Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Link to original article.

I truly wonder if they would kill off a profitable car, provided of course the Evo is actually profitable, considering the massive amount of money must go into R&D for every model.

The Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X could be the last Evo model from the Japanese brand, according to reports out of the Geneva Motor Show.

UK publication Autocar spoke with Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (MMC) global product director, Gayu Eusegi, who revealed that there would be no ‘Evo XI’ successor.

“There is still a demand [for the car] … but we must stop,” Mr Eusegi said. “Our influence is now EV technology.”

At the beginning of this year, Mitsubishi announced it would launch eight new hybrid, plug-in hybrid and fully electric vehicles by 2015, as the brand moves towards a new alternative energy future.

Mr Eusegi said the rally-bred Evolution franchise did not fit with the “policy change” at MMC.

“Maybe the world can change, and maybe someday we can do a motor race by electric vehicles. Maybe then we can enter the market again,” he said.

Mitsubishi Australia’s Lenore Fletcher said she personally had not heard any news about the end of the Evo from MMC head office, but said she had a call in to try to get to get the official word.

Ms Fletcher admitted the brand was heavily focused on hybrid and electric vehicles in the short term.

With the 6000th i-MiEV delivered recently, she said Mitsubishi was determined to further diversify its alternative energy offerings, with plans to introduce a hybrid or EV variant into every model line in the range.

“That will be a huge platform for us going forward,” Ms Fletcher said.

Despite this, she said hybrids and EVs did not necessarily mean the end of performance vehicles from Mitsubishi, with the potential for sports models to be based on the new efficient vehicle architectures.

The Mitsubishi Evolution is one of the most legendary nameplates in recent automotive history, particularly in rally, street and tuning circles.

The original Lancer Evolution I was launched in October 1992, designed to compete in the World Rally Championship. It produced 182kW of power and 309Nm of torque, and had a top speed of 228km/h.

The current-generation Lancer Evolution X follows the trend of all Evos before it, with a 2.0-litre turbocharged engine and an all-wheel drive system. It produces 217kW of power and 366Nm of torque, and in top-spec MR TC-SST form, accelerates from 0-100km/h in 5.8 seconds.

CarAdvice will bring you more news on the future of the Evolution franchise when we hear more.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/356059-mitsubishi-killing-off-the-evo/
Share on other sites

Probably more to do with the economic down turn than anything else.

Holden dropped the monaro, Nissan dropped the gtr. Plenty of examples of this kind of thing happenning before.

No doubt it will make a rerun some time in the future with much ado and fan fare.

  • Like 2
  • Nope 2

Evo X goes from 0-100 in 5.8seconds? Surely that's an error. I thought they were way quicker.

nah, in a straight line the evo 9 is quicker than a evo 10 (and all the stats on paper make it look faster than the newer version), however around a track the evo 10 is usually quicker.

Sorry boys but I have to pop in and say that buying an evo was the best purchase I've ever made.

Starting with an R33 gtst in the 90's (when they were relatively rare) worked in the usual mods including suspension, an FC RX-7 with a brand new rebuilt engine (paid by me) with a bridge port exhaust boost etc, a GTiR with mods, then a gc8 in wrx in blue, a mitsubishi Legnum (which shat on the wrx - if you couldnt stretch to a 30k evo 8.5/9 then it would be my car of choice, just awesome), an R32 GTR with N1 turbos SARD 700 injectors aftermarket ECU Tune by a really reputable shop fuel pump ohlins suspension and the rest of the works (a tune mid modification made 260kw at all 4).

And then a gun metal grey Evo 8MR with zorst, cams ecu and few bolt ons (the best bit is that you don't have to build the engine chasing that power and shit - they dont go pop, like my GTR after after a year (spun bottom end bearing)...... which in my mind tears the other competition apart through the adelaide hills.

Sorry.. but those thinking that all evos are 0-100 in 5.6 are in denial. Try mid low 4 seconds (8.5/9 model evo with the usual mods) - seriously. Also there are dudes using E85 with lesser engine mods than mine and making more power than my GTR! Sure you could also just as eay use that fuel to spark the r32, but as a package that GOs, stops and handles... the Evo has it at that price tag. Oh, and the all the carbon pieces from factory, aluminium roof etc never get old.

Look the gtr would probably pull infront on a drag strip, but in the real world the evo would chop it off the lights more regularly - unless I was in the gtr and dumping it at 7K and using the last two weeks pay to keep rebuilding clutches. But its in the hills that the BRAKES and HANDLING just absolutly out shine the the other cars I've driven.

This is my experience and I'm sure there are R34's out there (built like the Mines car) that would say hang on I'm the faster biaaatch.

But for dollar measure and as a long standing and still Nissan fan - I recommend peeps branch out and try and Evo 8MR through the twisties or on the track. I think you may be somewhat surprised.

Heres a small snap of mine:

av-1799.jpg

Edited by CONRAD

So basically they are following Toyota in making only white good A-B eco boxes & going into this all "green" crap...

Given the way emission rules are going just for cars - let alone the whole "carbon" bullshit around the world

They are being forced too as at the end of the day they want profit, not please people.

If I was rich (with extra $$$ to burn) I want to do what Clarkson did in one of his DVDs, go & buy some crap A-B eco box (I'll choose a Prius) & then smash it with a sludge hammer in front of the dealer.

  • Like 1

If I was rich I'd put a dirty old V8 into a prius, bribe some engineer to pass it, and drive around with bumper stickers all over the thing bragging about how green I am.

  • Like 1

I'm getting sick of companies killing off iconic cars... Carbon tax Bullshit

If I was rich I'd put a dirty old V8 into a prius, bribe some engineer to pass it, and drive around with bumper stickers all over the thing bragging about how green I am.

lmfao

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...