The Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VII - Part 2

Mitsubishi states that the Evolution VII chassis is 50% more rigid than that of the Evolution VI. Given the 50kg weight rise that's the least Mitsubishi engineers could do. Chassis rigidity is the number one factor in any car's handling abilities and the Mitsubishi numbers are more than encouraging regarding their latest creation. Previous Evo versions already displayed extremely reinforced and rigid bodies but this time the increase in the car's size required a redesign of chassis reinforcements and the numerous new welding points were accompanied by partly seam welded steel sheets just like in full works race cars.

The new car's transmission is were most of the changes took place. The fully equipped GSR/RS-2 version sports a TorSen front and an Active Yaw Control rear differential as previously but the center differential is now an "active" ACD differential that varies its locking characteristic according to inputs from accelerometers and other sensors. One  typical "active" strategy it applies is to stiffen its locking when the car starts negotiating a corner (the braking phase) allowing for maximum deceleration, loosen the locking to negotiate the turn-in phase, stiffen a bit mid-corner allowing more torque to the rear in order to turn more easily and stiffen even more while exiting the corner to provide the maximum grip and acceleration. Well, that is the theory and it is applicable in situations such as track courses where the road surface is even and no major denivelation is present. The problem is that the Lancer is not a track car but rather a rally car. In rallying most of the racing takes place on uneven road surfaces and extremely important denivelations. How do these electronic aids cope with such terrain? Generally badly. Then why are similar systems mounted on works cars you might ask? The answer to this question is that works rally cars are equipped wiht far better and much more evolved systems costing the twice the price of the road-going version of the Lancer Evo VII and these systems are adjustable to fit the driver's needs and the terrain requirements. Unfortunately no empirical solution can be applied and this is the main reason why the presence of such systems is more than questionable in the road-going Lancer Evo.
Note that similar locking characteristic can be achieved through purely mechanical differentials such as the TorSen or more classic disc-based Limited Slip Differentials. We here at rallycars.com are very unfriendly to whatever is electronic and is used as a commercial argument quoting abilities to "help" a car's handling. We feel there's nothing a car can do on its own that its driver can't. We find that the ACD differential has set the Evolution VII to standards that undermine its character and the driver's feel of the car. The single advantage of the ACD differential is the fact that it disconnects the rear axle when the hand brake is pulled. Further proof of the ACD differential's counter performance is the fact that it is replaced by a classic disc-based LSD in GroupN guise.
The gearbox uses new ratios for 1st and 5th gears in the GSR/RS-2 version and super-close ratios in the RS version. The gear material has been improved and so have the gearbox bearings.

The new car's brakes remain unchanged as their performance is satisfactory. Tire size went up a bit to 235/45x17" but the steering ratio is still the very quick 2.2 turns from lock to lock.

Where significant progress has been achieved, compared to the previous Evo, is in the domain of suspension travel. In this field the Evo VI was suffering from too low figures, 163mm front and 160mm rear suspension travel was insufficient to avoid bottoming the suspension without using stiffer than necessary dampers. The new car has added 45mm front and rear travel to the figures above while its ride height has been lowered. The numbers apply to a GroupN , tarmac spec car. A noteworthy step forward.

Overall Mitsubishi offer a commercial package that is more civilized and politically correct than previous versions. The car's look is far less aggressive and its everyday use rendered more realistic than ever before. Of course this new world order leads to a compromise in performance that brings the Evolution VII closer, in performance terms, to BMW and Audi cars than to its predecessors.

The competition car is, as already stated, is a WRC Class car. This class' regulations effectively allow extensive modification of the race version that do not have to be present on the commercial vehicle. However the new car's size is almost the biggest among all WRC cars. Only the Skoda Octavia WRC is longer and the Evolution VII has the longest wheelbase of all the contenders. That big a wheelbase, more than 2600mm, is a warrant of high speed stability but renders the car unwilling to engage in corners. Such a character can, of course, be moderated by the use of active differentials and the appropriate suspension geometry and settings but wouldn't it have been better to start from a healthy base rather than trying to correct the inherent faults of the current one through tricks? The Evo VII was still in its early development stages in the beginning of the 2002 season so it has yet to display its real potential and we trust Mitsubishi did everything in their power to make it competitive against other cars of its class. The car was driven during the 2002 season by the very experienced François Delecour and young Alister McRae. Unfortunately Mitsubishi's financial situation undermined the drivers and engineers efforts. After an awful and unsuccessful 2002 season the company decided to retire from the 2003 WRC in hope of developing a more competitive car.