rear windows at all, on what basis are you claiming that the evo is an illegally equipped car?

Well, if the judge says the wing is illegal, that kinda makes it an illegally equipped car don't ya think?

Not that I think it should be illegal...

 

Originally posted by: Ornery

Originally posted by: SampSon

I read that thread, and the "original thread", just because he posted that does not mean it's reality.

I cannot find the scan of the ticket that was claimed to exist in thoes posts. I cannot believe this person hired a lawyer and then did not have him on the courthouse floor while he was in trial. I cannot believe a single word this poster has to say.

Ever get tired of being a TOTAL ASS?

Under normal circumstances I'd dignify you with a response. I just don't think you deserve it today.

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: Ornery
"...it adds downforce to the rear wheels..."

How much, and at what speed? That's the question. ...the rear wing starts generating downforce at 86 mph...

Booyah, bitches.

 

[StageLeft]

LMAO!

 

[Ornery]

I notice you didn't apologize to Jophy either, maggot.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

That cop+judge need to take a road trip up here. They'd have a field day.

- M4H

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: supafly

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: Amused
The kid is going about this all wrong. He needs to first file a lawsuit against Mitsubishi for selling him an illegally equiped car, and then contact all the news orgs.

Of course he will not win against mits, but the attention will get him waht he wants.

Seeing that many commercial trucks don't have rear windows at all, on what basis are you claiming that the evo is an illegally equipped car?

Well, if the judge says the wing is illegal, that kinda makes it an illegally equipped car don't ya think?

Not that I think it should be illegal...

Its not what the judge thinks is illegal. If the law says you can have no rear windows so long as you have two sideviews (as with big rigs and other trucks) then how can the judge deem the car illegal? I doubt that law specifically states that it applies only to commercial vehicles.

 

Originally posted by: Ornery
I notice you didn't apologize to Jophy either, maggot.

He, nor his brother, deserve anything but a rusty spike through their eyes.

Now run along and go back to your v8 zealotry.

 

[mb]

Originally posted by: NutBucket

Originally posted by: supafly

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: Amused
The kid is going about this all wrong. He needs to first file a lawsuit against Mitsubishi for selling him an illegally equiped car, and then contact all the news orgs.

Of course he will not win against mits, but the attention will get him waht he wants.

Seeing that many commercial trucks don't have rear windows at all, on what basis are you claiming that the evo is an illegally equipped car?

Well, if the judge says the wing is illegal, that kinda makes it an illegally equipped car don't ya think?

Not that I think it should be illegal...

Its not what the judge thinks is illegal. If the law says you can have no rear windows so long as you have two sideviews (as with big rigs and other trucks) then how can the judge deem the car illegal? I doubt that law specifically states that it applies only to commercial vehicles.

I'm just saying that, if it is deemed to actually BE illegal, that would then make it an illegally equipped car. Sure it would take more than just a simple judge to do that, but if the guy appealed it as far as he could, and they still said it's illegal, then yeah, it would be an illegally equipped car.

And I don't know, but there possibly could be a different law for commercial vehicles, especially since it's impossible for some of them to have rear windows.


God damn I hate how when I try to say something nice and short I have to explain it even further cuz everyone is all anal about things here.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: supafly
Well, if the judge says the wing is illegal, that kinda makes it an illegally equipped car don't ya think?

Not that I think it should be illegal...

A little county judge is superceded by federal regulations. Presumably, any new car for sale and for use on public roads has to be certified by the US government. Somehow, I don't think this judge has more authority than the federal government.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: OS

Originally posted by: supafly
Well, if the judge says the wing is illegal, that kinda makes it an illegally equipped car don't ya think?

Not that I think it should be illegal...

A little county judge is superceded by federal regulations. Presumably, any new car for sale and for use on public roads has to be certified by the US government. Somehow, I don't think this judge has more authority than the federal government.

Well, OTOH each state does have different emissions requirements. IIRC they are at least that of federal standards but can be much stricter (ie Cali).