Again, the term value is not objective. Sure it has nice parts, but the results are not astonishing. It's like having a Rolex that doesn't keep time that great, is it really any better than the Timex you have for day to day use?
The WRX gets the same engine as the STI so does that make it better? Nope, it's just an engine and it no more makes it an STI than the color. Same goes for the Ralliart-Evo relationship, it's just an engine.
People hype the TC-SST up way too much. It's not "one of the most advanced transmissions currently available", it's just a nice transmission at a reasonable price. The technology has been around for quite some time now and other companies have beaten Mitsubishi to the punch. VW used it in their GTI before the Ralliart was even a pipe dream.
That car that you say is "just a FWD car" is as fast as an MR around a track. It may not have the almighty AWD but it's fast. A lot of Mitsubishi and Subaru people like to use AWD as some trump card but the fact is fast is fast, it doesn't matter what you do to get there. A FWD Cobalt is a flat out fast car, it even has launch control and flat-foot shifting from the factory.
As I've said before, it takes more than just a reflash to get Evo numbers. We've been over this in other threads.
All those parts you've mentioned cost money. New tires are a good 1000$. Add that to the MSRP of the Ralliart and it doesn't look as good anymore.

 

^ sigh Amby, whoever said here that the RA is superior to the WRX? I most certainly never indicated that. As I said before, it's a matter of personal choice. Each car has its advantages/disadvantages, pluses/minuses, etc. I just think the RA is packaged better in terms of technology and value over any other car in its price range.

You say the WRX is cheaper than the RA, last time I checked (believe it or not, I was cross shopping the STi/WRX/Evo/RA before I bought my ride) at the dealership, I was quoted exactly $1,000 over invoice for a WRX at something like 3.9% APR (60 months). That's the best they could do. The base RA I inquired at a nearby dealer quoted me close to $1,200 UNDER invoice w/ 0% APR (48 months) plus $500 loyalty rebate. The RA was way cheaper than the WRX at that time (factor in the said interest rates).

You can't say my logic is flawed cuz your logic is also flawed from my point of view. So stop telling me and the rest of us here that we have ****-poor sense cuz it'll just make you look bad. Put your money on the WRX, that'll make Subaru happy cuz they are certainly making good profit on that car. I'd rather put mine on the RA as Mitsu obviously isn't putting my hard earned cash into their execs' pockets, but rather to the factory grunts & engineers.

 

^ hehe, that's not going to happen... this is an open free-for-all forum as long as members are following rules, plus Amby used to be a mod here too (dunno why he isn't now, but that's OT). He and I had (along with a couple others) much more heated debates before, this is really mild in comparison :-) (search past RA vs. WRX threads) I actually like Amby and he does have a lot of knowledge on topics like this, but he is also known to have this unrelenting know-it-all attitude (as shown on his posts) that somehow ticks off a lot of people... and he tends to see his own logic as the way of the world. Not the kind of guy you see everyday, but that's just how he is.... you just have to get used to him cuz he is here to stay :-)

He does make the RA forum controversial, fun, & exciting at times.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambystom01

That car that you say is "just a FWD car" is as fast as an MR around a track. It may not have the almighty AWD but it's fast. A lot of Mitsubishi and Subaru people like to use AWD as some trump card but the fact is fast is fast, it doesn't matter what you do to get there. A FWD Cobalt is a flat out fast car, it even has launch control and flat-foot shifting from the factory.

Can you please cite said times and tracks? The 2008 Cobalt SS was 11 seconds slower around Nürburgring than the EVO IX, which has proven to be a slower car around the track than the EVO X.

FWD is widely acknowledged to be an inferior performance platform. It was designed for economy and to safe weight. While, admittedly, AWD is inferior to RWD for track purposes, it is still considered to be superior to FWD.

As for value, certain criteria can remain objective. My point with mentioning tires as being one of the biggest weaknesses of the RA is that tires are a wear item that would be replaced, regardless of what vehicle you buy. As are brake pads and rotors. If all that is necessary to improve breaking performance by 10-15% is to do something that I would have to do in any other car anyway, I would say that's a pretty good deal.

 

You have a lot of twists on this post that I can't make any clear sense of.

You said on an earlier post that "the RA doesn't have the WRX's 2.5L boxer engine", I got the impression that you meant the WRX/STi engine is superior to the 4B11T engine which I doubt is the case... the EvoX/RA engine has already been proven by Ryan Gate's Time attack car pushing 500+whp on the stock block awith close to 10K miles on the track... his motor is still running strong & reliable. Educate and refer me to a STi/WRX pushing 500+whp on the stock block w/ 10K racing miles on its belt without breaking down?

Then you say you don't want an RA pushing 500whp cuz it'll just destroy the tranny... stating the obvious, are we now? This clearly wasn't the point of my argument. No one would be that stupid to run 500whp on the stock TC-SST tranny. Not even the mighty GT-R's tranny is pushing that much. As for the GTi's DSG, I've read SST vs. DSG reviews before and most of them seem to favor the SST (probably cuz it's much newer)... and don't forget the DSG is a $1,500 option while the TC-SST is standard.

Again, for the nth time, I never said the RA is superior (stop making bogus statements about my posts) to the WRX or any of the other cars in its price range. I just think it has greater value and obviously better technology over the others.

 

amby used to be a moderator on the site, and gave it up. Outside of that, his posts generally have more info in them then we all could pretend to know. Hes here to make the community smarter, and to get rid of the thieves and liars that come in here.

simple as that.

 

Keep it civil guys.
Thanks

 

A lot of people are suggesting just that. They may not flat out say it, but their posts certainly imply it.
I'm comparing MSRP to MSRP, I'm not going to take into account offers or what specific dealerships are doing because it's too variable.

 

My comment was in response to the list of things you listed as putting the Ralliart above the competition/in a class of its own. It was essentially a list of all the Ralliart features/specifications and you were effectively establishing criteria that only the Ralliart could fulfill.
I don't think the STI motor is superior to the Evo motor at all, for racing purposes it is clear that the Evo motor is better/more reliable. However, we're not talking about race cars and debating at the extremes is useless. No one here is going to drive a 500 WHP WRX or Ralliart. If they are, they're really not going to care if they need to replace the pistons and rods or whatever, at that point, they're spending 10000$+ on a build.
The point is that VW had a twin-clutch transmission years before the Ralliart even existed. The TC-SST isn't ground breaking technology nor is it the first time that such a transmission was available in a relatively cheap car. It's Mitsubishi's version of a transmission that seemingly all manufacturers will eventually use (hell even Porsche is starting to use it which came as a shock to me).
Saying that the Ralliart is greater value and has superior technology really is the same thing as saying it's the best car. I think it's perfectly to clarify that you mean it's the best car for you, not the best in an objective way (I think that's what you mean right?).

 

Do a search for the "Car and Driver Lightning Lap" and "Motor Trend Laguna Seca Cobalt comparison", both have been well discussed before including massive conspiracy theories.
I've discussed the Nurburgring results before as well. 11 seconds isn't that long given the lap times being discussed (8ish minutes I believe). Moreover, I think it was done using a JDM Evo IX which may be faster than the Evo X given that it had S-AYC and was lighter.
FWD is widely acknowledged to be an inferior platform in theory or at the extremes but for the most part, it's not really an issue. A well designed FWD car can and does keep up with and exceed the performance of an AWD car. Obvious examples include things like the Cobalt SS, the Integra Type R, the Focus RS (may be called the ST, can't remember exactly), etc. As I said in my last post, a lot of AWD drivers like to use it as some trump point despite the fact that many FWD cars are very very quick and deserve recognition. Saying "well it's just FWD" doesn't change the fact that it's faster in the corners, faster in the braking zones and faster in the straights. Fast is fast no matter how you do it.
Yes tires are a wear item but to get the performance, you would have to either wait until the stockers wear out (not a good proposition) or take a 1000$ hit and get rid of perfectly good rubber. Neither is a great selling point. Same can be applied to the brakes and rotors. If that's your argument, you're basically suggesting that people put up with lackluster performance for months or over a year just to actually get a car they like. I wouldn't do that, I would want a car that would keep me smiling the day I bought it, not one that would make me wish my brake pads would just wear out already. You're right you can do it in any car, including all the others that compete with the Ralliart or that are cross-shopped with the Ralliart.

 

Thanks for that.

I'll address this even though it's apparently been deleted.
Looking at a topic critically is not the same as bashing, there is a fundamental difference. If I walked into every thread and went "the Ralliart is the biggest POS in the world and all these dynos are lies", you'd have a point but I don't and thus you don't. I look at the dyno results and think critically about them. If they look weird, I damn well say something. That's what a forum is about anyways, it isn't intended to be a giant marketing playground for the vendors but a place where people can talk and discuss cars. This means addressing both sides of an issue and openly debating and conversing on whatever topics come to mind. If you just want pretty dyno sheets with the standard marketing dribble ("look at our amazing gains! Ignore the ridiculously high baseline or the giant boost spike at 3000 RPM, you have 300 WHP when I apply a butt load of correction factors! 300 WHP! Zomg 300 WHP!), you can go to the website of whatever vendor you personally like.
I hate to break it to you, but some of us have been a part of the Mitsubishi community a long time, so long that we no longer drive Mitsubishis. Funny how when we move from Mitsubishi to Subaru, we get accused of being a Subaru fanboy (despite openly criticizing Subarus and praising other manufacturers ) yet if we bought Mitsubishi after Mitsubishi, no one bats an eye. Someone can say blatantly incorrect things about a Mitsubishi (such as one individual claiming that the Ralliart was basically an Evo) yet no one pipes up, if someone who happens to drive a Subaru or any other car really happens to state facts, with evidence to support it, people can't be faster to play all of the classic cards (accusations of being a fanboy, a hater, a troll, etc). Go figure. Most of the moderators don't drive Mitsubishis period so are they all those terms people are so quick to apply to me (generally as a substitute for addressing the issue at hand)?
If you really think I've contributed nothing, you're welcome to check the Lancer boards where I've contributed plenty or I can post up the various PMs I've received from Lancer owners, Ralliart owners, Subaru owners, etc. asking for my help/advice that I'm more than willing to give despite it taking my time.
What does the Buschur Evo have to do with this? This isn't a thread about the Evo. Should we begin discussing the Crawford STI?

 

I think its safe to say the board has developed cliques around certain vendors and what they sell/preach. This is fine, but it makes for a tougher crowd on the basis that alot of those people want to believe only that which supports their said clique. I also as you do find this troubling as this forum was originally intended for open discussions on topics brought forth, and not as a breeding ground for vendors and vendor talk. I myself have gotten bashed twice since i joined yesterday by the same vendor because i made a small yet unpointed comment about their baselines seeming high. I dont really understand why its such an issue, the baseline is high, but im more then happy, as im sure you amby are, to discuss the gains made.

Thanks

 

In going deeper to what I was getting at... a race proven motor that undergoes massive abuse, crazy HP, & still came out reliable after thousands of track miles (and on stock block/internals) obviously means that it is a one hell of a damn strong motor, correct? That, my friend, is a big plus to the RA... it can go the distance, and you can safely say that pushing more HP w/ boltons, etc... you don't have to worry about the RA's engine blowing up. An enthusiast may not go 500whp at the moment, but 300-350whp (up to the SST's limit) isn't a problem, and when the SST tranny gets upgrades, one can push even higher without having to change the engine block/internals. That saves $$ and that's what I meant by "potential".

Well, none of our prefered brands today (Mitsu, Subaru, etc.) invented the manual transmission too, and I'm not arguing about who invented the dual clutch tranny. My point is, this type of tranny is so much more sophisticated than either the typical manual or automatic, thus it costs a lot more to produce. Supercars have been using this tranny for awhile now, and finding it an econobox like the $25K RA as a standard equipment is a good thing to have... sure it may not give you the satisfaction of having to manually row through the gears and a third pedal, but it has a mission of its own and executes as promised.

My logic on what car to pick in terms of value is shared not just by many members on this forum, but I'm sure a lot of people out there too. Technology is a big selling point, as well as the quality of a car's performance components. Just so happens the RA comes with these things in more ways than usual. I'm pretty sure there's a ton of buyers out there too that look for other preference to consider a car as the best choice (like you for example).... things like out-of-the-box better performance (0-60, braking), higher stock HP, a stick shifter, lower advertised MSRP, etc. I respect that. Concluding that -I'm not being objective and that I'm claiming the RA is the best car for everyone- is just incorrect.

 

Although i love my RA i find it very hard to claim its the BEST car in its class.

Infact what has the RA won? The last comparison of new sub compacts i saw rated the RA 7 out of 8 for a variety or reasons. Wrx ms3 cobalt tc, all rated higher when power, braking, top speed, 0-60, how it drives, and quality were all taken into consideration. It really comes down to us being biased and loving our own car, there is nothing wrong with that, but its exactly that, biased.

 

My friend, I hate to break it to you but you picked the wrong car (and you probably already know that). Why don't you just sell or trade the RA for a WRX, MS3, or a Cobalt... I can't imagine someone buying a car they don't like and have to live with it... this happened to me before and in 4 months, I dumped that ride for another I liked much better. Just letting you know I don't even own a ralliart, but I admit I'm a little biased with Mitsu vs. the competition... only because I've owned a lot of other brands before (been driving almost 20 years) and so far only Mitsu didn't disappoint where it counts.