They can do it with 4, why cant we do it with 8??????

XWGT · 16-02-2005, 04:53 PM

I'm too shocked to speak really. Speaks for itself

http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/lancer_fq400.asp

JPFS1 · 16-02-2005, 04:56 PM

amazing... that's basically rally spec power and torque.

dj_pom82 · 16-02-2005, 05:00 PM

Wow, thats impressive. Thats certainly one Mitsubishi I would love to own...

XplosiveR6 · 16-02-2005, 05:01 PM

well thats the beauty of forced induction, you would see figures twice that with a well set up turboed boss motor

ssj_jaypee · 16-02-2005, 05:27 PM

I think I've seen that video before with Top Gear.

Did you watch the whole thing?
The second part talks about all the downfalls of that Evo including heavy turbo lag, bad ride quality, bad turning circle, bad clutch, twice as fuel hungry as a v8, needs to be serviced every 200,000kms, etc.

smoo · 17-02-2005, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssj_jaypee

I think I've seen that video before with Top Gear.

Did you watch the whole thing?
The second part talks about all the downfalls of that Evo including heavy turbo lag, bad ride quality, bad turning circle, bad clutch, twice as fuel hungry as a v8, needs to be serviced every 200,000kms, etc.

Hes a *****. He'll give shit to any jappa given the opportunity.
What kind of ride quality would he, or anyone expect in this sorta car? ****er.
****, I'd be stoked to have a car which needed servicing every 200k. Would be a change from the 10,000km/1yr that I'm used to.

XP6 · 18-02-2005, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoo

Hes a *****. He'll give shit to any jappa given the opportunity.
What kind of ride quality would he, or anyone expect in this sorta car? ****er.
****, I'd be stoked to have a car which needed servicing every 200k. Would be a change from the 10,000km/1yr that I'm used to.

Thats a service as in a overhaul, you know a rebuild.
For a small motor with 300kw, thats a very impressive service life.

ssj_jaypee · 18-02-2005, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoo

Hes a *****. He'll give shit to any jappa given the opportunity.
What kind of ride quality would he, or anyone expect in this sorta car? ****er.
****, I'd be stoked to have a car which needed servicing every 200k. Would be a change from the 10,000km/1yr that I'm used to.

Only the facts dude.
Besides, he still praised the standard Evo8 and Sti.

lv619 · 16-02-2005, 06:01 PM

For $113,300 and only 100 of them in production, you get what you pay for.

**Stav** · 18-02-2005, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lv619

For $113,300 and only 100 of them in production, you get what you pay for.

If I bought an xr6 t for 30,000 second hand and spent 70,000 on the motor it would be powering the QE2!!!

WIKIDSTIX · 16-02-2005, 06:12 PM

any1 know wat it does down the quarter mile? it looks very impressive

Rodp · 16-02-2005, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XWGT

I'm too shocked to speak really. Speaks for itself

http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/lancer_fq400.asp

Really nice figures.. but would you want to ride uncomfortably in something that ugly?

AUIII XR8 MAN · 16-02-2005, 07:39 PM

Nice car, not bad.

Bucknaked · 16-02-2005, 07:59 PM

Nothing ugly about that car. Except maybe the price.

DivHunter · 16-02-2005, 08:12 PM

exactly, for THAT much money you can do better with change after modding past that power... it's still just a lancer :P

galaxy xr8 · 16-02-2005, 08:48 PM

I don't mind the look of some Lancer's (EVO's) but not this one.

paul7v7 · 16-02-2005, 08:52 PM

i don't like buzz boxes all that much but this car i have to admit is a fine piece. well what they have done to the engine. on the top gear episode they went around a track, the evo was able to keep up with a lambo murcialego(sp?). Not sure about the turbo lag test as he had it in top gear to start off. Sure the money is a lot but why would you pay 70k for a GT when it is only a falcon :P

T_Terror · 16-02-2005, 09:03 PM

Its a factory backed EVO tuned to make 300kw and heaps more tweaks that comes with a warranty. For a PRODUCTION car it is an crazy-good package.

Some people want a performance car from teh factory (like Typhoon owners!).

The FQ400 is based on a Lancer, but a GT is based on a XT FAlcon.

My point is that for $85,000 you get supercar performance and very few cars that can touch you in the twisties.

M14A-Mclaren · 16-02-2005, 09:09 PM

How they get 300kW out of 2 litres is beyond me

ssj_jaypee · 17-02-2005, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambrose_1

How they get 300kW out of 2 litres is beyond me

Its not that hard.
I dont know why people seem to think a 300kW milk and juice motor is amazing.
A few years ago in one of the Motor magazines, one guy claimed 550kW from an Evo6.5 I remember him saying "dry tarmac wheelspin in 3rd gear" now thats impressive!

Steffo · 17-02-2005, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambrose_1

How they get 300kW out of 2 litres is beyond me

If you think 300kW from a 2.0 is impressive... you should look at some of the "street drag" as they call them 4cyls in Japan. Nissan 200SX with 800kW from its 2.0 turbo 4cyl..........

Or even Ford's 2.3 SVO Turbo 4cyl... 750hp+ 9sec Mustangs powered by a 2.3 four-banger :sm_headba

Then there's also Lingenfelter's 1100hp Chevy Cavalier.. powered by a turbo'd 2.0 ECOTEC... hehe.

Lots of small capacity 4cyls make big power.

turboute · 17-02-2005, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambrose_1

How they get 300kW out of 2 litres is beyond me

Since everyone is commenting about your post...

The answer is simple - enough fuel + air in followed by a semi efficient burn then get it all out quick enough = 300kw of power (for any size engine) getting it to burn properly is the hard bit on smaller engines.

clampy · 17-02-2005, 01:25 PM

apparently in the FQ bit, the Q is just a Q, but the F stands for 'far'..

im told its some message that mitsubishi wants to send out, but i dont get it..................

(should be fkme400, coz thats generally the reaction it'd get..)

Steffo · 17-02-2005, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmartion

apparently in the FQ bit, the Q is just a Q, but the F stands for 'far'..

im told its some message that mitsubishi wants to send out, but i dont get it..................

(should be fkme400, coz thats generally the reaction it'd get..)

Isn't FQ supposed to stand for F*****g Quick.....

dansedgli · 17-02-2005, 02:04 PM

yeah 300kw is not that much when talking turbos. Its about 220rwkw. Most high tech 2 litre engines should be able to support that. Then its just a case of increasing fuel, adding an intercooler and putting a bigger turbo on.
My workshop told me that the 2.5 litre R33 engine is good for about 270rwkw on standard internals.

loxxr6 · 17-02-2005, 03:01 PM

Quote:

How they get 300kW out of 2 litres is beyond me

Hahaha who cares. Just hang on.

YuGoStaR · 17-02-2005, 03:09 PM

Hey, I know I'd have one.
Nice car.

Pilch · 17-02-2005, 04:07 PM

I know someone who has a Datsun 1000 with 479.8rwhp........yes that is more than this lancer has at the fly

: The dato 1000 chassis was a little unstable, so he chucked the motor in a 260Z and than cracked 300km/h with ease. When the motor was in the 1000 he'd sqin the wheels at 200km's!!!!! I'll stick to V8s though :hihi:

T_Terror · 17-02-2005, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilch

I know someone who has a Datsun 1000 with 479.8rwhp........yes that is more than this lancer has at the fly

: The dato 1000 chassis was a little unstable, so he chucked the motor in a 260Z and than cracked 300km/h with ease. When the motor was in the 1000 he'd sqin the wheels at 200km's!!!!! I'll stick to V8s though :hihi:

NOW THATS SCARY

Charbs · 17-02-2005, 06:18 PM

man this evo is from the factory with warranty.. whats the point of comparin it to after-tuned cars.

Damn.. this thing is hot!