Evo X
06-28-2011, 06:49 PM
#31
Originally Posted by CosmosMpower' timestamp='1308665422' post='20704140
Either way for a 30K car it's still not acceptable.
06-29-2011, 05:44 AM
#32
yea i do agree the interior of the previous evo's screamed cheap, but the X is somewhat passable
i didn't buy one for the luxurious interior LOL, if i wanted that i would have gotten an is350
which i was cross shopping along with the evo X and STI.
i got my 2010 gsr for 31999 and 3200 in parts and a tune later, i'm having fun with 336whp
i didn't buy one for the luxurious interior LOL, if i wanted that i would have gotten an is350
which i was cross shopping along with the evo X and STI.
i got my 2010 gsr for 31999 and 3200 in parts and a tune later, i'm having fun with 336whp
06-29-2011, 02:05 PM
#33
Registered User
Originally Posted by secondreality' timestamp='1309103991' post='20720565
The interior is awful when you compare to other cars in the 35-40k range, especially if you throw used options out there. I would take a 135i for similar price over the Evo X (which, btw, has the smallest trunk this side of a S2000) and ended up buying a used IS-F for less than they would go on a Evo X MR. I also felt that my 2006 STI had just as good, if not better, interior than the 2010 Evo X.
The Evo (and STI for that matter) were excellent value when they first came out in the US because they outperformed everything in the price range. Unfortunately they have not advanced as much as the competition since that time, and today I think they are both just overpriced compared to other options.
The Evo (and STI for that matter) were excellent value when they first came out in the US because they outperformed everything in the price range. Unfortunately they have not advanced as much as the competition since that time, and today I think they are both just overpriced compared to other options.
I agree, I love my STi interior as well.
People got to keep in mind that the Evo is not a luxury vehicle and it is not promoted to be one.
To the OP, if you like the Evo, you should jump into one soon as Mitsu is gonna kill them off.
06-29-2011, 02:28 PM
#34
Registered User
From my company's facebook wall, directly from mitsubishi:
they will be making a 2012 evo and I would expect it to go forward from there. From talks we have had directly with them they appear to be intent on keeping the evo alive. At a minimum there will be a 2012 evo.
they will be making a 2012 evo and I would expect it to go forward from there. From talks we have had directly with them they appear to be intent on keeping the evo alive. At a minimum there will be a 2012 evo.
06-29-2011, 06:38 PM
#36
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I test drove an EVO X GSR last year when I started shopping for something else to get into (been in the Subaru game since 2005). The car is nice and is a lot of fun to drive but I just couldn't pull the trigger on it. The interior leaves much to be desired but I wouldn't call that a deal breaker. I actually liked how the instrument cluster was laid out. The steering wheel was very nice too and smaller than the one in my STI which I liked a lot. I loved the seats, much more comfortable than the STI seats, but I'm a pretty skinny guy so some might consider them a little small/uncomfortable. During the test drive I got to take a couple twisty back roads and the EVO handled very nice. I would say in stock form it handled just about as good as my STI with some light suspension mods. Steering in general felt great, partly because of the smaller steering wheel I'm sure. Didn't care for the shifter/5-speed, it felt cheap and clunky. The car also felt very laggy cruising around compared to the STI. Maybe I wasn't winding out the gears enough? Who knows. I'm sure a tune would help a lot with that.
Bottom line, it's an awesome car but it's not for everyone. After I drove it, I had a new respect for the car but I knew it wasn't for me. Still love the Subarus but I am planning to get into an s2k here soon
Bottom line, it's an awesome car but it's not for everyone. After I drove it, I had a new respect for the car but I knew it wasn't for me. Still love the Subarus but I am planning to get into an s2k here soon
06-30-2011, 08:37 AM
#37
Registered User
That's great to hear!
06-30-2011, 08:53 AM
#38
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Easton
Posts: 5,642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see the interior argument for the X much the same way that I see it on the C6 vettes. People compare the interiors to other cars either in the same price range that are nowhere near them in the performance category, or they compare them to other cars with the same amount of performance, but cost much more. Yes a c6 is not going to have the same interior quality as a 911, but it also costs a lot less, and still has as good if not better performance.
The idea of both of these cars is to offer better performance than other similarly priced cars. I cannot think of any car that beats either of these cars in their respective price ranges. The reason that they can do this is because the interior is not as nice as cars that cost much more. If an X or C6 had the nicer interior, then they would cost a lot more. They would no longer be the performance "bargains" that they are.
That said, I feel that the interior quality in both cars that I have listed is more than adequate for what they do, and how much they cost.
People saying that they want their 35-40k car to have the interior of a 40k car instead of a 25-30k car, need to stop looking at it like they are getting short changed on the interior, and look at it like they are getting the performance of a 50k car in an 35-40k car.
The idea of both of these cars is to offer better performance than other similarly priced cars. I cannot think of any car that beats either of these cars in their respective price ranges. The reason that they can do this is because the interior is not as nice as cars that cost much more. If an X or C6 had the nicer interior, then they would cost a lot more. They would no longer be the performance "bargains" that they are.
That said, I feel that the interior quality in both cars that I have listed is more than adequate for what they do, and how much they cost.
People saying that they want their 35-40k car to have the interior of a 40k car instead of a 25-30k car, need to stop looking at it like they are getting short changed on the interior, and look at it like they are getting the performance of a 50k car in an 35-40k car.
This is a very apt comparison, except that at least the Evo gets the seats and steering wheel right, easily two of the most important ingredients in a performance car interior. GM could learn from that.
I'd be all over a Evo X if it weren't for the poor mileage and minuscule trunk. I desperately want a driver's car as my daily, but sadly that daily routine involves far too many highway miles and weekend family hauling to completely ignore these shortcomings.
Who's buys Evos for these things, amiright? I'd argue a whole lot more people if they did a better job in these departments.
06-30-2011, 09:31 AM
#39
Registered User
at least the Evo gets the seats and steering wheel right
I'm sorry but I just don't get why so many people hate the vettes. They are the perfect balance of street vs track. Hey are very comfortable, very fast, and a set of Hoosier tires away from being just about the fastest street car at any track day you go to. If you want a nicer interior, and still want the same performance, spend twice as much and get a 911 turbo or R8.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post