Originally Posted by bye2u

this thread is going to end up just like the others lol...

Originally Posted by chino ali

The R/A for the original niche it was suppose to be and that was to bridge the gap between the Lancer and the X.
It is great.
I had the Lancer and went and upgraded to the R/A and I have not been disappointed.
The magazines are reviewing and comparing it, pound for pound to cars that is in the same segment and might have negatives, but they never said that the car was unacceptable. Editors have still picked the car over the others, buyers have bought it, so from a magazine perspective, it might not be so competitive.

Certain consumers, such as myself are making the same comparison but not as direct due to my preferences.
For i have test drove all of them except for the SS.
Which i won't even bother to. Cause i really dislike the way the SS looks above any of the cars that is in the segment.
But I am also making a comparison to the Lancer GTS. And it is a major difference in the performance and handling.

Is it competitive, maybe not in the eyes of the magazines. But to people who have certain preferences, it is very competitive, even if the car is more expensive then the next. That will depend on the buyer themselves.

I could have bought any of those cars including the X (GSR ONLY) or the STI.
or the Ms3
or the SS
or the WRX
or the R32
or the GTI or GLI
or the IS250 AWD or 350
or the Nissan 350z Nismo
I cross shopped the R/A with all of these cars.
But I still bought the R/A.

It is competitive for the buyer.
Intelligent people who buy cars don't depend on reviews solely.
It's basically a more-in-depth brochure.

Ask an 09 Cobalt SS owner his opinion.
I seen on the Chevy forums, that 09 SS owners are gloating how it can beat the X on the track and in a str8 line and how it's looks kills the X design.
IMO, that's some delusional s**t.



oh yeah, one more thing.
food for thought.
we all know that the best car in the segment is the COBALT SS.
HP, performance, etc. It was in all the reviews.
That being said,
HOW MANY OF YOU ARE NOW GOING TO GO BUY THE SS?

Originally Posted by ambystom01

I don't think the Ralliart was a poor decision on Mitsubishi's part, they were missing an entire segment in their lineup and making an AWD 30000$ sedan was a wise choice.

Originally Posted by S6devil

well thats just the thing, they already had an AWD $30,000 sedan, its called the Evo GSR !!
so i still say take away the AWD, and make the RA 200lb lighter, and $2,000 cheaper. then its right back in the game against a MS3, GTI, Si, SS, etc...

Originally Posted by chino ali

Ask an 09 Cobalt SS owner his opinion. I seen on the Chevy forums, that '09 SS owners are gloating how it can beat the X on the track and in a str8 line and how it's looks kills the X design. IMO, that's some delusional s**t.

oh yeah, one more thing. food for thought.
we all know that the best car in the segment is the COBALT SS.
HP, performance, etc. It was in all the reviews. That being said,
HOW MANY OF YOU ARE NOW GOING TO GO BUY THE SS?

Originally Posted by S6devil

well thats just the thing, they already had an AWD $30,000 sedan, its called the Evo GSR !!
so i still say take away the AWD, and make the RA 200lb lighter, and $2,000 cheaper. then its right back in the game against a MS3, GTI, Si, SS, etc...

Originally Posted by chino ali

I disagree.
Mitsubishi needed it.
You take all that away and your back to a GTS.
The R/A is 300lbs heavier then the GTS due to the AWD system.
$2000 and you back in the same price as a fully loaded GTS.

Originally Posted by hibby

I'm with you Chino. If the AWD isn't there, I'm not even interested.

Originally Posted by EsRt2evo

And that's the sad thing. We all have been over this numerous times. The only thing that'll quiet the naysayers is how the car does modified.

Originally Posted by heavyD

How many violent launches to attain the 4.7 0-60 time do you think a WRX could handle? If you look at the 5-60 times which are more real-world numbers the Ralliart and WRX are tied for fastest at 6.3 seconds. Most people that go on test drives will be using their butt dynos and the Ralliart will feel equally as fast to the average driver. I don't think Mitsubishi needs to add any power to the Ralliart as it's already plenty quick for the street which is what it was designed for.

Originally Posted by heavyD

This is different for Americans but in Canada a fully loaded WRX 265 is just over $37K while a fully loaded Ralliart is $39K. $2000 isn't chump change but that $2000 extra gets you the leather, heated EVO X MR Recaros, HID's and NAV/Fosgate system. A fully loaded WRX 265 has no HID headlights, no NAV (basic crappy Subaru sound system only), and the crappy WRX seats. In Canada the Ralliart is actually a better value that the WRX 265. And yes we Canadians get totally screwed compared to Americans from auto manufacturers.

Originally Posted by ambystom01

That's not going to quiet anyone. You can take a Smart Car and make it run 11s, it doesn't mean the Smart Car is a great performance car.

Originally Posted by S6devil

Exactly. #'s alone isnt everything (well to at least slightly educated people). And magazine editors and drivers aren't as single-minded as we make them out to be... they DON'T only judge a car based on raw #'s. thats why even the slow bmw's always win, and even the fastest lexus' always lose
...MS3 may not be the fastest, but the steering is ultra crisp, the shifting is butter smooth, suspension is perfectly firm yet not punishing, and seats & the interior is almost bmw-esque (well the base bmw's)... even the base Mazda 3 wins comparos against the base Civic, Lancer, Rabbit/Golf, Imprezza...

Originally Posted by ambystom01

That's not going to quiet anyone. You can take a Smart Car and make it run 11s, it doesn't mean the Smart Car is a great performance car.