+1

 

I did notice that but the entire method itself is flawed, it's simply not accurate enough for the kinds of claims people are attempting to make.
So when the WRX is overrated by 9 HP, you don't seem to care but if the Ralliart is underrated by 13 HP, it's a significant difference leading to claims of it being underrated by the factory? The formula is simply too general for such a claim, if the variation is as little as 5%, that's 10 HP right there. I'm willing to bet that the variation is more than that. Yes it is math but it's not taking into account all the variables, it is merely a general idea, even the website states that very clearly.

Edit: I retried it again using the performance numbers here http://www.insideline.com/mitsubishi...-ralliart.html. With a weight of 3662 lbs (curb weight + 200 lbs for a large male driver), the power would be 223 HP or 242 HP (a 19 HP spread) . Decreasing the weight would obviously bring these numbers down. However, if we use the numbers from this review http://www.insideline.com/subaru/imp...preza-wrx.html, the Ralliart has either 253 HP or 244 HP, a 9 HP spread. The WRX is again making either 259 or 253 HP. The STI is apparently makes either 300 or 281 HP (20 HP deficit) or 302 HP or 283 HP (depending on which model exactly was used). Using the numbers produced by Motortrend http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html, the WRX would be making 274 or 275 HP. Does this mean the WRX is also underrated? No, the results are not accurate enough to make such a claim. Further evidence would be needed before you could conclusively state that.

 

When the person who says this:

Then goes on to say that 1/4 mile times and trap speed can not be used in any way to judge the HP of a car it makes me realize they just like to argue. If you are going to pee on my leg, and tell me it is raining I will tell you that you are full of $hit.

Hell, if every post about why the Ralliart is great wasn't posted in by someone who doesn't own one it might help. I wasn't the one who brought up drag strip performance as a measure of HP in this thread.... the person arguing AGAINST it tried to use it to prove his point... and when I called him on it once again flipped the script and started arguing the opposite of his pro drag strip comparisons post in this thread. There is no pleasing some people.

Keith

 

What I'm saying is that you cannot precisely quantify HP using the methods you've outlined. I showed this a bit in my previous post, the same car can have a 20 HP variation depending on the 1/4 mile times used. Which is the right answer? I'm fine with people using it as a very, very rough estimate of HP but that's not what is happening here. People are attempting to equate the 1/4 mile times to an underrated Ralliart which makes zero sense and can effectively be applied to any car (using that same method, the 09 WRX can claim to be underrated as wel as can the Mazda3l).
This was my point with the whole "the 1/4 mile numbers make sense" argument. If the Ralliart is making the claimed 237 HP, the 1/4 mile times and other performance indicators are fine. They're not the fastest out there, they're not the slowest but they're OK. However, if you suddenly want to argue that it's making an additional 13 HP over the rated HP, it goes from perfectly fine to a bit of underperformer given it's 0-100 MPH times, 20-60 MPH times, etc. The 0-100 MPH time for the Ralliart is 15.1 seconds according to R&T. With 237 HP and a high curb weight, this is fine and makes sense. Compare it to others out there though. The Evo X GSR and MR have times of 13.3 and 13.7 seconds respectively. The 09 WRX is 13.5, MS3 is 13.8 and the GTI is 16.8. The 0-60 times of the AWD cars mentioned are not that far off however suggesting to me that while the Ralliart can get out of the hole fast, it simply doesn't have the power to move that weight once it's moving. The Evo X GSR is roughly the same weight as the Ralliart yet it's more than a second faster to 100 MPH.

Edit: I tried the calculator again using the R&T results for the old Evolution RS. According to the calculator, that car would have 308 HP, 20 HP over the rated HP of 286. Do you think the Evo 9 was really making 308 HP? Using the numbers for the Lamborghini Gallardo Superleggera, it would be 434 HP or 490 HP, it's rated at 522, do you think Lamborghini overrated it by 30 HP? The calculator is at best a tool to estimate power, it isn't accurate or precise enough to be useful in reaching conclusions.

 

They dont want the fast and furious crowd to choose their brand.. same reason they fudged up the 2000 year eclipse..

 

but sadly all that advanced mubo jumbo that the average consumer does not understand or care about , did not produce a better performing car... oh well..

 

cause alot of folks are very sad that mitsu constantly under powers their cars in comparison to the competition.. and even with all the extra new high tech stuff the performance is lacking.

 

There's more factors to consider that I'm not sure an online calculator would include. Technological advances make the costs of producing better quality things less expensive. Look at what TV you could buy for 3k even just 5 years ago, and look now.

 

True, if you are talking about the RA in pure stock form w/ those crap OEM tires. If a buyer just picks a car at face value, then the Ralliart is not the best choice. I'd buy it because it has potential. Point me to a sport compact that has a highly tunable motor+turbo, AWD w/ electronically-controlled ACD plus front+back mechanical LSDs, auto-manual tranny, etc. at $25K? I thought so...

 

What you've basically done is define your criteria so specifically that only a single car (the RA) fits it. The MS3 is tunable, the WRX is tunable, the Cobalt SS is tunable, but they don't have the other stuff you talked about. At the same time, the Ralliart doesn't have Brembos (the Cobalt SS does), it doesn't have a 2.5 L boxer motor (the WRX does), it doesn't have a manual transmission (all three cars I've mentioned do), etc. If you're criteria for a car are as you've stated, than naturally the Ralliart is the best because it's the only car with those criteria. To expand that notion to the entire sport compact market is ridiculous, other cars have specific areas where they are clearly better than the Ralliart. If you like the Ralliart as a whole package, that's great but not everyone does. I wouldn't buy one right now, I'd probably go for an 09 WRX hatchback if I had to buy a car within that bracket. This "it has potential" argument is itself flawed, all cars have potential if you have the money. A 92 Civic has a lot of potential if you're willing to drop 10000$ into the car.

 

^ LOL, your logic is just different than mine and some of the other guys here on what is suppose to be a Ralliart enthusiast forum :-) Tell me this, does it cost the same for Subaru to produce the WRX's 5-speed manual tranny w/ Mitsu's 6-speed TC-SST tranny? I read somewhere here that the whole assembly costs $6K brand new... expert reviews have praised its performance and drivability constantly. Let's take a look at the 4B11T engine compared to the Rex's 2.5L Boxer engine, are you saying it is superior? AMS just broke 750whp on the 4B11T... Ryan gates is running over 500whp on the stock block and winning time attack races since last year. Cobalt's Brembos? I'd most certainly take the Evo9's/RA's AWD (ACD+2LSDs) over that. Brakes are far easier to upgrade.

Your criteria is different from mine. I look for superior technology and value. You are probably looking for a more traditional car w/ a stick shifter and higher performance numbers right out of the box.

 

Of course it doesn't cost Subaru as much to produce or rather buy (since neither Subaru or Mitsubishi makes their transmissions in house) their 5-speed transmissions vs the TC-SST in the Ralliart. The Ralliart also costs more to buy so I don't see your point.
There are 700, 800, 900, 1000 WHP STis running around so does that mean the WRX can be tuned to that extent? Sure if you want to drop thousands (probably close to a hundred thousand) of dollars into it. Same applies to the Ralliart. Sure the engine can be modified to handle 750 WHP but A. the transmission would explode, B. it would cost a lot of money and C. any idea of reliability would be gone.
The Cobalt SS has Brembos, I'm not sure about the MS3. A Cobalt person would equally well argue that they can modify the suspension, upgrade the front diff (it has an LSD in the front stock as well) to something more hardcore, upgrade the engine, etc. and run circles around the Ralliart so naturally this makes it a superior vehicle right? Hell, the Cobalt SS is as fast as an MR around at least two tracks according to Car & Driver and Motor Trend so it must the best for everyone.
Brakes are not easier to upgrade, at least not if you want them doing right. I don't think there is any area of tuning or modifying that is necessarily easier to do than another, it's a matter of what you want and how much you have to spend. To really give the Ralliart's brakes a full overhaul (new calipers, larger rotors, any hub changes if needed to stop pad knockback) would cost a lot of money. Those changes wouldn't be needed for 99% of people though, most would be fine with some nice pads and nice tires.
I look for the same basic things you do, I like value for money (I'm not rich) and I like "technology" to an extent. However, what I view as value for money is different than what you view as value for money or what somebody else views as value for money, we all have our own priorities. I think the Ralliart is an OK package and I like certain aspects (namely the seats) but the rest just doesn't do it for me. I couldn't care less about how much the transmission costs or how "advanced" people claim it is, I want a manual and that's that. I couldn't care less about Ryan having 500 WHP on the stock block because I wouldn't want a 500 WHP Ralliart. I want a car that I wouldn't have to dump money into just to keep me happy and unfortunately the Ralliart falls into that category for me. If others are happy with it though, that's great. To say that the Ralliart is superior to others is flawed, if it was superior, it would be the fastest, the best handling, the best braking, etc. It's an imperfect car like every other car out there.
In conclusion, as I have said time and time again, pick whichever car you personally like, there's no need to attempt to justify your decision by degrading other cars out there. If the sole reason why you buy a car is because you think others aren't as good, you're really missing the point. Buy a car because it's the one you like, the one that makes you smile when you drive it.

 

LOL now we have a Beamer boy on here to. And once again the comments are not on topic HHHMMMMMFF I am shocked. 0-60 IN 5.8! Performance that. Buschur/RRE/AMS/UR/TTP racing if you dont know who they are LOOK IT UP have there hands on the R/A and hands down ARE making it a monster of a car. Once again this car is a great platform with sick AWD, SAME MOTOR AS THE EVO, and more high tech equipment then any other car even close to its price range. BOOST BOOST gone. Achhhoooo (puke beamer) Gazuntite.

 

0-60 in 5.8 seconds isn't that amazing, that's maybe average in it's market.
Buschur and AMS are also working on other cars so naturally they can use that as "proof" to their awesomeness right? I have yet to hear about this monster Ralliart, do you have a link?
Equipment does not make a car superior, if that was the case, there would be no place in this world for cars like the Evo RS, the Miata, the S2000 CR, the Lotus Exige, etc. Some people do not put a value on fancy transmissions, trick differentials that take the skill out of driving fast, hard drives bigger than those in computers 5 years ago, etc.

 

As far as value for the money, the RA really should top even the most objective person's list. You're getting hardware that, two years ago, came on a car that cost $8,000 to $10,000 more. You get the same engine as a car that currently costs $8,000-$10,000 more. You get one of the most advanced transmissions currently available (and one that happens to cost more than half the value of the vehicle if you were to buy it new). You get a better driveline than any of the cars in the same class. I'm sorry, but a FWD car with an LSD is still just a FWD car.

Add to that the possibility of great deals/rebates and 0% APR financing (my guess is that a LARGE number of people on these boards got the 0% APR), and it is hard to argue the overall value.

As for the shortcomings of the car, I don't think a single car today is manufactured and sold without some sort of shortcomings. Cars are always about give and take. I had to give up a lighter more mod-friendly car in order to gain a roomier car that other people could drive.

As for the obvious shortcomings (that are universally deemed to be negatives), they are some of the easiest to remedy. Power-to-weight ratio? ECU reflash and you're putting down stock EVO numbers (nothing to scoff at). Braking distance? A new set of tires (people have to buy these eventually anyway), and you'll drop at least 10 feet in your 60-0 breaking. $100 for new pads and you'll drop even more plus alleviate a good amount of fade.

Anyone who wants more than that (regardless of what car they buy), is going to be throwing down a lot more money anyway. At that point, the choice between cars in the RalliArt's class is purely aesthetic.