2003 Mitsubishi Lancer Evo Vs. Top Dollar German Performance Cars

Road courseThe Streets of Willow Springs road course provided the requisite lapping backdrop. Three point six nine seconds covered the field with the Porsche leading by 1.12 seconds over the EVO. Most of this margin can be attributed to the Porsche's huge grip, rather than any power advantage. With higher midcorner speed and marginally better brakes, driving the 911 quickly is easier on the track than on the street.

As usual, the EVO was stable and easy to drive around the Streets. Managing understeer at corner exit was the key to quick lap times, but reeling in the Porsche seemed out of the question. Still, it was 0.67 seconds quicker than the absolutely brilliant M3.

We say brilliant because the M3 is perhaps the most rewarding track car of the bunch. With dynamic fundamentals that are simply as good as any road car in the world, the M3 is a joy on a racetrack. Easy to place, quick to stop, amazingly balanced. It is what a rear-drive sports car should be. And it's considerably faster than the S4.

Ah, the S4. Still showing its weight, with faded brakes and a hot engine in just four laps. And it's best time was the slowest of the day, 1.9 seconds slower than the M3.

AccelerationAs expected, the best times in the all-wheel-drive EVO, S4 and C4S were achieved with high revs and painful clutch slip. On the other hand, the M3 required a bit of finesse with the throttle and clutch. All runs were made with the M3's Sport mode activated and all electronic watchdogs (i.e. traction control) turned off.

At the end of the day, the Porsche and M3 tied for the top position, both putting down 13.6-second runs at 103.4 and 104 mph, respectively. The Audi laid down a 13.8-second run at 100.6 mph while the EVO was slowest with a 14.0-second run at 97.7 mph. Obviously, this pass was considerably slower than the EVO's usual 13.4-second pace at 103 mph (see data, page 58), which would've put it ahead of all three Germans.

The problem was two-fold: First, the EVO we used in this test is the same car we've run through two previous instrumented tests and its clutch wasn't up to the task. Second, it was hot. The day's temperature ranged between 89 and 93 degrees during instrumented testing and the EVO simply isn't as quick in the heat as the normally aspirated cars in this test. We suspect even a good clutch wouldn't put the EVO on pace with the quickest Germans in these conditions, but it would certainly be a much closer race.

We also performed roll-on testing to illustrate the advantages of normally aspirated power delivery. We measured each car's accereration from 5 mph roll to 60 mph and 5 mph to 100 mph. The telling results are in a data chart on pages 54 and 56.

Handling and brakingThe EVO's handling numbers also suffered in the heat, but it still held its own. Through the slalom, it was easily the fastest of the group, posting a 72.3-mph pass to the Porsche's 69.2 mph run. The M3 was right on the 911's heels at 69.0 mph while the Audi split the cones at 68.0 mph.

Around the skidpad, the 911 eked into the lead at .94g to the EVO's .93g. The M3 circled at .91g while the S4 managed only .88g.

Braking was also very close with all four cars stopping from 60 mph within 8 feet of each other. The M3 stopped shortest at 110 feet, followed by the 911 (112 ft.), the EVO (113 ft.) and the S4 (118 ft.).

ConclusionOver fast backroads it's a driver's contest between the 911, M3 and EVO. Both the 911 and EVO are surefooted, precise tools for disecting two-lane driver's roads. And what the M3 lacks in all-wheel-drive confidence and outright grip, it makes up in pure driving reward. It's more fun than any car here on the right road even if it's not the fastest.

Given the over-the-road driving character, lap times, price and tuning potential (see sidebar page 66), it's hard to pick anything but the EVO as the winner of this contest. Giving up some straight-line performance (on a very hot day) to the Germans means little when you consider the EVO was on pace or leading the pack in all the other excercises, and it costs 35 to 65 percent less than the German cars. We'll give up some street cred any day for that kind of performance.

By every measure it appears that the days of spending more to go fast are over.

The Dyno:What Happened?Dyno testing all-wheel-drive cars isn't easy. Hell, for that matter, dyno testing an M3 isn't easy. We ran into numerous problems during the course of this test, which prevented our usual dyno numbers from being included in the final results.

First, our attempts to dyno the 911 resulted in a very angry viscous coupling. The front and rear rollers on HKS' all-wheel-drive Dynojet are different sizes and weights, which forced the Porsche's viscous coupling to work overtime trying to equalize the speed difference between the front and rear wheels. We gave up when the 911 began to protest on the first pull.

The M3, despite being two-wheel drive, is also remarkably dyno proof. Its electro-trickery requires the front and rear wheels to be moving at the same speed or it won't allow maximum engine speed. The engine simply stops revving at 6500 rpm on the dyno. The problem persisted even with the wheel speed sensors disabled.

With half the field unable to complete the dyno test, we scrapped the idea altogether.

Vishnu EVO: Stage Zero plusWith $4,200 in mods, the EVO is the undisputed king

We knew going in that the stock EVO would have its hands full in a comparison test against Germany's best. We figured throwing in an EVO with some hot rod parts would help level the playing field.It did. Significantly.

Vishnu Tuning's Stage Zero EVO was along for this entire test, including the road driving portion where it simply dominated. Every editor emerged from the Vishnu car amazed by how much a few mild changes improved the car. Mods to the Vishnu EVO include a remapped ECU using the Xede piggyback computer, turbo-back exhaust, a larger adjustable rear anti-roll bar, an aftermarket clutch, Ferodo brake pads and lighter Volk wheels. It retains the stock Yokohama A046 tires in the stock 235/45-17 size. These mods total around $4,200 beyond the cost of the stock EVO, bringing the car's total cost to about $34,000-still 10 grand less than the Audi.

If we had included this car in the test, its domination would be laughable given its cost. Over the road, the Vishnu EVO's additional power and improved handling balance are remarkable, relative to the stock car. Corner exit speeds are ludicrous and it literally smoked the 911 on any road we visited. It was also significantly more fuel efficient than the stock EVO thanks to leaner fuel mapping.

It ran a 13.1-second quarter mile at 105.9 mph in the same conditions where the stock car ran a 14.0, and improved on the stock EVO's skidpad number by .03g, thanks to a larger rear anti-roll bar. Perhaps most telling of its performance enhancements was the lap time of 1:35.79. That's half a second quicker than the 911 and 1.6 seconds quicker than the stock EVO.

The only area where it didn't improve on the stock cars numbers was through the slalom where it was .2 mph off the pace. This is due to the rear-biased handling balance from the larger rear anti-roll bar-a very worthwhile sacrifice.