First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
A car that you were very disappointed in.
711 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 4/8/09

BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:


BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:


BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:

evo x....it just looks retarded....i mean why the hell does the body have to look exactly the same as the lancer (yea there are a few cosmetic differences) the only difference is whats INSIDE the car (evo equip.) any person who don't know jack about asian cars would automatically say that its a lancer from almost any view angle...the other evos didn't do that (the idiots can see the difference in prev. evos)

i had a choice to buy the new evo x or the evo ix....i never regret having the ix



what does looks matter? as long as the parts are functional, thats all that matters. people dont buy evos for the looks of it, they buy it for the performance, which the evo x delivers, and much better than the previous generations i might add


the prev evo's beat all the sti's in every performance aspect....the new one doesn't




I dont know where you get your information from but you have been misinformed.


i hear that the new sti's have a higher top speed than the X....dont know about the MR tho


So automatically top speed=better car? Motortrend and Car and Driver along with Grassroot racing prefer the new evo x's over the STI. Not only that but so do many auto X'ers and circuit drivers. Although in a straight line its slower (safety=weight), in corners, it KILLS the STI. Not to mention if you take into account a couple of mods, the Evo X responds MUCH better. Bolt on the same mods and let them run each other and the Evo X wil EAT up the STI, in corners AND a straight line.



i think you should reread carefully. All I said was that the new evo didn't beat the new sti in EVERY PERFORMANCE ASPECT (it beats it in just about EVERYTHIG but not in top speed) where as the prev evo beat the sti in EVERY PERFORMACE ASPECT...get it straight, and when did i mention that top speed = better car
when you look at a car from its performance aspect you look at its 0-60mph, 60-100mph (i perfer this because lots of cars have great 0-60 but to 100 if rather slower than some of the others), 1/4 mile time, 1 mile time (yes there are people out there that look at the 1 mile run too), top speed run, and then track time.
the evo 9 beat the sti in everyone of these catagory, where as the new evo beat it in everything EXCEPT the top speed run. now do you understand? not tring to be an ass btw.
209 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/8/09

xiongboy wrote:


BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:


BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:


BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:

evo x....it just looks retarded....i mean why the hell does the body have to look exactly the same as the lancer (yea there are a few cosmetic differences) the only difference is whats INSIDE the car (evo equip.) any person who don't know jack about asian cars would automatically say that its a lancer from almost any view angle...the other evos didn't do that (the idiots can see the difference in prev. evos)

i had a choice to buy the new evo x or the evo ix....i never regret having the ix



what does looks matter? as long as the parts are functional, thats all that matters. people dont buy evos for the looks of it, they buy it for the performance, which the evo x delivers, and much better than the previous generations i might add


the prev evo's beat all the sti's in every performance aspect....the new one doesn't




I dont know where you get your information from but you have been misinformed.


i hear that the new sti's have a higher top speed than the X....dont know about the MR tho


So automatically top speed=better car? Motortrend and Car and Driver along with Grassroot racing prefer the new evo x's over the STI. Not only that but so do many auto X'ers and circuit drivers. Although in a straight line its slower (safety=weight), in corners, it KILLS the STI. Not to mention if you take into account a couple of mods, the Evo X responds MUCH better. Bolt on the same mods and let them run each other and the Evo X wil EAT up the STI, in corners AND a straight line.



i think you should reread carefully. All I said was that the new evo didn't beat the new sti in EVERY PERFORMANCE ASPECT (it beats it in just about EVERYTHIG but not in top speed) where as the prev evo beat the sti in EVERY PERFORMACE ASPECT...get it straight, and when did i mention that top speed = better car
when you look at a car from its performance aspect you look at its 0-60mph, 60-100mph (i perfer this because lots of cars have great 0-60 but to 100 if rather slower than some of the others), 1/4 mile time, 1 mile time (yes there are people out there that look at the 1 mile run too), top speed run, and then track time.
the evo 9 beat the sti in everyone of these catagory, where as the new evo beat it in everything EXCEPT the top speed run. now do you understand? not tring to be an ass btw.


I understand where your coming from but how many people are really going to take their car up to its top speed? Why even take that into account when your comparing two cars that are meant for HANDLING? Sure, 0-60 and 60-100 are good times but top speeds are irrelevant, even on tracks like VIR or LCR. Not trying to come off like an ass but your trying to nitpick on one little aspect of the car that doesnt really matter, on the road or track. But who am I to talk, Im a hypocrite myself.

Just a little interesting fact, take a look at the straight line speeds and top speeds for the Nissan GTR. Pretty slow compared to other supercars that make tons more power but still demolishes it all around. You know why? Because people know top speed doesnt equal to jack shit.
711 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 4/8/09

BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:


BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:


BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:


BoostFedEMII wrote:


xiongboy wrote:

evo x....it just looks retarded....i mean why the hell does the body have to look exactly the same as the lancer (yea there are a few cosmetic differences) the only difference is whats INSIDE the car (evo equip.) any person who don't know jack about asian cars would automatically say that its a lancer from almost any view angle...the other evos didn't do that (the idiots can see the difference in prev. evos)

i had a choice to buy the new evo x or the evo ix....i never regret having the ix



what does looks matter? as long as the parts are functional, thats all that matters. people dont buy evos for the looks of it, they buy it for the performance, which the evo x delivers, and much better than the previous generations i might add


the prev evo's beat all the sti's in every performance aspect....the new one doesn't




I dont know where you get your information from but you have been misinformed.


i hear that the new sti's have a higher top speed than the X....dont know about the MR tho


So automatically top speed=better car? Motortrend and Car and Driver along with Grassroot racing prefer the new evo x's over the STI. Not only that but so do many auto X'ers and circuit drivers. Although in a straight line its slower (safety=weight), in corners, it KILLS the STI. Not to mention if you take into account a couple of mods, the Evo X responds MUCH better. Bolt on the same mods and let them run each other and the Evo X wil EAT up the STI, in corners AND a straight line.



i think you should reread carefully. All I said was that the new evo didn't beat the new sti in EVERY PERFORMANCE ASPECT (it beats it in just about EVERYTHIG but not in top speed) where as the prev evo beat the sti in EVERY PERFORMACE ASPECT...get it straight, and when did i mention that top speed = better car
when you look at a car from its performance aspect you look at its 0-60mph, 60-100mph (i perfer this because lots of cars have great 0-60 but to 100 if rather slower than some of the others), 1/4 mile time, 1 mile time (yes there are people out there that look at the 1 mile run too), top speed run, and then track time.
the evo 9 beat the sti in everyone of these catagory, where as the new evo beat it in everything EXCEPT the top speed run. now do you understand? not tring to be an ass btw.


I understand where your coming from but how many people are really going to take their car up to its top speed? Why even take that into account when your comparing two cars that are meant for HANDLING? Sure, 0-60 and 60-100 are good times but top speeds are irrelevant, even on tracks like VIR or LCR. Not trying to come off like an ass but your trying to nitpick on one little aspect of the car that doesnt really matter, on the road or track. But who am I to talk, Im a hypocrite myself.

Just a little interesting fact, take a look at the straight line speeds and top speeds for the Nissan GTR. Pretty slow compared to other supercars that make tons more power but still demolishes it all around. You know why? Because people know top speed doesnt equal to jack shit.


ya true bout the top speed thinging...but then if it dont matter you sometimes wonder why company such as vw (veryon), shelby, and other exotics comes out with cars with really high top speed...plus people out there will actually shell out money to have the car that has the higher top speed. i mean ofcourse you do get what you paid for and those cars have awsome handling, you still wonder why car company keep tring to take the title as "Fastest Production Car". Instead of making the vehicle gain higher top speed y not just invest it to handle corners alot better than it already is...like the elise
22967 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / SF Bay Area, CA (...
Offline
Posted 4/15/09
Any automatic car disappoints me....

A car that disappointed me in terms of exterior design was the 2008 WRX. On a more positive note, the 2009 WRX looks badass compared to the 2008:

2008 Subaru WRX (crap)


2009 Subaru WRX (much better! Notice the darker rims)



The crappy 2008 WRX had a soft floppy suspension and the "outdated" 223HP turbo boxer-4.

The better 2009 WRX has a stiffer track-tuned suspension and an upgrated 265HP turbo boxer-4.
1046 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / Marin County
Offline
Posted 8/6/09
Wow, I thought I was going to original with the Evo X, but obviously I'm preaching to the choir.
My problem with the new Evo is not it's performance. I'm sure it's an awesome car. However, my first run-in with an Evo X was what burned it for me. Before I even saw one in person, I feel like the interior and exterior have regressed in both design and fit/finish. Anyway, my friend and I just finished up lunch, and we wanted to check out the new Evo. We head down to the local Mitsu dealer, and the first thing the wanker of a salesman says it,"upgrading to an Evo?". We're in my friends car, which is a super clean NA1 NSX, which my pampers. Both my friend and I are already off to a bad start. We head into the showroom and make a beeline for the Evo. It's still ugly in person, and then I get to touch it. I remember the last Evo for not being incredibly impressive with materials, but it had it where it counted. The Evo X on the other hand just feels like a Toyota Corolla on the inside with some plastic painted silver to look like metal and some Recaros thrown in. Plastic gas pedal? WTF? The douche of a salesman takes us on a test drive. I'm not going to drive it, as I don't really want to. My friend on the other hand wants to get a feel for it compared to a Evo 9.

Meh. Just sitting in the back seat it was a let down. My friend and I both drive NA cars, and so we're used to instant throttle response. The throttle response in the Evo is a great as a first gen 1.8t motor in a Audi A4. We get back to the dealership, get out and look at the car while it's outside. Still ugly, and we still want to punch the salesman in the nuts. He's says the cars awesome. He told my friend that it's an upgrade from his NSX. The salesman's personal car is a V6 Mustang. Enough said.

In summation, the new Evo looks bad, inside and out.
Posted 8/9/09 , edited 8/20/09
If you think the new Lancer's were bad enough, check out the Sportback version



4902 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Shah Alam, Selangor
Offline
Posted 8/14/09
proton tiara!!!

i don't like the style... it's disgusting!!!
128 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36
Offline
Posted 8/17/09
Enjoy the Subarus now because it seems like they will lose a bit of everything besides gas mileage in the next model change.
78 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
106 / M / ATL,GA
Offline
Posted 8/21/09
yep the evo x what a s***y looking car looks like something my mom would drive
1238 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / toronto
Offline
Posted 4/12/10
impreza's starting from 2006 and on were ugly pieces of shit with wheels.
22967 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / SF Bay Area, CA (...
Offline
Posted 4/13/10
The Nissan GT-R. True d-bag-mobile.

2 pedals, lame...

Funny thing is, the Super GT GT-R is very different from the production GT-R.
408 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 4/14/10

3S-sw20 wrote:

yep the evo x what a s***y looking car looks like something my mom would drive


actually one of the reasons I like it

I like a car that looks inocent but could blow the doors off most things... sleepers ftw...
2063 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Cali
Offline
Posted 4/19/10

firebos7 wrote:


3S-sw20 wrote:

yep the evo x what a s***y looking car looks like something my mom would drive


actually one of the reasons I like it

I like a car that looks inocent but could blow the doors off most things... sleepers ftw...


haha...in my point of view...any car with a big spoiler screams out obvious and does not look like a sleeper at all.
22967 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / SF Bay Area, CA (...
Offline
Posted 4/19/10

Havoc_360 wrote:


firebos7 wrote:


3S-sw20 wrote:

yep the evo x what a s***y looking car looks like something my mom would drive


actually one of the reasons I like it

I like a car that looks inocent but could blow the doors off most things... sleepers ftw...


haha...in my point of view...any car with a big spoiler screams out obvious and does not look like a sleeper at all.


You want a sleeper?

Get a Fo' SHO

(that's what I call the Ford Taurus SHO)
408 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 4/20/10

Havoc_360 wrote:


firebos7 wrote:


3S-sw20 wrote:

yep the evo x what a s***y looking car looks like something my mom would drive


actually one of the reasons I like it

I like a car that looks inocent but could blow the doors off most things... sleepers ftw...


haha...in my point of view...any car with a big spoiler screams out obvious and does not look like a sleeper at all.


well it looks the same as a lancer... which isn't terribly fast ^_^

but no... if I ever win the lottery I'm buying a 94 V6 camry, swapping everything and making it awd..... that would be fun
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.