|
![Reply](/forum/images/buttons/reply.gif) |
|
12-01-2008, 01:50 PM
|
#1
|
Resident Avatar Gambler
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,997
|
Mitsubishi Evolution X FQ400
It's too bad it's not coming to the states, but it's a beast
Here are some details:
"Autocar snagged a handful of pics and some initial specs of the UK-only Mitsubishi Evolution X FX-400, and as suspected, the hotter Evo is a road-going version of the ADR Motorsport-prepared sedan that successfully campaigned this past September in the 24-Hour Britcar Championship.
The turbocharged 2.0-liter 4B11 will put out approximately 405 hp and 400 lb.-ft. of torque thanks to a new turbo, retuned ECU and center-exit exhaust. As opposed to the outgoing FQ400, the Evo X-based model won't use a race clutch, so puttering around town should be bit more bearable, and due to the FQ400's prodigious output, the twin-clutch SST gearbox – which can't handle more than 331 lb.-ft. of torque – won't be used. Despite this, expect the FQ400 to lay down 0-60 times of around 3.5 seconds, 0.6 seconds faster than the Evo X FQ360."
![](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/12/01-mitsu_x_fq400_small.jpg)
|
|
|
12-01-2008, 01:51 PM
|
#2
|
Resident Avatar Gambler
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,997
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanPlunk
It's too bad it's not coming to the states, but it's a beast
Here are some details:
"Autocar snagged a handful of pics and some initial specs of the UK-only Mitsubishi Evolution X FX-400, and as suspected, the hotter Evo is a road-going version of the ADR Motorsport-prepared sedan that successfully campaigned this past September in the 24-Hour Britcar Championship.
The turbocharged 2.0-liter 4B11 will put out approximately 405 hp and 400 lb.-ft. of torque thanks to a new turbo, retuned ECU and center-exit exhaust. As opposed to the outgoing FQ400, the Evo X-based model won't use a race clutch, so puttering around town should be bit more bearable, and due to the FQ400's prodigious output, the twin-clutch SST gearbox – which can't handle more than 331 lb.-ft. of torque – won't be used. Despite this, expect the FQ400 to lay down 0-60 times of around 3.5 seconds, 0.6 seconds faster than the Evo X FQ360."
![](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/12/01-mitsu_x_fq400_small.jpg)
|
Oh, and the fact that the SST transmission can't hold more than 331lb/ft is terrible. What is the point of these fancy transmissions (Nissan, I'm looking at you) if they can't hold up to any real power ![Rant](images/smilies/rant2.gif)
|
|
|
12-01-2008, 01:57 PM
|
#3
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 501
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanPlunk
It's too bad it's not coming to the states, but it's a beast
Here are some details:
"Autocar snagged a handful of pics and some initial specs of the UK-only Mitsubishi Evolution X FX-400, and as suspected, the hotter Evo is a road-going version of the ADR Motorsport-prepared sedan that successfully campaigned this past September in the 24-Hour Britcar Championship.
The turbocharged 2.0-liter 4B11 will put out approximately 405 hp and 400 lb.-ft. of torque thanks to a new turbo, retuned ECU and center-exit exhaust. As opposed to the outgoing FQ400, the Evo X-based model won't use a race clutch, so puttering around town should be bit more bearable, and due to the FQ400's prodigious output, the twin-clutch SST gearbox – which can't handle more than 331 lb.-ft. of torque – won't be used. Despite this, expect the FQ400 to lay down 0-60 times of around 3.5 seconds, 0.6 seconds faster than the Evo X FQ360."
![](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/12/01-mitsu_x_fq400_small.jpg)
|
ya this thing is pretty freakin sexy...i like the new body and what not. and that they are gonna use the manual tranny, but the only thing i could see being bad about this just like the last fq400 is the lag. for some reason they picked a turbo on the last generation that had alot of lag, it wouldnt hit full spool till 42-4400rpm because of an oversized hotside, and the cold side was barely bigger then stock. on in the garrett gt28 family of turbo's
but if they got a better bigger turbo then i can really see this being a perfect high hp factory evo. ![Big Thumbs Up](images/smilies/biggthumpup.gif)
__________________
ask me about my weener!!
**Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car
**Oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car
**Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall
**Torque is how far you take the wall with you.
|
|
|
12-01-2008, 03:54 PM
|
#4
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 501
|
__________________
ask me about my weener!!
**Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car
**Oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car
**Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall
**Torque is how far you take the wall with you.
|
|
|
12-01-2008, 05:21 PM
|
#5
|
Internet Tough Guy
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
40 hp increase over the fq 360 and ditching the transmission that shifts for you and you think that will equate to a .6 sec drop to 60?
I the old FQ 400 was a full second behind 3.5 and weigh less. Must be another one of those technology packed japanese rocketships that defies physics. (GTR ![Suicide](images/smilies/suicide.gif) )
|
|
|
12-01-2008, 07:24 PM
|
#6
|
Resident Avatar Gambler
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,997
|
Maybe they're underrating the engine?
|
|
|
12-01-2008, 08:02 PM
|
#7
|
Internet Tough Guy
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
Sounds more like Nissan.
Here is my prediction. It will do 0-60 in 3.5 secs ![EEK!](images/smilies/eek.gif) , but in order to obtain that kind of acceloration you will need to launch the car at 5000-6000rpm. Mitsubishi will see this abuse when the car is serviced and void the driveline warrenty. The previous Evos had limiters to prevent such abuse. If I remember correctly they were limited to 4,500 rpm when the clutch was not engaged (please correct me if I'm wrong). They also came equiped with a insanely weak clutch.
I really like this car. I think it will be a track terror (not talking shit, really). I'm considering either an Evo 8/9 or a C5 for a track only car.
|
|
|
12-01-2008, 08:18 PM
|
#8
|
Resident Avatar Gambler
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,997
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BADDASSC6
Sounds more like Nissan.
Here is my prediction. It will do 0-60 in 3.5 secs ![EEK!](images/smilies/eek.gif) , but in order to obtain that kind of acceloration you will need to launch the car at 5000-6000rpm. Mitsubishi will see this abuse when the car is serviced and void the driveline warrenty. The previous Evos had limiters to prevent such abuse. If I remember correctly they were limited to 4,500 rpm when the clutch was not engaged (please correct me if I'm wrong). They also came equiped with a insanely weak clutch.
I really like this car. I think it will be a track terror (not talking shit, really). I'm considering either an Evo 8/9 or a C5 for a track only car.
|
I think I'd probably choose a C5 Z06 for a track only car, but an EVO8/9 would also be a solid choice.
|
|
|
12-06-2008, 08:23 PM
|
#9
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 96
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BADDASSC6
Sounds more like Nissan.
Here is my prediction. It will do 0-60 in 3.5 secs ![EEK!](images/smilies/eek.gif) , but in order to obtain that kind of acceloration you will need to launch the car at 5000-6000rpm. Mitsubishi will see this abuse when the car is serviced and void the driveline warrenty. The previous Evos had limiters to prevent such abuse. If I remember correctly they were limited to 4,500 rpm when the clutch was not engaged (please correct me if I'm wrong). They also came equiped with a insanely weak clutch.
I really like this car. I think it will be a track terror (not talking shit, really). I'm considering either an Evo 8/9 or a C5 for a track only car.
|
The new evos have a factory 2 step at 6k rpms! ![Thumbs Up](images/smilies/thumbsup.gif) (but the stock clutch sucks) and the turbos spool up quicker now due to the intake mivec ,exhaust mivec and better flowing heads! FP reds are spooling similiar to stock(just a lil more lag)! as for that thing doing 0to60 in 3.5 seconds. I dont think it will!
if you look at other 400flywheel hp evo x's you might be able to get a idea of what this will do! which wont matter cause we wont see it here and its not worth the price! ![Smack](images/smilies/smack.gif)
__________________
2008 WW Evo X
HBS tuned 404awhp 354tq 91oc-Tang!
2005 Yamaha R6
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
|
|
12-11-2008, 01:40 AM
|
#10
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,850
|
How is it that guys like CornFed are putting down 500hp if the old trans will only hold up to 330ft lbs?
I worry about the integrity of my trans at a 450 ft lb torque rating and I don't even have AWD to help tear it up.
__________________
I <3 forced induction.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|