ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

Watch out Byung, soon they'll be calling you a troll and a Mitsu hater.

krnkimchi702

iTrader: (2)

just stating the facts..

people need to stop changing facts with biases

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

That won't happen, this is Evom after all. If it doesn't have a three diamond badge on the front, it can't possibly offer anything but failure.

NavyEvoChief

iTrader: (1)

I dont know if anybody mentioned it, but the WRX was modified, according to the review. It was the only one they could find at the time and it had some added goodies. I know it had some kind of aftermarket exhaust at a minimum. But still, I think the Ralliart is a better DD then the others. If I had my choice, which I will in about 2 months (wife going back to work, hates my car) I am thinking Golf GTI or keep it in the family and get a Ralliart.

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

If it had an SPT exhaust, that's a catback exhaust offered through Subaru (I believe SPT stands for Subaru Performance Tuning), it doesn't do squat for performance but it could have impacted their opinion on how the car sounded, how much fun it was, etc.

NavyEvoChief

iTrader: (1)

true, I think the artice said SPT and it gained 10FP TQ and 10 HP. I left that article at work. They did say it sounded sweet.

krnkimchi702

iTrader: (2)

out of all those.. the 2010 gti and the subie are my favorite.. if the gti was offered in awd.. i would get that car in a heart beat

kyoo

iTrader: (29)

it will be soon! for a massive price increase though. overall the gti is my favorite for sure. best overall car for me

Deathsythe

Yes, it is a better package in my personal opinion. I didn't mud sling, I made my judgment based on research. As for warranties, Subarus was worse for the WRX, simple as that. Especially for the rust warranty in a place like Ohio. The best warranties belonged to VW, BMW etc. Especially with a 12 year rust warranty on VW's. Mitsu on the other hand, was right in the middle of all companies. Not amazing, but way better than the WRX.

As for subaru and their "fine engines", We, (my family) have 3 Foresters, and had my Impreza. All from 2000 to 2007. Every last one of them had catastrophic head gasket failure at low miles and Subaru was terrible at owning up to it in addition to tranny problems etc. And lots of people in my old Subie club can attest to subies having stupid problems that they shouldn't.One 2.5RS had an engine blow up (yes, piston broke through engine with NO mods) while driving home from a meet!

As for power, I had a guy with an 07 wrx tr with sti turbo, Perrin FMIC tune, 11 second car etc. tell me just last week, that he can't wait to see what I do with my car because he wished Subarus reacted to tuning the same way that Mitsu's do. Now, I don't confirm nor condemn his opinion, but a lot of other people in the club seemed to agree. I have nothing against any of the other cars. I love Subarus, (that's why I was in a club for them) mazda's etc. The point I was getting at was that these reviews test performance and take little else into consideration when they make their judgments.

When judging a car in the sport compact segment, on looks for a car that looks aggressive, can handle real world/crappy weather conditions, is sporty, has good safety, good warranties, and the most tech for the buck in the given price range, Mitsu fulfills those criteria the best. Mainly because it is smack dab in the middle. It isn't; a whole bunch of performance but lacking in tech and thin warranties but great safety. (Subaru). It wasn't lots of performance, no good in crappy weather, with some tech and pretty good warranties (madza). What the Mitsu is, is; upper-mid level performance, great in bad conditions/ real weather, really good safety, great tech and mid level warranties.

Now people can feel free to disagree with my logic,(obviously the magazines do) that's fine haha. But do know that my conclusion was based on research and experience. Not just a drive around a track and some cones. Also, this is the only Mitsu i've ever had, so I'm not a Mitsu fan-boy by any stretch.

My referenced Subie....

xi

I don't understand whats so hard to get. I mean, the RA's a great car but let's face the facts, between 3 of the cars:

It's the HEAVIEST car. It's the LOWEST powered car.

Why would anyone here try to argue that it'll perform better than the other cars?

It is a pretty well rounded package. And for someone who wants a hatch, twin clutch tranny, and awd, there isn't anything thing else out there under 30k that offers you that.

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

Again, this is just your opinion. Based on my research, the Ralliart isn't the best package. It's not the fastest, it's not the best handling, it doesn't have the nicest interior and Mitsubishi's warranty is a joke. You're welcome to tell all the people, including fellow Ralliart owners, who have had their warranty requests denied that Mitsubishi's warranty is better than Subaru's.
We have three Subarus in my family as well and none have had major issues, none. I even track my Subaru and nothing happened.
It's all well and good talking about how much power the Ralliart could make but reality doesn't quite match up with potential. So far I haven't seen a single Ralliart push big power, the highest HP Ralliarts are running into transmission problems at HP levels that are easily achievable and easily sustained by the WRX. Moreover, this idea that Subarus don't make power is a joke, a simple tune bumps up torque by 50 ft-lbs, spend the extra money on a turboback exhaust and you're laughing. You're welcome to also inform AMS, Bushur, Cosworth, and other top level tuners that Subarus don't make power and have all these issues that they apparently missed.
Mitsubishi does not fulfill those criteria the best, it simply fulfills them adequately.

Deathsythe

Most of what you're still talking about is the same as the magazine article. Power. I never said Subaru's had a problem making power, hence my referral to the 11 sec WRX TR. What I and the guy in the subie club were referring to is the ease of power. I have heard lots of reports from a lot of respected people here Ohio, that it is easier (not more, but less initial effort) to make power with a mitsu rather than most subies. Riddle me this, which would react better to adding a turbo, an Impreza 2.5i or 2.4L Lancer? Believe me, unless you swap, it is idiocy to try to turbo a normal Impreza without a full swap. As for Forced induction, traditionally mitsu's blocks could also take more boost. In addition, I have never heard of subies getting gains like RA's do from just a tune alone with no mods.Be they NA's or FI. But I digress....

As for the better package, all you have to do is look at the options, price, insurance rates, performance, safety and warranties. Compared to the mitsu, the subie has a very slightly higher score in safety, and performance. Some may say "well there is a huge price difference too." Well, yes, but you are also getting less. you don't even get an LSD with the WRX. You get no SI drive, a sub par navi, sub par stereo, nothing close to mitsu's FAST Key and no option for HIDs or Recaro or sports type seats seats until the recently announced, new 2010 options of HID's and leather last week at the auto show. Not to mention that the WRX is one of the worst small cars to try to insure in it's class. Even for a driver like me with not a blemish on my record. As for Interior, no, the mitsu doesn't have the best interior. I would say in my opinion, the MS3 has the best, followed by the golf followed by the mitsu followed by the subaru. Add navi and Recaros, and RA goes to #2. Again, in my opinion.


Basically again, my point is that speed isn't the defining criteria of a car. Hence why I believe the reviews are incorrect. If they took into account the whole picture; performance, price, safety, insurance, looks, tech, in stead of the narrow view of just performance and price, then the RA would win. The RA based on the whole criteria is the most well rounded car.

I know some obviously do not agree, but warranty numbers, options and insurance costs don't lie. If speed is all you care about, more power to you. I fault ye not.

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

What I'm talking about is ease of power. It is very easy to make big power initially with the WRX. There are many top level tuners who would agree with this, including well known Evo tuners. As I said, a simple tune yields an additional 50 ft-lbs of torque. That's pretty easy power. Clearly you didn't read the thread since I posted that earlier in response to someone else that thought like you did, ie. incorrectly.
What you're talking about is not even applicable here, was this a 2.5i vs. 2.4L Lancer thread? Nope, it's comparing the Ralliart, a 2.0L turboed car to other turboed vehicles including the 2.5L turboed WRX. If you really want to talk about turboing an NA car, it's a six of one, half dozen of another type situation.
Let's breakdown the six things you listed.
Options- Depends on what you want and how much you're willing to spend to get it. This is a subjective field and boils down to personal preference. I could care less about a six-CD changer, hard drive, navigation, sunroof, etc. because I rarely use those things anyways. Others may value this more.
Price- More or less the same between the WRX and the Ralliart. To get some of the things people love about the Ralliart, you have to pay, like the Recaros.
Insurance rates- The difference is insignificant here and likely varies from insurance carrier to carrier and from person to person.
Performance- The winner is pretty clear here.
Safety- Likely very similar between the Ralliart and the WRX.
Warranty- Again, Mitsubishi is known for having terrible warranties. You are free to debate this with your fellow Mitsubishi owners.
You may think you're getting less with the Subaru but you're also getting the best performer between the two, easily. For some, that's what matters. As I said, I don't care about many of the features you listed, they don't sway my decision one way or the other. However, what I do care about is fun and the Ralliart simply comes up lacking in that department. It doesn't have enough power for its weight, the stock handling leaves much to be desired, as does the stock braking and the lack of a traditional manual is an instant no for me. Given how many problems people have been having with the TC-SST, I'm sure many would agree with this now.
You're somewhat naive if you honestly think magazines only care about performance. The people who review the cars are average people for the most part, they make their decisions based on the hard numbers sure, but they also take into account the things you can't measure like whether a car is fun to drive, how "nice" the interior is, etc. This becomes rather clear when you look at the cars magazines like Car & Driver pick as their top car of the year. It's rarely the fastest car within its group yet they love it. The same thing is apparent in these kinds of reviews, if they only cared about performance, why wasn't the fastest car the winner? The fact that the Mazdaspeed3 has consistently ranked high, even about the faster WRX, essentially throws this "they only care about performance" argument out the window.

RotorGlow

iTrader: (1)

I just love how Mitsu is bashed for being heavy. I would rather buy a heavier car that is build more sturdy, then a light flimsy car. When it comes to collisions, physics will always tell you that the heavier car will come out the winner. bar none.

PS - I hate this car, but it sure is fun to drive

ambystom01

iTrader: (7)

You can a car that is light and safe. That's actually the big push for manufacturers right now, to make lighter vehicles. Not only does it help with performance but it increases fuel efficiency and allows you to use smaller engines.