Manual Trans
Jun 21, 2009, 10:23 AM
#1
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (46)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outer Space
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Manual Trans
I could find any topics regarding this so I thought I'd flat out ask or inquire about it at least. Is the ralliart lancer to be equipped with a manual trans in the near future?
Jun 21, 2009, 11:25 AM
#3
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trending Topics
Jun 21, 2009, 05:04 PM
#8
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Fort Hood Texas
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will be? That was the whole point of the 2009 Ralliart.
Sure there are some factors here...
1. Subaru caught wind of the 2009 RA and beefed up the HP on their WRX.
2. Mitsubishi went VERY conservative on the RA with their HP.
Double edged swords here. On one hand Subaru messed up by making the WRX almost as powerful as their STI, causing a lot of potential customers to go WRX and skip the STI. On the other hand potential customers probably went with the WRX over the RA.
As far as Mitsubishi goes, well, they were smart to keep the HP lower in comparison to the Evo, it helps justify the extra dough for an X. However they potentially lost customers to Subaru by under cutting the RA's HP.
Which was the better move, point goes to Subaru, as they may have lost potential STI owners to the WRX, at least they kept the customers. Mitsubishi potentially lost customers to Subaru's WRX.
All of that aside there are distinct advantages to the RA that must be taken into consideration. First, because Mitsubishi was so conservative it's a simple matter to add 50whp to the car with a basic re-flash ($500).
Second is the TC-SST AWD set up that's being used in so many new top end high performance cars (GT-R, Bugatti Veyron, Lamborghini, etc). How many performance sports sedans can offer that to customers for around $25-28K?
Yes, Mitsubishi messed up by putting the wrong tires on their car, but the RA also comes stock with larger wheels than the WRX, so a simple tire swap, will significantly improve handeling. Oh, and while the WRX may have more HP, it falls behind the RA in TQ.
Me, I'll stick with the RA, but that's a personal choice. After 3 months of owning this car, I have fallen in love with the TC-SST. I'm not sure I'll ever go back to another type of transmission.
Sure there are some factors here...
1. Subaru caught wind of the 2009 RA and beefed up the HP on their WRX.
2. Mitsubishi went VERY conservative on the RA with their HP.
Double edged swords here. On one hand Subaru messed up by making the WRX almost as powerful as their STI, causing a lot of potential customers to go WRX and skip the STI. On the other hand potential customers probably went with the WRX over the RA.
As far as Mitsubishi goes, well, they were smart to keep the HP lower in comparison to the Evo, it helps justify the extra dough for an X. However they potentially lost customers to Subaru by under cutting the RA's HP.
Which was the better move, point goes to Subaru, as they may have lost potential STI owners to the WRX, at least they kept the customers. Mitsubishi potentially lost customers to Subaru's WRX.
All of that aside there are distinct advantages to the RA that must be taken into consideration. First, because Mitsubishi was so conservative it's a simple matter to add 50whp to the car with a basic re-flash ($500).
Second is the TC-SST AWD set up that's being used in so many new top end high performance cars (GT-R, Bugatti Veyron, Lamborghini, etc). How many performance sports sedans can offer that to customers for around $25-28K?
Yes, Mitsubishi messed up by putting the wrong tires on their car, but the RA also comes stock with larger wheels than the WRX, so a simple tire swap, will significantly improve handeling. Oh, and while the WRX may have more HP, it falls behind the RA in TQ.
Me, I'll stick with the RA, but that's a personal choice. After 3 months of owning this car, I have fallen in love with the TC-SST. I'm not sure I'll ever go back to another type of transmission.
Jun 21, 2009, 05:18 PM
#9
Ummmm....you can increase the power of the WRX with a simple reflash as well and the gains are pretty substantial (very similar to the RA gains). The Ralliart hardly has the advantage there.
The GTI has a similar transmission.
Wheel size has no effect on performance in that sense, larger tires are also more expensive.
The difference in torque between the WRX and the Ralliart is far smaller than the difference in HP.
Edit: Here ya go http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...ghlight=09+WRX and http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...ghlight=09+WRX.
The GTI has a similar transmission.
Wheel size has no effect on performance in that sense, larger tires are also more expensive.
The difference in torque between the WRX and the Ralliart is far smaller than the difference in HP.
Edit: Here ya go http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...ghlight=09+WRX and http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...ghlight=09+WRX.
Last edited by ambystom01; Jun 21, 2009 at 05:22 PM.
Jun 21, 2009, 06:57 PM
#10
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Fort Hood Texas
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ummmm....you can increase the power of the WRX with a simple reflash as well and the gains are pretty substantial (very similar to the RA gains). The Ralliart hardly has the advantage there.
The GTI has a similar transmission.
Wheel size has no effect on performance in that sense, larger tires are also more expensive.
And cut me some slack, you know I've been a Nismo guy for the last 10 years.
Jun 21, 2009, 07:03 PM
#11
The WRX and the RA are similar in that regard, as are the Evo and the STI, it's just a matter of playing with the boost levels, the timing and the AF ratio.
The GTI is only a FWD car but it does have a similar transmission at a similar cost, if not cheaper. The transmission is both a plus and a minus, it's a cool technology but it's having its growing pains.
The RA tires are narrower than the WRX tires. The RA is 215 while I believe the WRX uses 225 now. There's also the issue of the narrow fenders limiting the width you can run. Given it's weight, the RA would be ideally suited with a set of 235 or even 245 tires but those are about the max you can run.
The GTI is only a FWD car but it does have a similar transmission at a similar cost, if not cheaper. The transmission is both a plus and a minus, it's a cool technology but it's having its growing pains.
The RA tires are narrower than the WRX tires. The RA is 215 while I believe the WRX uses 225 now. There's also the issue of the narrow fenders limiting the width you can run. Given it's weight, the RA would be ideally suited with a set of 235 or even 245 tires but those are about the max you can run.
Jun 21, 2009, 09:17 PM
#12
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Fort Hood Texas
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The transmission is both a plus and a minus, it's a cool technology but it's having its growing pains.
Like I said, I have really come to love this transmission and I hope to see it further developed.
Jun 22, 2009, 05:16 PM
#14
The thing is, that WRX-sedan is not appealing at all whatsoever and it's a big turn down; Unlike the beefy STI. I really, really doubt Mitsubishi has lost any customers to the newest WRX. The only thing it's got is weight advantage and about 30 more horses. It's ugler than a new Corolla, its got the same old tranny (correct me if im wrong... though the old tranny is as good as it gets), it's lost its big wing, it's maddog mean style, and '09 Impreza guys want to try you on the street everyday, cause there's barely any difference in design to set apart the Impreza and the WRX. Even Edmund's saw how the RA owned the 09' WRX at the slalom with a simple tire swap.
Subaru wanted to stay on top of their game as soon as they saw Mitsu come up with the Ralliart, the thing is that by then Subaru had already lost it; So they did a "desperate" move and quickly, really quick if you ask me, released the same weird stuff they came up with on 2008, with 40 more horses; Just so they could still compete; When in reality they should've let Mitsu keep it's glory for about 1-2 years and REALLY go back to the sketching board and figure out what went wrong with their 2008 WRX/STI.
Last edited by jazket; Jun 22, 2009 at 05:22 PM.
Jun 22, 2009, 11:04 PM
#15
08s have the same HP as I do (well, when I was stock), which is underrated from the factory at a claimed 224 HP I believe.
The new WRX is an absolutely astonish car for the money. I have yet to see a truly negative review involving that car. It's incredibly fast all things considering, handles well and has a nice interior. Sure some don't like the looks but it appears to be selling reasonably well. The tranny is beefed up over the previous years, there are some claims that it gained the LGT gears to accommodate the extra power. You can claim that it looks the same as the Impreza but that really is the pot calling the kettle black, what differentiates the Ralliart the GTS, the hood? I saw a Ralliart the other day and didn't even realize it until the car was passing me going the other way, I thought it was just a GTS.
The Ralliart did not "own" the WRX in the Edmunds review you speak of, it simply kept up. In fact, here are the numbers.
2009 WRX
Skid pad- 0.87 g
Slalom speed- 68.5 MPH
Braking from 60 MPH- 107 ft
2009 Ralliart (stock in brackets)
Skid pad- 0.82 g (0.80)
Slalom speed- 69.3 MPH (65.6)
Braking from 60 MPH- 120 ft (127)
Yep, that sure is an ***-kicking what with it winning in one category (when modified).
I have no idea how you can say Subaru has "lost it" when they're one of the few manufactures still doing well in the market. Subaru is beating Mitsubishi like the red-headed stepchild, Mitsubishi numbers are way down. People seem to think that Subaru went wrong with the 08, especially Ralliart guys but the funny thing is that according to the numbers (0-60, 1/4 mile times, etc), the 08 was a solid competitor for the Ralliart while the 09 blows it out of the water.
Here is the review, http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=138347. Maybe you should make sure you actually read the comparisons and learn a bit about the cars before you go making baseless accusations that really just hurt your arguments.
The new WRX is an absolutely astonish car for the money. I have yet to see a truly negative review involving that car. It's incredibly fast all things considering, handles well and has a nice interior. Sure some don't like the looks but it appears to be selling reasonably well. The tranny is beefed up over the previous years, there are some claims that it gained the LGT gears to accommodate the extra power. You can claim that it looks the same as the Impreza but that really is the pot calling the kettle black, what differentiates the Ralliart the GTS, the hood? I saw a Ralliart the other day and didn't even realize it until the car was passing me going the other way, I thought it was just a GTS.
The Ralliart did not "own" the WRX in the Edmunds review you speak of, it simply kept up. In fact, here are the numbers.
2009 WRX
Skid pad- 0.87 g
Slalom speed- 68.5 MPH
Braking from 60 MPH- 107 ft
2009 Ralliart (stock in brackets)
Skid pad- 0.82 g (0.80)
Slalom speed- 69.3 MPH (65.6)
Braking from 60 MPH- 120 ft (127)
Yep, that sure is an ***-kicking what with it winning in one category (when modified).
I have no idea how you can say Subaru has "lost it" when they're one of the few manufactures still doing well in the market. Subaru is beating Mitsubishi like the red-headed stepchild, Mitsubishi numbers are way down. People seem to think that Subaru went wrong with the 08, especially Ralliart guys but the funny thing is that according to the numbers (0-60, 1/4 mile times, etc), the 08 was a solid competitor for the Ralliart while the 09 blows it out of the water.
Here is the review, http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=138347. Maybe you should make sure you actually read the comparisons and learn a bit about the cars before you go making baseless accusations that really just hurt your arguments.