Even though I own a new Accord 6MT, I sure hope something went wrong with either Motor Trend's test results or Mitsubishi's pre-production Evo X. Why? Because a Honda Accord should not be faster than a Mitsubishi Evo. Period.

But it is.

The January 2008 issue of Motor Trend will contain a road test of a 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution GSR. In it, this Evo takes 15 seconds to reach 100 mph and traps the quarter mile @ 96.9 mph. Even the conservative results of Road & Track put the new Accord 6MT at 100 mph in 14.5 seconds and trapping the quarter mile @ 100 mph...with spin-in-1st-2nd-3rd-gear all season tires.

This just shouldn't be. Why not? Because the Evo is and always has been a factory rally race car that you can drive off the dealer lot and onto a race track. The Accord is not and never has been such a vehicle. Indeed, the Accord simply is an efficient people mover since its inception in 1976.

I will be the first to admit that I didn't buy the new Accord to pull away from an Evo X at speed. Let's hope for Mitsu fans that this road test result was a fluke.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0801_mitsubishi_lancer_evolution_comparison/road_test_data.html

If this is true however the Evo cuts turns like a hot knife through butter and would hand us a plate of humiliation if we raced them on a curvy course.

I've raced a few stock Evo's and STI's in my (now totalled) stock 06 S2000....from 40-100 I would be door ahead of the evo and the STI would be about a door ahead of me....

and my guess is that from 40-100 the 08 Accord is faster than a stock S2000...

so you guys tell me

I agree. That .99 g lateral acceleration is on par with a Z06. The moral of this story is don't follow an EVO X onto a road course! :lmao:

I wouldn't be too surprised. I mean, the 08 V6 6MT can supposedly beat an Acura T............ Ah, nevermind.

Like you said, must've been a fluke because according to Edmunds (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=123357), the Accord V6 6MT does 0-60 in 6.3 secs vs. the Evo's 5.4 sec time, and does the quarter in 14.6 seconds at 101.6 mph vs. the Evo's 14.0 sec @ 96.9 mph.

Wonder if it's a pre-production Evo X because it's slower than the Evo IX.

I wouldn't be too surprised. I mean, the 08 V6 6MT can supposedly beat an Acura T............ Ah, nevermind. Shame, shame...
Like you said, must've been a fluke because according to Edmunds (http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=123357), the Accord V6 6MT does 0-60 in 6.3 secs vs. the Evo's 5.4 sec time, and does the quarter in 14.6 seconds at 101.6 mph vs. the Evo's 14.0 sec @ 96.9 mph.

Wonder if it's a pre-production Evo X because it's slower than the Evo IX.

Just don't see it happening. The V6 is strong for factory spec, but a turbo and AWD? Highly, highly doubt it.

Obviously from a launch any Evo should be able to take the 08 6MT in a quarter mile race...

BUT...if that trap speed of the Evo X is accurate at around 96-97 mph...it would suggest that due to the Honda's higher traps: 99.8 (R&T) and 101.6 (edmunds)....the accord has more overall power.

AND, Like I said, Evo IX's usually trap around 101-103 in the 1/4 mile....and from 40-100 my S2000 was basically even with them. And AP2's trap 13.9-14.1 at 99-100 mph.....

So I'm guessing drivers race....or small advantage Accord

God, I can't believe that this thread exists.

Evo>TL>Accord.

That is how the world spins...everyone knows this...the Accord is a family sedan with a "bigish" engine...nothing more.

I can't even believe someone would think to compare the superior driving Evo to an Accord......

God, I can't believe that this thread exists.

Hell, why not?

It's fun!

Is the Accord a Evo? No! But it's still a kick to consider!

God, I can't believe that this thread exists.

+1
I got a good laugh out of it... :lmao:

Come on guys your comparing oranges to apples. The EVO is faster than the accord, PERIOD!! No discussions and wishful thinking!

Tha magaine i read about the new EVO did 0-60 in less than 5 seconds!
Thats fastttttttttt....

Now if you want to compare an EVO to a 08 IS-350, then it would be a close call!

The EVO and STI are only quick off the line because of AWD. Going from a roll they're not that impressive. Handling on a track would be another story.

I've raced a few stock Evo's and STI's in my (now totalled) stock 06 S2000....from 40-100 I would be door ahead of the evo and the STI would be about a door ahead of me....

and my guess is that from 40-100 the 08 Accord is faster than a stock S2000...

so you guys tell me

I am not gonna even argue with you ..... :lmao:

God, I can't believe that this thread exists.

why not? look at the general concept of many of the threads started by the OP......

accord si vs. nissan (http://www.driveaccord.net/forums/showthread.php?t=9510)

accord si (http://www.driveaccord.net/forums/showthread.php?t=9258)

performance upgrades (http://www.driveaccord.net/forums/showthread.php?t=12623)

times... (http://www.driveaccord.net/forums/showthread.php?t=13054)

he seems to think he bought, if he really did, a race car..... although a good performer, the accord is still not designed as an EVO with the purpose of driving agressively....

God, I can't believe that this thread exists.

+1

Dream on...300+ HP + probably significantly lighter = Accord looses

why not? look at the general concept of many of the threads started by the OP......

accord si vs. nissan (http://www.driveaccord.net/forums/showthread.php?t=9510)

accord si (http://www.driveaccord.net/forums/showthread.php?t=9258)

performance upgrades (http://www.driveaccord.net/forums/showthread.php?t=12623)

times... (http://www.driveaccord.net/forums/showthread.php?t=13054)

he seems to think he bought, if he really did, a race car..... although a good performer, the accord is still not designed as an EVO with the purpose of driving agressively....

excellent point. the accord si thread was my favorite by far though.

Let's put this in full context. The Mitsubishi Evolution X is one of the top supercars in Japan alongside the Nissan Skyline and Subaru WRX STI. The Honda Accord 6MT has no business being as fast as or faster than any of these cars because it simply is a derivative of a family sedan.

Now look at the test data from Motor Trend (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0801_mitsubishi_lancer_evolution_comparison/road_test_data.html) and Road & Track (http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/1107_rt_dp_accordCoupe.pdf):

0-30: 1.6 seconds (Evo X), 2.3 seconds (Accord 6MT)
0-60: 5.4 seconds (Evo X), 5.9 seconds (Accord 6MT)
0-90: 11.9 seconds (Evo X), 11.9 seconds (Accord 6MT)
0-100: 15.0 seconds (Evo X), 14.5 seconds (Accord 6MT)

These results show that the Evo X gets a jump on the Accord 6MT due to its AWD launch on sticky summer tires. But once the Accord 6MT stops spinning its tires (after 60 mph), it catches up to the EVO X and passes it.

Now to avoid confusing an AWD launch on sticky tires with acceleration, imagine if these cars swapped tires so that the Evo gets the Accords' ice skates and the Accord gets the Evo's gummy treads. Or better yet, imagine a rolling race from 30 mph to 120 mph. In such a case, the Evo would be hapless as the Accord 6MT shows its taillights to the Evo every time.

My concern is not that Honda made the Accord too fast. My concern is that Mitsubishi made the Evo too slow.

Accord Si thread FTMFW :lmao:

:screwy:

anyone wanna re-open that thread???? :naughty: :nuts:

:screwy:

anyone wanna re-open that thread???? :naughty: :nuts:

No thanks, we don't need that crap again :paranoid:

Let's put this in full context. The Mitsubishi Evolution X is one of the top supercars in Japan alongside the Nissan Skyline and Subaru WRX STI. The Honda Accord 6MT has no business being as fast as or faster than any of these cars because it simply is a derivative of a family sedan.

Now look at the test data from Motor Trend (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0801_mitsubishi_lancer_evolution_comparison/road_test_data.html) and Road & Track (http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/1107_rt_dp_accordCoupe.pdf):

0-30: 1.6 seconds (Evo X), 2.3 seconds (Accord 6MT)
0-60: 5.4 seconds (Evo X), 5.9 seconds (Accord 6MT)
0-90: 11.9 seconds (Evo X), 11.9 seconds (Accord 6MT)
0-100: 15.0 seconds (Evo X), 14.5 seconds (Accord 6MT)

These results show that the Evo X gets a jump on the Accord 6MT due to its AWD launch on sticky summer tires. But once the Accord 6MT stops spinning its tires (after 60 mph), it catches up to the EVO X and passes it.


OK, so your comparing numbers published from two DIFFERENT Magazines tested at different road conditions in different environments... So it would only look good on paper.
Granted the Accord has POS shit tires, becuase its a family car equipped it with Grand Toursing All Season tires. Installing better tires would give it a better launch, and perhpas
shave off 0.2~0.3 seconds but still im sure it would still be behind the EVO (evo being lighter)

BUT i dont think that the EVO does 0-100 in 15 seconds, maybe 14~14.5 would be more accurate.


Now to avoid confusing an AWD launch on sticky tires with acceleration, imagine if these cars swapped tires so that the Evo gets the Accords' ice skates and the Accord gets the Evo's gummy treads. Or better yet, imagine a rolling race from 30 mph to 120 mph. In such a case, the Evo would be helpless as the Accord 6MT shows its taillights to the Evo every time.

My concern is not that Honda made the Accord too fast. My concern is that Mitsubishi made the Evo too slow.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a155/finny76/icons/crackup.gif

The accord is fast BUT not that fast. It gets old real quick!

Let's put this in full context. The Mitsubishi Evolution X is one of the top supercars in Japan alongside the Nissan Skyline and Subaru WRX STI. The Honda Accord 6MT has no business being as fast as or faster than any of these cars because it simply is a derivative of a family sedan.

Now look at the test data from Motor Trend (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0801_mitsubishi_lancer_evolution_comparison/road_test_data.html) and Road & Track (http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/1107_rt_dp_accordCoupe.pdf):

0-30: 1.6 seconds (Evo X), 2.3 seconds (Accord 6MT)
0-60: 5.4 seconds (Evo X), 5.9 seconds (Accord 6MT)
0-90: 11.9 seconds (Evo X), 11.9 seconds (Accord 6MT)
0-100: 15.0 seconds (Evo X), 14.5 seconds (Accord 6MT)

These results show that the Evo X gets a jump on the Accord 6MT due to its AWD launch on sticky summer tires. But once the Accord 6MT stops spinning its tires (after 60 mph), it catches up to the EVO X and passes it.

Now to avoid confusing an AWD launch on sticky tires with acceleration, imagine if these cars swapped tires so that the Evo gets the Accords' ice skates and the Accord gets the Evo's gummy treads. Or better yet, imagine a rolling race from 30 mph to 120 mph. In such a case, the Evo would be hapless as the Accord 6MT shows its taillights to the Evo every time.

My concern is not that Honda made the Accord too fast. My concern is that Mitsubishi made the Evo too slow.

Did you even read the comparo?? They werent even using a production Evo X:

Although we tried to get our hands on a topline Evo X MR, replete with a new Getrag six-speed dual-clutch "TC-SST" transmission, Bilstein dampers, Eibach springs, 18-inch forged BBS wheels, and two-piece front brake rotors, the timing of our test and vehicle availability meant we got dealt a preproduction, base GSR. With a standard five-speed manual, a KYB suspension, cast Enkei wheels, and one-piece front brake rotors, the GSR is the less polished of the two Evos, but it still boasts all the X's essentials-a 295-horse (estimated) 4B11 turbocharged aluminum-block engine, Brembo brakes with larger discs (+1.2 inches front, +1.0 rear), and the Super All-Wheel Control system that encompasses an Active Center Differential, stability control, Sport ABS, and, new for this year, AYC, which apportions torque between the rear wheels. A close illustration of a production example, our early-build GSR did suffer from one "handbuilt" niggle: an asthmatic engine that seemed to suffer respiratory attacks near redline, a symptom Mitsubishi says was most likely an engine-control gremlin that would be sorted by production. Under normal driving conditions, the four-banger, as well as all the mechanicals around it, performed flawlessly, but as the tach needle tickled 7000 rpm, the engine came down with a soft wheeze, a symptom that most likely cost the X a 10th or two at the track and dragstrip.

Did you even read the comparo?? They werent even using a production Evo X:

Yes I stated that in the first sentence of this thread.

Yes I stated that in the first sentence of this thread.


Well the EVOX (pre) is slower than the Evo IX. Infact they should have not even published this test because its a Pre Produciton car. Oh well!