I'm sorry but I think that's kind of a copeout, much like when Kevin Smith said his movies weren't for critics thus negating their comments about his crappy movies (Gigli, Jersey Girls). The Ralliart isn't in its own private class anymore than the WRX is in a class of its own or the Evo is the only car in the Evo class. It will be compared to the Evo and the WRX among other cars by consumers.
Maybe it's just me but I don't want a transmission to win a race for me, if I win a race I want to know it's because of superior driving skills not some fancy computer that does all the hard work for me.

 

I hate to say it, but I'm pretty sure there are quite a few fancy "computers" doing a lot of hard work for you, especially in your car. I'm sure there were people who thought that the abacus was better than the calculator for a long time, and there probably still are. ACD vs S-AWC? Well, you'd pick ACD since it doesn't help you as much as S-AWC, right?

Now I know the discussion was about the transmission, but really, what's the difference? The X and GTR are doing most of what they do because of their fancy computers.

The real problem is that the system for many of the auto-mans trannies is that the technology as far as the "fancy computer" analogy goes is the equivalent to a computer made in the 1980s and it is surrounded by tech from the 21st century (ala S-AWC, SH-AWD, etc etc) If we can make a car smart enough that it practically drives itself, you'd think the auto-mans systems would be better. I haven't driven a Mitsu with SST, but it sounds like they're just barely building systems in their garage, while many other mainstream companies are moving into the 90s.

 

Normally I'm right with you ambystom... but I think you're reading this wrong. I think his point was that the transmission CAN win races... just like a manual CAN win races. In other words, it's reliable enough to win a race.

However, I don't necessarily agree with that. It's a much more closed system with many more components that can fail. It will take a few YEARS of practice before I believe this transmission will be as reliable as a manual transmission. I think a side to side performance between a manual and a SST would be awesome... see which one lasts longer. Measure heat, whp, shifting speeds after a few hours of HEAVY driving. I'm willing to bet the manual wins and the car with the SST will have to come up with $5k to replace the SST ;p.

 

The tires ( IMO ) are worthless trying to hold it together.

In the wet, it will loose traction then ****** it back under control in a straight line. Floor it from a stop and point the wheel more than half a rotation?.... the Microsoft Word wizard pops up and asks if you would like some help.

In the dry, an exit ramp can quickly show oversteer ....... as you drift sideways.

I get the feeling from the road feedback that it really is just a lack of grip.

The GTS showed nothing but understeer.

Speaking of insurrance, when I switched my 08 gts to an 09 RA, my rate stayed the same. Im just waiting for them to call me up and say they made a mistake. Or maybe they are just waiting for me to call them to let them know I found the edge and promptly went over.

 

Why would it be a copout?
First of all, it's the only car really now in it's class by itself due to the tranny.
Which is the focal point whether it's a great thing or not.

We all know that the manual transmission has been around for ages and now someone is introducing a new tech for the average consumer to get.
There are no cars with TC-systems that are in it's price class. Save the GTI and and the R32 with their DSG trannies or any other car that is affordable with TC/DSG systems.
It still competes with the 09 WRX because of the 2.0l, turbo, and AWD and of course, price.

But now that the Lancer R/A for the very first time can compete with other cars with similar trannies.

Of course the R/A is going to compete with the WRX, STI and the EVO GSR, MR.
That is the tradition of .
But the R/A never was built like this.
Now a real R/A has finally been built and of course Subie and Evo owners are going to say something. That's the egotism.

And to address the computer winning a race for me maybe something YOU and many others may not like but the way that the gears change is very simialar to the paddle shifting Lambos and other priced out cars out there and F1 drivers are accustomed to.

But you have been around awhile, so you know that already.

 

Trivial sidenote -

Ya know, in GG w/ SST, it looks kinda european while the WRXs, STIs, EVOs look obviously japanese.

.... and Ambystom1 is a purist in a dirty, dirty 4WD world.

 

I can live with active diffs and things like that (which I don't have anyways) but since the transmission is effectively the visceral linkage between the driver and the car, I think it's important that the link be as pure as possible.

 

You cannot use the transmission as a means of isolating the car into its own class. The WRX is the only boxer motor in its class so should it be allowed to essentially go uncompared? Mitsubishi made the choice to only equip the Ralliart with the TC-SST, that was their decision and it has no bearing on what class the Ralliart fits into. It was meant to compete with the WRX, MS3 and SS.
Mitsubishi was not the first to introduce the technology to the masses, I'm pretty sure VW hold that title.
Why does egotism factor into this? I'm sorry but considering the performance numbers, I don' think Evo or WRX owners have anything to worry about.
You cannot compare the transmission on a 30000$ econocar with that of a 100000$+ sports car, I'm willing to bet that just the transmission on a Lambo is worth more than an entire Ralliart. You might as well say that the transmission is just like the Prodrive transmissions used in WRC.

 

No car exists in a complete vacuum. I see what you're trying to say, but realistically, consumers CAN and WILL cross-shop the Ralliart with the MS3, GTI, CSS and WRX.

 

You are right! that's exactly what I did and test drove them all to compare, I actually had an 09 GTI on order before cancelling it when the RA got here before the GTI did. Drove it and for the money, which was 3k more, I got everything I wanted, AWD, NAV,BlueTooth,Fastkey,more HP, AND the SST. I didn't need to be the fastest from Factory spec like the MS3 or the Colbalt SS, This I can do with aftermarket mods.
I think that was value for me. But not for everyone for if that was the case we would all be driving the same cars on the road and that would be just boring!!!

 

point taken but all i was trying to put in was the fact that it is a sub$30kAWD Turbo TC-SST. It can be now cross-shopped against e.g. like an R32. Which is running for what like $35k base?
Feel me?
But yeah to everyone, i understand that people are going to cross-shop. I mean look a the SS, its generating alot of hype.


But that was just a way i was looking at it.

 

The irony, a robot complaining that he does not like computers

 

I'm run on alcohol, not fancy smancy electronics.

 

Interesting debate. I didn't buy the Ralliart with any intention of taking it to a track. Ever. If I wanted a track car, I would have saved up longer and picked up the Evo X. I bought the Ralliart because I wanted a car that was fun to drive day-to-day.

 

I agree with you mh_silver. I think if the Ralliart was purchased as a PURE daily driver... it's a great car. I think this debate gets hot when people start thinking of modding it for racing. My GF wants one pretty badly... as she loves my evo. But she'll never mod it, so she will just keep on with the dd routine. I think it would be a great car for her (us)...