Lancer Register Forum banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
in evo magazine was an article about the ralliart evo 7 sprint
it s based on a RS

it has 320 bhp

questions:

does this car has the standard exhaust and does it have the cat still mounted
they upped the boost to 1.3 bar. how did they do that (boost controller.)
they have mounted a hks induction kit (is it so much better than a ralliart air filter.)

regards

Andre
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Yes on E7 you need to boost 1.3 bars to get same performance as E6 with 0.9 bars. Because weight.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Original Post:
in evo magazine was an article about the ralliart evo 7 sprint
it s based on a RS

it has 320 bhp

questions:

does this car has the standard exhaust and does it have the cat still mounted - A question should end with a question mark (like this: ?)
they upped the boost to 1.3 bar. how did they do that (boost controller.) - Magic! http://www.lancerregister.com/graphics/tongue1.gif border|EQU| 0 align|EQU| absmiddle > LOL
they have mounted a hks induction kit (is it so much better than a ralliart air filter.) - This is not a question (a question stops with a question mark) [img]http://www.lancerregister.com/graphics/tongue1.gif border|EQU| 0 align|EQU| absmiddle >

regards

Andre

[/QUOTE]

Regards

Claudius
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I know claude youre right about all

my english is bad altough it s not so bad as youre driving.

:)

This thread is going nowhere.

thx anyway

Andre
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
A standard evo 7 is quicker than a standard evo 6 - fact. Yes it is 35 kg heavier ( difference between a fat bloke and a thin bloke) but it has more torque and a revised 1st gear. Theres NO argument !
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Viper,

That's a new one on me! Standard 7 quicker than a 6. Surely the extra weight cancels out the increase in torque?? Diff 1st gear ratio. So it is only quicker in first?? Every mag revue and telly program slate it for being softer and not a fast as the all conquering 6 (who's the daddy, the 6..that's hoooo...
)
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Dont get all upset, Viper forgot to read the official Mitsubishi announcement where the performance is stated. He will come back later and apologise for getting his facts wrong.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Claudius official mitsubishi figures put the 7 0.1 secs quicker than the 6 0-60 BIG DEAL !!!!!

The magazines state that the 7 looks softer,agreed but is even more exciting to drive.Maybe we just read different magazines ?.

Maybe some of you should actualy drive a 7 on the limit before passing judgement.

17.05 secs quicker than a 6 around the nurburgring thats aprox 1.33 secs quicker per mile and thats a fact.

SAYS ME
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
All this 0-60 stuff is b######t. Its how the car drives and a silver7 says, on the ultimate test around the ring, the 7 was faster. Claudius has driven a 7 and, although I am sure he didn't really want to, gave it the thumbs up as far as driving was concerned.

I personally prefer the 7 but believe that in the 0-60 arguement, the 6 just wins. SO WHAT!
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Wait till Sport Auto has put the EVO VII through its paces on the Ring when doing the Supertest. Don't make claims before they did it. The tester H. v. Saurma is a Ring fanatic, the Japs drove the VI around 10 seconds slower per lap than he does (this is already around 0.5secs per km). If you go to http://www.myevo.com you can see the pics when they tested the VII in November 2000 as my mate was there with RA. If you've ever driven on the Ring you'd know that knocking off 17 sec. needs more than the VII offers over the VI. And yes I've driven on the Ring.
Since when do we believe in marketing talk?

Cheers

Mike
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Surely this Sauma chappie would improve the times of the 7 as well.

What about personel experience does that count?

Would any other 7 owners who had a 6 previously be prepared to comment?
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I don't think it makes any sense to have a VI vs VII argument, but I'd like to comment on the Ring test.

As Silver7 says, it's a fact the VII was quicker than the VI at the Ring. Now, how much of that difference was due to Yokohama vs S01 tires? We all know how important tires are in a race track, and how bad Bridgestones (S01, S02 and S03) perform in those conditions (particularly S01 and S03).

What would have happened if they had fit semi slick tires on the VI and S01 on the VII?

The Ring test was a marketing exercise by Mitsubishi, and their interest was to show the VII would not be slower than the VI. Was that a standard VII? As you know, even press cars these days are tuned (I know a tuner that even works on the internals of the press fleet of one of the major manufacturers).

I believe Mitsubishi claims the VII is only around 30 kg heavier than the VI. Has anyone checked the ACTUAL weight difference? Most manufacturers tend to lie about the official weight figures these days.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
this really strange why do 6 drivers always dis the 7? it is faster if you are not convienced try to go against a 7 and see for yourself. do you really think that they will build a slower car?!

the standard 7 is faster than a standard 6 period. for the simple reason they run more boost, have bigger intercooler and better exhuast. so all things being equal engine wise ( which they are) it will have more power. makes sense to me. the 7 runs 1.2 bar as standard while the 6 runs 1.1 bar i think.

the wieght is not really that much more. 35kg is nothing really maybe will make a difference of 0.1 to a 100mph but it has more torque. i don;t think there is much in it at all. i think the acceleration figures of the 6 are very hard to beat so the 7 does well no match them. but the handling should give a big advantage on track.


evojkp
we will see mate ;)


sam
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Std 6 peak at 0.85 and hold just below 0.8 bars.

The official Evo 7 0-62mph time is on the CCC press release thread posted by HH6. It is 5.3s. The official 6 time was 4.9 seconds and 5.0 or 5.1 have often been measured.

Totally agree with Rallyman that they now use Advan tyres which just cannot be compared to Shitstones. This will even make a 7 faster than a 6 when in fact it isnt.

Not saying the 7 is a bad car; it's a very good car, very stiff and precise, just too heavy (like the 6 btw) and underpowered.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
claud

maybe the 6 you have tried had a faulty gauge but the 6 i have seen boosted to 1.1 and held 1 bar on the HKS boost gauge that i am using. so if the 6 holds less that means my 7 also holds less.

as for the 7 standard tyres they are quite **** and i can't wait until i get some shitstones so2, or so3s. so i don't see they logic there. i think both cars are heavy my self but the 6 GSR AGAINST 7 GSR. in standard even with the same tyres the 7 will win.

every one likes his car and i am sure 6 drivers don't like admit that the 7 is better to justify keeping there 6s really. same as the scooby people in a different kind of way :D.

just as the poeple that have moved form a 6 to 7. i have tried many 6s before i bought my 7.


sam
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Don't get me wrong but as stated I first want to see what times the VII puts in during the Supertest. Before that discussing Ring time is just marketing hype. The test is planned and as soon as it's out I'll post the results and if the VII is really that much faster no arguments anymore.

Cheers

Mike

PS: Still prefer my TME ;)
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top