[Guest]

Don't confuse any Ralliart branded E7's with the new cedia WRC that Mitsubishi now run. They are no longer the same.
They no longer rally an Evo. It is a Cedia WRC.

EG: the WRC has completely different suspension to the E7. Not just in terms of damping etc, but mounting and type. The group A 6 did at least have to share the same basic design as the E6

WRC rules need an homolgation requirement that far exceeds the number of E7's being built. Therefore the WRC is in fact homologated as a base Cedia, with a kit of rally parts - just like the Focus, 206, Xsara, etc. Some of these kit parts are the same as the E7, but not all.

TonyC

 

[Guest]

The type of stuff that CCC writes really p**ses me off. If you are comparing the Scooby STD UK300 with an Evo it should be a standard GSR not an Extreme S. A standard 7 comes out better in tests I have read. Why take a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Journalists do tend to follow their own hidden agenda. Take the review of the 7 Extreme in Evo last month. They criticised it for things like service intervals (the same as other EVOs) stating that it was the high price of such a state of tune. They even went as far as to attack stuff on the Extreme that the had praised on the standard car, even though it had not been changed!

I am suprised with the comments about understeer on the Extreme S. All reports and chats with people I know who have driven it suggests the opposite. I wonder whether they were messing with the ACD settings or were crap drivers. Everybody says that Tarmac settings should be renamed sideways, opposite lock hooligan mode

 

[Guest]

F***. just read the above. I had forgotten how much I hate journalists (except those who own Evos and contribute to this forum!

 

[Guest]

you got the bull by the horns

regards

andre

 

[Guest]

Simon

Has something upset you by any chance But seriously, have you read the article (it's actually part of a whole supplement with CCC this month on track day car of the year). It's not really a UK300 v Extreme S article, but a comparison of 13 cars and which makes the best track car.

The whole supplement is interesting, but the test includes some very extreme cars that people would buy only as track day cars and doesn't go on about the normal stuff such as fuel tank size and service intervals. I've been reading CCC for ages and have to say it is one of the most fairest and honest magazines around. I agree with you about other magazines though.

Dave