Skip to main content

2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Evo MR Test - A Closer Look

"True, the Evo MR is an aged dog. Its equipment is antiquated." Who would have thought this would be how to describe an Evo? It has basically been unchanged since its introduction. In fact, the pictures posted here are from Mitsubishi's website. A link that takes you to a flickr Mitsubishi account where the pictures are titled 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution.

 The Lancer Evolution has always been a performance bargain, offering performance that nothing in its budget did but, with a starting price that's as close as makes no difference $40,000 and no updates since its introduction, that's no longer the case. You can get Camaros, Mustangs and Challengers that are faster and quicker now. Many people now know that a Camaro SS 1LE or a Mustang GT Track Pack are hugely capable on a track and can easily beat an Evo but would struggle to believe that a Challenger would beat an Evo on the track but during Car and Driver Lightning Lap features, a 2011 Challenger SRT8 392 did a best lap of 3:09.4 while a 2011 Lancer Evo SE did a best of 3:10.6. You can get the same important suspension and drivetrain bits in a Challenger R/T now with the Scat Pack without the luxury features and it starts just under $40,000.

Some would say the Evo is a couple of bolt ons and a tune away from having enough power to pull away and they would be right. But the Challenger is a big soft GT at heart and I would fully expect a set of stiffer springs and dampers that make it anywhere near as stiff as an Evo plus wider wheels and tires to match the newfound poise to easily extend that lead. I do know that Evos have immense potential when fully built with enough power to take advantage of the available grip due to the AWD system but that's more effort, time and money than most people want to put into their cars.

If domestics aren't your cup of tea, you can go for a Golf R, which would be far, far more refined and comfortable, you would think you were in a Mercedes S-Class if you sit in one right after you jump out of an Evo. If you don't mind spending a few grand more and step in the mid $40k's territory, you could get a lightly optioned M235i or an S3. The same applies to a 335i, although to get a 335i close to that price range, you would have to leave all the option boxes unchecked and you would probably be hard pressed to find such an example on a dealer lot. Still, it shows you what's available in that price range. You could also give up some performance for luxury and get a well optioned A4 or 328i or step back into domestic territory and get a Chevy SS or a Charger SRT8. Much, much more car for the money and a lot more performance.

I will admit, when you stop looking at numbers and only consider the experience, it will be very different for the Evo compared to any of the other cars mentioned above. The little mechanical noises and lack of comfort that all the others lack will make you hate it on a long trip but feel a lot more "raw" when you start pushing it. And save for maybe the SS 1LE, the Mustang GT and the M235i, the Evo will feel much more agile and direct. Of course, there's also something the Evo can't give you which is the RWD driving dynamics. I've driven a new Evo GSR a few years ago and I had a lot of respect for it and what it can do but the AWD system, while very impressive, made the driving experience feel lacking anywhere short of a track. I came away very impressed but not in love. 

After looking at the numbers, though, one thing becomes clear.  The traction of the AWD system in the Evo is unmatched. Except for the Golf R and the Audi S3, all the cars below have been proven to be faster than the Evo around VIR during Car and Driver testing. The new Mustang hasn't participated in a Lightning Lap yet but the S197 Mustang GT Brembo was quicker than the Evo. The S197 Track Pack was quicker than that around a track and the new S550 Mustang GT Track Pack is even quicker. The Challenger R/T Scat Pack should be at least as quick as a 2011 SRT8 392 since it gets the same running gear and should be slightly lighter without the luxury features. Yet, their average g numbers in the MT figure-eight test are far behind the Evo despite being close in terms of time and the Camaro actually matching it. The secret? Traction, I think.

As the cars go around the figure eight, there's turning as you go through the number eight "top" and "bottom" curves, there's acceleration as you exit these turns and there's braking as you approach them. All the acceleration, braking and turning g forces contribute to the overall average g. All the cars are very comparable in terms of braking and lateral grip, with the Camaro actually being much better on the brakes. The three muscle cars are far ahead in terms of acceleration and the BMW, Golf and the Subaru are still significantly faster. These cars couldn't have lost that much in the "straight" sections in the figure eight, the braking going in the turns or going through the turns. The only possible section where the Evo could make that big a difference is corner exit; being able to distribute as much power as possible to the wheels with the most grip. This confirms the potential of Evos with a lot of power I was referring to earlier.

Test    Ford Mustang GT Track Pack          Chevy Camaro SS 1LE       
0-60 mph4.44.4
1/4 mile12.8 sec @ 112.2 mph12.9 sec @ 110.5 mph
60-0 mph braking107 ft99 ft
Lateral g-force0.960.98
MT figure-eight24.7 sec @ 0.84 g24.5 sec @ 0.87 g
Starting price (USD)$35,420$38,000
Difference (USD)-$4,385-$1,805

Test Dodge Challenger R/T Scat Pack                BMW M235i               
0-60 mph4.2 sec4.4 sec
1/4 mile12.6 sec @ 112.313.0 sec @ 106.6 mph
60-0 mph braking108 ft103 ft
Lateral g-force0.89 g0.97g 
MT figure-eight25.5 sec @ 0.81 g24.9 sec @ 0.78 g
Starting price (USD)$39,490$44,025
Difference (USD)-$315$4,220

Test                      Audi S3                        Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X MR  
0-60 mph4.7 sec5.1 sec
1/4 mile13.4 sec @ 102.4 mph13.8 sec @ 99.7 mph
60-0 mph braking113 ft105 ft
Lateral g-force0.92 g0.98 g
MT figure-eight25.2 sec @ 0.81 g24.5 sec @ 0.94 g
Starting price (USD)$41,995$39,805
Difference (USD)$2,190$0

Test                    VW Golf R                                Subaru WRX STi          
0-60 mph4.5 sec4.6 sec
1/4 mile13.1 sec @ 104.9 mph13.1 sec @ 104.4 mph
60-0 mph braking108 ft108 ft
Lateral g-force0.94 g0.97 g
MT figure-eight24.9 sec @ 0.85 g24.9 sec @ 0.79 g
Starting price (USD)$37,415$38,190
Difference (USD)-$2,390-$1,615

To be fair, the Evo does come cheaper and with a manual (better in my opinion) in the GSR trim but it would be slower because of less aggressive shocks and springs and the slower transmission. At the end of the day, though, I don't think the Evo's AWD grip is enough to bring more than very few new fans to the Evo in its final year of production. The power advantage of the Mustang, Challenger, Camaro and M235i have shown to be more than enough to make up for the traction advantage. I am really surprised to see the Evo die this way, as I thought it would always be a tough competitor in the segment. With a lacklustre lineup, Mitsubishi's future in North America is questionable and so is the Evo's rumoured hybrid replacement. Unless you're a diehard fan, you probably will decide that you can get much more for your money if you decide on any of the cars above. In the case of the of Mustang, you'll save a good chunk of change and end up with a manual V8 RWD car. I know what my choice would be.

Notes: Prices include Distination. Difference in price is compared to the Evo MR. Tests are on different days, so the numbers may be slightly different in relation when tested on the same day.


Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.

Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.

🔥 Most Visited This Week

Falken Azenis RT615k+ Street and Track Review

Last year, I picked up a 2009 Lancer Ralliart to do a long term test with it as a dual duty track/daily. One of the first things I knew I was going to do was put a decent set of tires on it. The car came without OEM wheels which was actually good because I didn't have to hesitate about getting a good set of aftermarket wheels to support going wider. Thankfully, my friends at YST Auto Halifax  set me up with a great set of Superspeed RF03RR wheels. The Wheels I had never even heard of Superspeed but I trusted the good folk at YST Auto who mentioned some customer cars running on track with them. These wheels are rotary forged which is basically a prerequisite to be taken seriously in this market populated by companies like TSW and Fast Wheels. The wheels looked like a high quality, well finished wheel and each had a "QC" check sticker on. Just for appearances? Maybe, but I found no defects. The wheels seemed easy to balance (didn't need many weights) and at 18.1 lb. f

Michelin Pilot Super Sports vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 - Street Review

I've been a huge fan of Michelin PSS tires and exclusively bought them for the Mustang over the last four years. So how did I end up here? This year, I was hugely interested in trying an "R-comp" tire. I had my eyes set on Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's for two simple reasons: price and reputation. Although not a true "R-comp" tire on paper, it performs like one by the account of every single test and review I've read (down to wear rates...). They seem like they're easily the most affordable (from a big brand) R-comp tire and combine that with a reputation for having tons of grip, it was an easy top contender. I had my concerns, though. For one, I'm told and have read that they are an autox tire, not really designed for high speed, pressure, and temps associated with open track. For another, the Mustang is a heavy car (as far as track cars are concerned) being roughly 3,800 lb. (including driver), which will amplify the unwanted open track load

2004 Audi TT 3.2 Quattro DSG Track Review

Before getting into this, I have to confess something... I had never driven an Audi TT before. Not until this one, anyway. But that hasn't stopped me from forming an opinion about it from the comforts of my own couch while reading and watching reviews online. After all, if you've never done that, do you even know what the point of the internet is? Now, we all interpret reviews differently. Call it confirmation bias if you will, but if you like a car, you'll read a review and look at the positives as what makes the car great and the negatives are but a few quibbles you have to live with. If you don't like a car, the positives are a few things the manufacturer got right while screwing up everything else. It's a bit harsh to put the TT in the latter category, but that's where it ended up for me... I never took the TT seriously. The problem with the TT for me isn't that it's a Golf underneath, per se. There is nothing wrong with a performance car sharing a

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's vs Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's

I never thought I'd ever run Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's on my 2012 Boss 302. The cost is astronomical and they are supposed to last the least of anything comparable. So how did I end up with (nearly) fresh Sport Cup 2's? A complete fluke. I came across a lightly used set with only a few hundred miles and no track time; 305/30/19 takeoffs from a GT Performance Pack Level 2 (GT PPL2). I knew my 71R's were getting very worn before the season started and likely wouldn't last the whole season, even this short one. The price was far better than a new set of RE-71R's, a little more than half, and local Time Attack rules (Canadian Automobile Sport Clubs) recently made 180 and 200 TW tires equivalent, meaning no PAX or PIP point penalty for going with 180 TW tire like the Pilot Sport Cup 2's. I have been very curious about how PSC2's compare to RE 71R's but I stayed away due to their being painfully expensive and, up to last year, their 180 TW rating would