I have a great idea..... How about we all believe everything we hear from a car dealer/salesman.

I have posted this vid before, but he states mid 20's not high 20's. I will believe this way before a dealer or salesman.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/video/in...tid=1381693990

 

If the thread is about the pricetag, it doesn't go in the Engine Forum........

 

A simple rumor, nothing more...though I fear I may have helped to perpetuate the lie.

 

haha^^^

 

I'm amazed at the number of auto transmission haters on this thread. I must ask, have all of you converted your EVOs to carburetors?

I'm old enough to remember when electronic fuel injection first came out. At the time, all of the 'serious' car enthusiasts hated the idea and only wanted to drive engines with "carbs" so they could tune their motors by re-jetting.

So, how are the carbs on the EVO working out?

 

I, for one, welcome our new dual-clutch overlords.

But seriously, I can't drive stick because nobody loves me enough to teach me, and I have a seriously busted right shoulder that would make a MT DD a bad idea anyway. I'll pass on the chance of not being able to drive myself home from somewhere if my arm's acting up. The RA's trans seems like the perfect solution -- I've enjoyed the autostick cars I've driven, and this should be significantly better than Cadillac or Chrysler's autostick.

TC-SST for me, but I do wish they'd give the RA the Sport mode with the two-step.

 

that is a completely different comparison

when you drive an automatic i feel disconnected from the car, as do many others

A manual gives you more control and is just plain more fun to drive imo, auto's may be faster in some instances but i love being connected to my car

 

Hey, if you want fun and excessive control, try installing a second (and maybe a third and fourth) steering wheel, to end the tyranny of single-wheel steering... and while you're at it, why just the one brake pedal when there are at least four independent brakes? Also, I don't think AWD or FWD cuts it at all -- we must insist on cars with four gas pedals, one for each wheel. Actually, what's with the single engine? -- each wheel should have it's own engine, and maybe it would be best to go to four wheel-drivers plus a captain while we're at it...

Control is great, but you want control where it actually matters. I personally can't imagine driving a car with separate controls (and perhaps transmissions) for front and rear wheels, but I'm sure that if you could handle it, it would be a much more controlled drive than AWD.

 

Sorry, your examples don't work. You're talking about redundant controls that don't add anything. Saying a clutch / mt doesn't add anything to the feel of a car will not fly. Mechanically you're in tuned with the car more. You can feel where the powerband is. You can slip the clutch to prevent wheel spin. You can rev out going up a hill (yes you can with paddles too). You can feather the clutch (i've never really got this down in a car) to get out of tight situations. You're comparing completely automatic situations that aren't controlled by the person (carburetor? LOL).

Anyways, I'm going to hold back all judgement on the SST until I try one. I'm merely pointing out things an SST can't do. There is simply a mechanical feel and connection with the car when you are putting it in gear and control the grab on a variable scale. With SST that variable scale is gone. It has it's advantages and disadvantages. Hell I might still get a Ralliart after I sell mine and buy a house.

Their have been things in the past that motor companies have tried. Chrysler tried the paddle shifting back in the 60-70s... Others tried turning off four cylinders during cruising. Both of these technologies failed a miserable death. I find it funny that motor companies are trying them again. Ford with the cylinder thing and others with paddle shifters. I find it amusing . I'm sure the technologies will survive this time.

One thing that will definitely affect me is I'm a much better driver with one hand than two. All those years of driving a stick. With paddle shifters you will be required to have two hands up. I'll adapt if I have to though. I'll just have to wait and see just like everyone else.

 

Dodge's MDS/GM's AFM technologies are actually pretty decent from what I've seen, and they do improve fuel economy...

Not at all...paddle function is replicated on the console shifter as far as I can tell.

 

to me, it doesn't make sense to pay 24k on a 2008 lancer with 150 hp, even if its fully loaded with navigation and heated seats or w/e you got, its crazy to pay that much when you can get a turbo speed3 thats nicer ourside and inside (imo) than the lancer. i'm not sure because i don't have an 08' but i don't even think they get amazing fuel mileage for the econ car that they are supposed to be.

me, i would pay 25k for the new ralliart, anything more is really pushing it.

in the argument about SST and manual; most people are going to drive this car for the next 3 years as a daily driver to work and wherever else, and you know there are lots of those days where you don't even feel like driving (even if you own an evo). so think about it, a 5/6 speed car is nice if you wanna have fun on the weekend or at the track but for everything else you just need to get from A to B as comfortably as possible just my 2 cents.

(i plan on buying the ralliart in 09

 

I actually heard the opposite on the ford side... because the 4 cylinders are still dead weight. I didn't know about the dodge. Maybe they do something different

Really? I thought on the GTS didn't have the controls on the stick? Do the ralliarts?

 

I did not mention 'carburetors', and I very definitely did not mention anything automatic -- in fact my post was absolutely the opposite of automatic (did you actually read my post? -- if you didn't, don't worry, I've made the same moronic mistake myself when responding...)

What I did say was that there are plenty of ways to improve control over a car, such as independent controls for front and rear power, that aren't implemented because they're either a waste of effort or because they make a car too complicated. Traditional (single clutch) manual transmission is often a waste of effort, but it really depends where and how you're driving, and what level of complexity you're capable of handling while you drive.

I notice no one here is railing against AWD or traction control, even though both are very definitely automatic operations (at least as they're implemented in the Ralliart). Why is it considered so evil when they mess with gear-shifting, but not so evil when they mess with traction or implement automatic control over drive power to the wheels? Seems they are all comparable.

 

Shifting gears isn't even something I think about - its all very natural being a DD myself...

I will be disappointed if they do not offer the ralliart in a manual setup in this 09 model, but I don't think its something that will be a deal breaker for me (although I go back and forth on this issue).

I myself have not driven a Dual clutch setup, or a paddle shift style vehicle so I guess we'll just have to wait and see

All this waiting SUCKS

 

Yea but that is an evolution or advancement in technology, its like why we don't make wheels out of rock

The argument of Auto v TC v Manual is different I think - even though I realize that even this when we look back on it in 20+ years could just be another "advancement in technology"

I'm not really rebutting or arguing just my pennies for thought