First off, I was not speaking about the pre 1994 models, they have a 5 speed and less power (300hp / 307tq), and stock to stock would probably beat an FK8 from a dig until 100 to 120mph when the FK8 would pass it, I had a 1992 VR-4, it was much slower than my 1998 VR-4, ran a best of 13.69 @ 101.1mph. It dynod at 248@whp. Also, the base model 3000GT is shit, FWD with 222hp, of course that car would lose to an FK8.
My 1998 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 has 124,000 miles on it, and when I last dynod it it made 292@whp, and that was at 119,856 miles...so these cars don't lose power when taken care of, the guy I go to specializes in the 3000GT platform, he has confirmed that even high mileage (150k plus) 1994 and up VR-4s don't 'lose power' if you maintain them correctly.
Also, he hasn't seen a '94 and up VR-4 make less than 280@whp, the 2g VR-4s were underrated, the 320HP is BS, do the math - he worked in Japan at Mitsubishi in the 90s and knows these cars inside and out. Mitsubishi knew these cars were producing about 345 to 355hp at the crank, some stock ones dyno 310 to 320@whp, and no, that's not a typo. They were going after the R33 Skyline GTR, and Nissan lied about the numbers on the Skyline as well, they also made about 350hp at the crank.
You don't need to believe anything, but I OWN BOTH CARS. I also am familiar with the 3000GT platform AND high powered FWD cars, I owned an 11s EG hatch years ago.
I'll say it again - a 1994 to 1999 3000GT VR-4 is in a different league than an FK8 as far as straight line speed, think more like C5 Corvette level acceleration, or R33/R34 Skyline GTR acceleration.
PLAY BY PLAY, from a dig, the VR4 jumps about 3 car lengths ahead due to AWD, and due to way more displacement, power and more aggressive gearing, is about 4 to 5 car lengths ahead of the FK8 at the 1/4m. The FK8 has GREAT top end, so it makes up about 2 to 3 of those car lengths, but it does NOT have enough top end to close the gap. And at 150mph, the VR-4 is already 2 car lengths or so ahead, so the AWD disadvantage doesn't come into play, plus the FK8 is actually pulling less hard than the VR-4 at that speed. AGAIN, I own BOTH, and have had plenty of seat time in both.
Or think of it this way -
1998 3000GT VR-4 - 13.1s @ 103mph (non generous average)
2017 Civic Type R - 13.7s @ 105mph (generous average)
Thats .6 seconds, or about 5.5 car lengths, that the VR-4 has on the Type R. The Type R is traveling 2mph faster, so it easily makes up about 2 or 3 car lengths of the VR-4s lead - but it's not traveling fast enough to make up that much of a gap. And this is being generous on the FK8s part, as my VR-4 has run 13.0s @ 104 many times.
It's simple science. The VR-4 has AWD that allows it to win immediately, the Type R has FWD that ****s it up immediately. VR-4 has more power, more torque, and twin turbos vs a smaller displacement single turbo engine. Yes, the Type R weighs about 600lbs less and has a better power to weight ratio, so you'd think it may win, but the VR-4s AWD, gearing, power / torque / displacement gives it too many advantages.
The 1994 to 1999 VR-4 is known to pull flat 13s @ 103 to 105mph with a good driver, and the 1994 to 1996 lighter Stealth TT is capable of 12.9s @ 104 to 106mph.
I just don't understand how you can't see this. Even the motoring press has gotten better numbers overall for the VR-4 than the FK8. Again - best run in my 2017 Type R (so far) is a 13.73 @ 104.6mph, my best run in my 1998 3000GT VR-4 (so far) is a email@example.com...thats basically the same trap with a .65s difference in ET, so about 5.3 car lengths at the 1/4m mark.