Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution

Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution: Which Version to Buy and Why

The Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution catalogue covers 10 generations produced from September 1992 to March 2016.

The Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution catalogue covers 10 generations produced from September 1992 to March 2016. Choosing between them is mainly a question of priorities: the lightest listed car is the first-generation 2.0 MT at 1,170 kg; the quickest measured version is the sixth-generation 2.0 MT at 5.2 seconds from 0 to 100 km/h; the highest listed output is 295 hp in the tenth generation; and the ninth generation is the only Estate 5-door, while every other generation is a Sedan. All listed versions use a turbocharged Gasoline inline-four engine, distributed multi-point injection and AWD.

Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution generations compared

First generation, September 1992–December 1993: This Sedan has one version, 2.0 MT. Its 1,997 cc engine produces 250 hp and 309 Nm, paired with a 5-speed Manual gearbox and AWD. At 1,170 kg, it has 4.68 kg per horsepower and approximately 125.2 hp per litre. It reaches 100 km/h in 5.5 seconds and has a measured top speed of 240 km/h.

Second generation, January 1994–January 1995: This Sedan also has one 2.0 MT version. Output rises to 260 hp while torque remains 309 Nm. Kerb weight increases to 1,250 kg, producing a weight-to-power figure of 4.81 kg/hp, versus 4.68 kg/hp for the first generation. Acceleration is 5.6 seconds and top speed is 229 km/h.

Third generation, February 1995–July 1996: The single Sedan 2.0 MT develops 270 hp and 300 Nm from 1,997 cc, equal to approximately 135.2 hp per litre. Its 1,260 kg kerb weight gives 4.67 kg/hp. It records 5.5 seconds to 100 km/h and 241 km/h at the top end. The engine speed at which maximum torque occurs is not measured.

Fourth generation, August 1996–December 1997: Its sole Sedan 2.0 MT has 280 hp and 353 Nm. With 1,350 kg to move, it provides 4.82 kg/hp. Acceleration takes 5.4 seconds and maximum speed is 240 km/h. Ground clearance falls from the third generation’s 175 mm to 155 mm.

Fifth generation, January–December 1998: This Sedan has one 2.0 MT, rated at 280 hp and 373 Nm. Its 1,360 kg kerb weight corresponds to 4.86 kg/hp. Compared with the fourth generation, it adds 20 Nm but also 10 kg. Its measured figures are 5.3 seconds to 100 km/h and 243 km/h.

Sixth generation, January 1999–January 2001: The single Sedan 2.0 MT retains 280 hp and 373 Nm but reduces kerb weight to 1,280 kg. The resulting 4.57 kg/hp is better than the fifth generation’s 4.86 kg/hp. Its 5.2-second acceleration result is the quickest measured figure in this catalogue, while top speed is 250 km/h.

Seventh generation, February 2001–December 2002: This Sedan introduces a choice of two versions. The 2.0 MT has 280 hp, 392 Nm, a 5-speed Manual gearbox and a 1,380 kg kerb weight; it reaches 100 km/h in 5.4 seconds and 250 km/h. The 2.0 AT has 280 hp, 383 Nm, a 5-speed Automatic and a 1,320 kg kerb weight; it takes 6.2 seconds and reaches 242 km/h. The Manual is 0.8 seconds quicker, has 9 Nm more torque and gains 8 km/h in top speed, while the Automatic is 60 kg lighter in the supplied figures.

Eighth generation, January 2003–March 2005: This Sedan has three versions, all named 2.0 MT. The 280 hp, 392 Nm, 5-speed version weighs 1,410 kg and accelerates in 5.9 seconds. The 280 hp, 392 Nm, 6-speed version also weighs 1,410 kg but takes 6.1 seconds. Both reach 245 km/h. The 265 hp, 355 Nm, 5-speed 2.0 MT weighs 1,470 kg, reaches 100 km/h in 6.1 seconds and also tops out at 245 km/h. Against the 265 hp car, either 280 hp version adds 15 hp, saves 60 kg and improves weight per horsepower from 5.55 to 5.04 kg/hp.

Ninth generation, March 2005–December 2006: The only Estate 5-door generation offers three versions. The 272 hp 2.0 AT has 343 Nm, a 5-speed Automatic and a 1,540 kg kerb weight; its 0–100 km/h result is not measured, while top speed is 250 km/h. The 280 hp, 392 Nm 2.0 MT uses a 6-speed Manual and weighs 1,500 kg; its acceleration is not measured and its top speed is 250 km/h. The other 280 hp 2.0 MT has 355 Nm, a 6-speed Manual and a lower 1,465 kg kerb weight; it records 5.7 seconds and 250 km/h. Between the two Manual versions, the 392 Nm car adds 37 Nm but also 35 kg.

Tenth generation, October 2007–March 2016: This Sedan has four listed versions. The 280 hp 2.0 MT produces 422 Nm through a 5-speed Manual and weighs 1,520 kg; acceleration and top speed are not measured. The 280 hp 2.0 DSG also produces 422 Nm, uses a 6-speed Robotic gearbox and weighs 1,540 kg; it reaches 100 km/h in 5.61 seconds, while top speed is not measured. The 295 hp 2.0 DSG develops 366 Nm, weighs 1,590 kg, accelerates in 6.3 seconds and reaches 242 km/h. The 295 hp 2.0 MT develops 366 Nm, weighs 1,560 kg, accelerates in 5.4 seconds and reaches 242 km/h. Between the 295 hp versions, the Manual is 30 kg lighter and 0.9 seconds quicker.

Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution engine specs

Across the range, engine capacity changes only from 1,997 cc to 1,998 cc. Specific output runs from approximately 125.2 hp per litre in the first-generation 2.0 MT to approximately 147.6 hp per litre in either tenth-generation 295 hp version. Maximum listed torque is 422 Nm in the tenth-generation 280 hp 2.0 MT and 2.0 DSG.

Performance and fuel economy

Among versions with complete consumption figures, the ninth-generation 280 hp, 355 Nm 2.0 MT has the lowest combined figure at 10.6 L/100 km. The tenth-generation 295 hp 2.0 MT uses 1.8 L/100 km less combined fuel than the equivalent-power 2.0 DSG, while also accelerating 0.9 seconds faster.

Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution weight, ground clearance and dimensions data

Exterior length, width and height are not measured for every version, and wheel sizes are also not measured throughout the supplied data. The available catalogue measurements are therefore weight, ground clearance and fuel-tank capacity.

Which Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution version should you buy?

For the strongest measured power-to-weight proposition, choose the sixth-generation 2.0 MT. Its 280 hp and 1,280 kg give 4.57 kg/hp, and its 5.2-second acceleration is the best measured result here. It is 80 kg lighter and 0.1 seconds quicker than the fifth-generation car with the same 280 hp and 373 Nm.

For minimum kerb weight, the first-generation 2.0 MT is the clear choice at 1,170 kg. It gives away 30 hp to the sixth generation, yet its 5.5-second result remains only 0.3 seconds slower.

For an Automatic gearbox, compare the seventh-generation 2.0 AT with the ninth-generation 2.0 AT. The ninth-generation version adds 220 kg but loses 8 hp and 40 Nm; both use a 5-speed Automatic, and both have a 55 L tank. The seventh-generation car has measured acceleration and economy figures, while the ninth-generation car’s 0–100 km/h time and fuel consumption are not measured.

For an Estate 5-door body, the ninth generation is the only available choice. Within it, the 280 hp, 355 Nm 2.0 MT is 75 kg lighter than the 272 hp 2.0 AT and has a measured 5.7-second acceleration result. The 280 hp, 392 Nm 2.0 MT provides 37 Nm more torque than the other Manual but weighs 35 kg more.

For maximum horsepower, choose between the tenth-generation 295 hp 2.0 MT and 295 hp 2.0 DSG. The 2.0 MT is the stronger numerical choice: it is 30 kg lighter, 0.9 seconds quicker to 100 km/h and uses 1.8 L/100 km less fuel combined. The 2.0 DSG is the alternative when a 6-speed Robotic gearbox is preferred over the 5-speed Manual.

For maximum torque, consider the tenth-generation 280 hp 2.0 MT and 280 hp 2.0 DSG, both rated at 422 Nm. The Manual saves 20 kg, while the Robotic version supplies a measured 5.61-second acceleration figure. Top speed is not measured for either, and acceleration is not measured for the Manual.

On the supplied figures alone, the sixth-generation 2.0 MT is the performance-led selection, the ninth-generation 280 hp and 355 Nm 2.0 MT is the Estate 5-door and lowest-measured-consumption selection, and the tenth-generation 295 hp 2.0 MT is the best numerical choice among the highest-output versions. Reliability, problems, prices and cars or engines for sale cannot be compared because those values are not measured in the catalogue data.