WRX vs Ralliart Thread...again...
Oct 22, 2009, 03:14 PM
#31
What would have been nice is if they gave the two vehicles the same tires in the same spec size. Giving the RA RE050As and then talking about how great the handling is is really a bit unfair. The RE050As are pretty good tires and I'm sure the WRX's handling (as indicated with slalom and skid pad results) would improve as well.
Oct 22, 2009, 03:48 PM
#32
Evolving Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: INDY
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SmikeEvo - its not funny. Edited.
Like I said take these two cars do up grade for upgrade then run them again. I understand they did the upgrades to the cars they thought were going to improve it the most but, that's was in there opinion and stock tires/heavier model made it unfair. I was surprised at the fact that the brakes on the R/A were considered that bad stock. The brakes IMO are I big improvement over the GTS's. Then again mine hasn't seen any road courses either. Subbies are good cars bullet proof almost, But the R/A is one hell of a building platform to start from. And I am sure that this wont be the last comparison of the new WRX vs. R/A Rivalry.
Like I said take these two cars do up grade for upgrade then run them again. I understand they did the upgrades to the cars they thought were going to improve it the most but, that's was in there opinion and stock tires/heavier model made it unfair. I was surprised at the fact that the brakes on the R/A were considered that bad stock. The brakes IMO are I big improvement over the GTS's. Then again mine hasn't seen any road courses either. Subbies are good cars bullet proof almost, But the R/A is one hell of a building platform to start from. And I am sure that this wont be the last comparison of the new WRX vs. R/A Rivalry.
Last edited by Smike; Oct 22, 2009 at 04:10 PM.
Oct 22, 2009, 04:12 PM
#35
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The WRX is the better performing car out of the box, but the RA is more appealling for me (like several magazine reviews have already pointed out). Blessed with some real Evo hardware, and that clutchless auto-manual tranny which is something you don't normally find standard in a $25K (base) AWD car... it is the ultimate econobox daily driver. If you want it to have decent performance on the track (compared to other cars in the same price range), swap out the tires and tune it... or go all-out w/ full bolt-ons!
Potential counts a lot too. :-) Plus the deals that can be had on these cars, 0% APR & hefty rebates on the Ralliarts, what's not to like?
Potential counts a lot too. :-) Plus the deals that can be had on these cars, 0% APR & hefty rebates on the Ralliarts, what's not to like?
Last edited by tipoytm; Oct 22, 2009 at 04:21 PM.
Oct 22, 2009, 04:19 PM
#36
Evolving Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: INDY
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes its the outlander (Same size as GTS and front vented but with 2 pistons in the front 1 in rear..GTS 1F and 1R) and the Hatch puts on A hefty 138 lbs.
Oct 22, 2009, 04:21 PM
#37
The potential doesn't really hold any water. It's not the WRX is fully tuned from the factory, it has a lot of potential as well, certainly as much as the Ralliart. What it boils down to is what car you personally like. There's no need to rationalize it by diminishing the competition.
Oct 22, 2009, 04:23 PM
#38
Jeez that's a hefty increase for a hatchback.
Oct 22, 2009, 04:28 PM
#39
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The potential doesn't really hold any water. It's not the WRX is fully tuned from the factory, it has a lot of potential as well, certainly as much as the Ralliart. What it boils down to is what car you personally like. There's no need to rationalize it by diminishing the competition.
Since both cars are close in performance (refering to the Edmunds review), it's going to boil down to what the buyer prefers. If I had the money, as I pointed out before... it'll go to the Ralliart.
Oct 22, 2009, 05:03 PM
#41
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 1,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PDF that I downloaded listed the MRT brake upgrade for the Ralliart as $850. I wonder what that could include. 
Also, the "ECU tuning and exhaust" was listed at over $4,000. 
Either way, I'm disappointed in the level of transparency that provided in their written materials. Certainly not worth submitting an email address over.
Maybe there were some materials that I missed, but I'm not too impressed thus far. At this point, I'm just going to start focusing on my own car and individual gains I see from mod to mod.
Also, the "ECU tuning and exhaust" was listed at over $4,000. Either way, I'm disappointed in the level of transparency that provided in their written materials. Certainly not worth submitting an email address over.
Maybe there were some materials that I missed, but I'm not too impressed thus far. At this point, I'm just going to start focusing on my own car and individual gains I see from mod to mod.
Oct 23, 2009, 08:39 AM
#42
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://blogs.edmunds.com/strategies/...mktid=cj260233#
1st place: 2009 Ralliart
2nd place: 2009 WRX
"Though we're sure some of you are surprised that we'd pick an automatic (well, automated-clutch) gearbox over a three pedal car, trust us, the Lancer's tranny is that good. And when you factor in the Mitsubishi's greater sporting character, meaning the superior steering feel, sharper handling and more supportive sport seats, you can see why it won this tight race. True, the Ralliart is more money ($30,065 versus $28,160 for the WRX, but keep in mind it comes with the trick tranny) and needs better tires. But the latter is nothing a few clicks on tirerack.com and a subsequent visit to your local tire shop for an install can't easily fix. The stock tires? We'd sign up for some autocrosses or track days and burn 'em off before we put the new ones on. "
http://www.carsales.com.au/reviews/2...ralliart-14816
"And so to our 'everyday' verdict.
Both cars have their strengths and weaknesses but they don't cross over. The Subaru engine is better, but the Mitsubishi gearbox is far superior. Both are powerful, responsive and provide great bang for the buck.
In a perfect world you'd be able to buy a composite of the two; a Ralliart powered by the WRX engine. But it isn't a perfect world and that being the case, the Ralliart gets our nod.
It may be harder than the Lancer VRX and softer than the Evolution, but the Ralliart has a real sense of purpose. Unlike the WRX that became a hatchback that went soft and is now trying to rediscover its mojo, the Ralliart is the product of a clear mission statement.
So Mitsubishi wins this battle."
http://www.insideline.com/mazda/mazd...-ralliart.html
"Frankly, we're a little confused by Subaru's strategy. It's the most expensive car in the test, yet it's the least involving to drive. And, symmetrical all-wheel drive or not, its powertrain doesn't come close to matching the Ralliart's sophistication or confidence.
The 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart, however, puts up a genuine fight with a good overall driving experience and lots of amenities. If it cost $1,000 less and had better tires, the Ralliart would win this contest hands down."
Last edited by tipoytm; Oct 23, 2009 at 09:03 AM.
Oct 23, 2009, 08:58 AM
#43
So the first one they pick the Ralliart but say nothing about overall driving experience or feel, they're simply enamored by the TC-SST. It should be noted that the Ralliart was also wearing the RE050s in that review, which draws into question the conclusions as better tires would result in sharper handling, better steering feel and a more sporting character.
Edmunds also flips back and forth, I think because there are different editors who end up writing on the same car (as you can see with the review I posted). The second is more of the same (WRX better in these regards, Ralliart better in these areas) and the third says the Ralliart has a good overall driving experience, not superior or great. The third also involves the 2008 WRX, not the 2009 and was published before the Ralliart was even available. Beating the 2008 WRX is like beating a puppy, sure you can do it but you sure as hell won't brag about it.
Mitsu was kind enough to swap out the tires on our tester for some Bridgestone Potenza RE050s and even though the tires were used, the difference was notable, especially in the slalom where the Ralliart's speed improved from 65.6 mph to 69.3 mph -- a "ginormous" difference according to our test jockey and one mph faster than the WRX. Mitsubishi, if you're reading this, please upgrade the Ralliart's tires; this car deserves better.
Oct 23, 2009, 09:08 AM
#44
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edmunds also flips back and forth, I think because there are different editors who end up writing on the same car (as you can see with the review I posted). The second is more of the same (WRX better in these regards, Ralliart better in these areas) and the third says the Ralliart has a good overall driving experience, not superior or great. The third also involves the 2008 WRX, not the 2009 and was published before the Ralliart was even available. Beating the 2008 WRX is like beating a puppy, sure you can do it but you sure as hell won't brag about it.
Ooops, just realized the 3rd one is on the 08... still, that's 2 out of 3 reviews against the 09.
Last edited by tipoytm; Oct 23, 2009 at 09:10 AM.
Oct 23, 2009, 09:18 AM
#45
If we go by the numbers, the WRX comes out ahead by a mile. How many reviews rank it ahead of the Ralliart? C&D reviews, R&T reviews, Motortrend reviews, Edmunds reviews, etc. As I said before, it boils down to what car you personally like. There's no point in digging up reviews from online sources like Edmunds or that australian site just to justify your purchase or preference.