Mitsubishi Evo 8 vs. Lamborghini Murcielago

[imported_Shivetya]

Top Gear Comparison


Uh, is that coming here? If so I may just get one

 

[Demon-Xanth]

The Evo 8? Well, considering that they're up to the Evo 10... You're a few years late

 

[GoatMonkey]

I try not to watch too much streaming video from work, but if it's the one I'm thinking of, the EVO is a special edition with an extra large turbo. It's funny to watch them try to accelerate when it's not in the boost. The large turbo takes a lot of effort to keep the pressure up.

 

[LordMorpheus]

yeah, it's the FQ 400 or something like that. The review is that it's a great car, but you're better off with a less powerful, more useable version.

 

[DivideBYZero]

It was a UK only Special Edition and pretty unusable. The huge turbo means monster lag, but when on song....

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Well I was wondering if they were just behind over there as Automobile magazine has been reviewing the EVO X and if not for the fact I get my performance jollies from my bike I would have considered one

 

[JackBurton]

Um, why is he pronouncing Murcielago incorrectly?

 

[Minjin]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
It was a UK only Special Edition and pretty unusable. The huge turbo means monster lag, but when on song....

A 4G63 with 400hp is nowhere close to being unusable. And that turbo is nowhere close to being huge.

 

[ViviTheMage]

evo's are slick!

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Minjin

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
It was a UK only Special Edition and pretty unusable. The huge turbo means monster lag, but when on song....

A 4G63 with 400hp is nowhere close to being unusable. And that turbo is nowhere close to being huge.

It's pretty unusable compared to a 400hp Vette, for example. Having the power available from 1500rpm to redline, with no turbo lag, is a pretty massive advantage.

Displacement/Torque > Turboed up micromotor

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Minjin

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
It was a UK only Special Edition and pretty unusable. The huge turbo means monster lag, but when on song....

A 4G63 with 400hp is nowhere close to being unusable. And that turbo is nowhere close to being huge.

It's pretty unusable compared to a 400hp Vette, for example. Having the power available from 1500rpm to redline, with no turbo lag, is a pretty massive advantage.

Displacement/Torque > Turboed up micromotor

Nope, it all comes down knowing how to drive fast. Big displacement motors are easy for anyone to drive fast. It takes skill to drive a small engine high performance car. I remember an old Kenny Roberts interview where they asked him about his favorite bike to ride in his stable, it was a 250cc. When asked about lack of performance his reply was along the lines of "you don't slow down"

That is what most people with M3/M5 and Vettes don't understand about driving. It takes NO skill to go from 0 to whatever, it takes skill to not back down. It takes no skill when you have a wide powerband, only a lead foot.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Shivetya

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Minjin

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
It was a UK only Special Edition and pretty unusable. The huge turbo means monster lag, but when on song....

A 4G63 with 400hp is nowhere close to being unusable. And that turbo is nowhere close to being huge.

It's pretty unusable compared to a 400hp Vette, for example. Having the power available from 1500rpm to redline, with no turbo lag, is a pretty massive advantage.

Displacement/Torque > Turboed up micromotor

Nope, it all comes down knowing how to drive fast. Big displacement motors are easy for anyone to drive fast. It takes skill to drive a small engine high performance car. I remember an old Kenny Roberts interview where they asked him about his favorite bike to ride in his stable, it was a 250cc. When asked about lack of performance his reply was along the lines of "you don't slow down"

That is what most people with M3/M5 and Vettes don't understand about driving. It takes NO skill to go from 0 to whatever, it takes skill to not back down. It takes no skill when you have a wide powerband, only a lead foot.

You're forgetting something though, and confusing things with the driver 'skill' thing. If you have an excellent driver, the wide powerband and lack of turbo lag will still be an advantage for him if he drove both cars.

I know all about cars that you have to learn how to drive fast. I've owned :

Prelude 3g
Prelude 5g w/Jackson SC
93 Integra RS
Eclipse GST

etc.

And have driven tons of other cars with small high-revving engines, had a blast in the S2K.

What remains undeniable, is that all other things being fairly equal (weight, etc), a car with a larger motor and more torque (and approx equal HP), will offer better performance than something that has to deal with the turbo lag and lack of torque.

 

[DivideBYZero]

OMG, people are quoting engine models and claiming nobody here can drive fast. Well I still say it's a laggy bitch compared to the FQ320, which I have driven quite fast. Also I don't think M3/5/Vette owners were born with the keys in their pocket. :roll:

 

[fstime]

I love how people are stuck in the late 80's and think turbo lag is anywhere near as noticeable as it once was.

I guess they're just too many Supra videos out there with the stock sequential setup taken out and replaced with a monster turbo sticking out of the hood.



Nissan GT-R
BMW 335i
Mazdaspeed 3/6
Evo/STI
911 Turbo

All impress me for being "micromotors" and put up a good fight to their N/A counterparts.

 

[geokilla]

Don't forget that it's been tuned to 400hp. Stock Evos have 280hp - 300hp. I know this cus I watch Best Motoring a lot.

And did you guys see the posted date for the video? It was posted in January 2007. We're just 2 weeks away from January 2008.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: BouZouki
I love how people are stuck in the late 80's and think turbo lag is anywhere near as noticeable as it once was.

I guess they're just too many Supra videos out there with the stock sequential setup taken out and replaced with a monster turbo sticking out of the hood.



Nissan GT-R
BMW 335i
Mazdaspeed 3/6
Evo/STI
911 Turbo

All impress me for being "micromotors" and put up a good fight to their N/A counterparts.

OK, you know you listed 5 cars, 3 of which three have twin turbo setups of various types, right?

FQ400: Big single turbo on a small cap (2.0) motor running 400hp = lag.

335: large cap motor with TWO small turbos running 300hp = NO LAG.

OK?

Even my GF body WRX 2.0 EJ was laggy under 3k rpm.

 

[sniperruff]

yeah i remember that episode. Evo's tend to understeer so i think having all that power wouldn't help... maybe that's why its not even sold in japan.

and that video is obviously edited to show the evo beat the lambo, but clearly the lambo just pulled ahead after the hammer head and into follow through.

 

[Minjin]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Minjin

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
It was a UK only Special Edition and pretty unusable. The huge turbo means monster lag, but when on song....

A 4G63 with 400hp is nowhere close to being unusable. And that turbo is nowhere close to being huge.

It's pretty unusable compared to a 400hp Vette, for example. Having the power available from 1500rpm to redline, with no turbo lag, is a pretty massive advantage.

Displacement/Torque > Turboed up micromotor

I certainly agree that displacement has its advantages. But lets look at the reality here. A 400hp v8 have make good power from 1500-5000, while a 400hp Evo will make good power from 3500-7000. Both have similar sized powerbands at about 3500rpms. Keep each car within its powerband and it will perform. Seems pretty logical to me.

The reason people whine about turbo lag is for two reasons. First, they let the car get out of its powerband, which can happen with ANY car. Second, they are comparing the low power to the sudden surge of power from the exponentially rising boost. You get the same effect from any car where the power doesn't increase linearly. Are all cars with variable valve timing "laggy"? It goes back to the idea of, which would you rather have? A sudden surge in power? Or no surge in power? Part of the reason why people love turbo cars is because they can give you such a kick in the ass. A naturally aspirated engine gains power so slowly and linearly that it feels lacking. But I'm not making this into turbo vs n/a, just responding to what I think is undeserved criticism. There are times, of course, where a linear power output is desired.

 

[GoatMonkey]

Ok, here's the FULL video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1ZWJjC648I

Start at around 6 minutes to see the rest.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

It's a track car. Just like the Mustang FR500.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Minjin

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
It was a UK only Special Edition and pretty unusable. The huge turbo means monster lag, but when on song....

A 4G63 with 400hp is nowhere close to being unusable. And that turbo is nowhere close to being huge.

It's pretty unusable compared to a 400hp Vette, for example. Having the power available from 1500rpm to redline, with no turbo lag, is a pretty massive advantage.

Displacement/Torque > Turboed up micromotor

I'm sure the V8 is overall a better driver, but a 400 hp 4G63 can still be very easy to drive. I know from first hand experience. Power from 1500-7000 rpm in the V8 or power from 3500-8000+ rpm. Not to mention that with the AWD launch there is really no reason to ever be below 3500 rpm. On my WWD Spyder I have the stutter box set to 4500 rpm. When I had an AWD Talon I slipped the clutch out at around 5200 rpm.