Considering a 2010 Ralliart or 2010 WRX
Dec 17, 2009, 02:36 PM
#286
the 4B11T is a good engine, because it can take abuse, what in the RA probably never will . Because the same internals as a X but less stress , smaller turbo SST tranny etc.
The new vs old engine is was your point , when you said the new probably not as good as the old one...remember?
Now funny thing is, in this comparison the RA engine which is new , better then a older WRX engine.
The new vs old engine is was your point , when you said the new probably not as good as the old one...remember?
Now funny thing is, in this comparison the RA engine which is new , better then a older WRX engine.
"The 2.5-liter four and all-wheel driveline are the only mechanical carryover pieces, and in the WRX, the 224-horsepower intercooled turbo engine's torque peaks at 2800 rpm, down from 3600 rpm, for better performance."
Unless they changed the engine and the drive line from 2008, i might be right here.. dont you think?
You might rethink your own statement :
"A true case of talking without knowing facts first."
At a same time i hope i dont have to point out the engine and drive train difference between the old body style and the new one in the RA forum about the RA. vs the WRX.
I dont think the WRX did a same upgrades and so in Engine wise drive line wise as the RA. That was my point. Sure the WRX engine is "updated" as they should with every new model. But upgrades are not a same, as the new engine, and so on.
There for the RA engine is in my opinion much better what the WRX have.
thanks for listening.
Rob
link :
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...wrx/index.html
Unless they changed the engine and the drive line from 2008, i might be right here.. dont you think?
You might rethink your own statement :
"A true case of talking without knowing facts first."
At a same time i hope i dont have to point out the engine and drive train difference between the old body style and the new one in the RA forum about the RA. vs the WRX.
I dont think the WRX did a same upgrades and so in Engine wise drive line wise as the RA. That was my point. Sure the WRX engine is "updated" as they should with every new model. But upgrades are not a same, as the new engine, and so on.
There for the RA engine is in my opinion much better what the WRX have.
thanks for listening.
Rob
link :
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...wrx/index.html
amby the 4G63T is a 4G63T, yes it was changed and mivec-ed / in the IX/ etc but it was and are a 4G63 T engine and design.
between the EVo 1 and the Evo IX is more time and change happened then the WRX engine between 2006 and 2010...
The 4G63T even turned around in time
The 2.5 l WRX engine is a same design and engine from 2006 and 2010 even when it has upgrades on it like the dual valve control or different tune etc.
The 2.0l WRX engine is not a same as the 2.5l engine. The number is not a same either. Not to mention the STI 2.0l vs the STI 2.5L engine....
SO the the engine in the RA is not a same as the 2006 RA.
you can argue on this as long as you want it.
I wont Dont care that much 
between the EVo 1 and the Evo IX is more time and change happened then the WRX engine between 2006 and 2010...
The 4G63T even turned around in time
The 2.5 l WRX engine is a same design and engine from 2006 and 2010 even when it has upgrades on it like the dual valve control or different tune etc.
The 2.0l WRX engine is not a same as the 2.5l engine. The number is not a same either. Not to mention the STI 2.0l vs the STI 2.5L engine....
SO the the engine in the RA is not a same as the 2006 RA.
you can argue on this as long as you want it.
I wont
Dont care that much for the new vs old argument in this case:
amby the WRX 2006 engine is reworked for better performance and so on for 2008. But the problem is they just blow them up left and right when they came out...., that is an old story... Mean while the brand new 4B11T doesnt seems to be blown nearly that much, specially in stock stage ... /fact i know maybe 2 or 3 cases/ all of them is after some modification.
SO the the "old" engine and desing doesn t shine as much as it should against the new desing... When they came out.
Since then Both get fixed and upgraded here and there . But a point is the WRX engine shouldn't have to have a problem at all since it was based on at least a 3 years old set up, vs the completely new design...
The 4B11T is a better engine vs the WRX turbo engine.
Even the subi forums are agree with that.
tranny you can argue. Im not going there. Because i think that is mostly personal preference.
amby the WRX 2006 engine is reworked for better performance and so on for 2008. But the problem is they just blow them up left and right when they came out...., that is an old story... Mean while the brand new 4B11T doesnt seems to be blown nearly that much, specially in stock stage ... /fact i know maybe 2 or 3 cases/ all of them is after some modification.
SO the the "old" engine and desing doesn t shine as much as it should against the new desing... When they came out.
Since then Both get fixed and upgraded here and there . But a point is the WRX engine shouldn't have to have a problem at all since it was based on at least a 3 years old set up, vs the completely new design...
The 4B11T is a better engine vs the WRX turbo engine.
Even the subi forums are agree with that.
tranny you can argue. Im not going there. Because i think that is mostly personal preference.
Dec 17, 2009, 02:39 PM
#288
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amby, if you are a "stock, by-the-numbers" guy, then, that's you and of course you are welcome to your own opinion. However, not all people share your perception or your logic, so let the rest of us reserve our own opinions. Don't say "you cannot quantify" this and that, cuz I willl only laugh at you. I have my own criteria on picking cars, you have yours. Ultimately, it won't matter to the OP anymore cuz he already picked his choice :-)
Dec 17, 2009, 02:41 PM
#289
Amby, if you are a "stock, by-the-numbers" guy, then, that's you and of course you are welcome to your own opinion. However, not all people share your perception or your logic, so let the rest of us reserve our own opinions. Don't say "you cannot quantify" this and that, cuz I willl only laugh at you. I have my own criteria on picking cars, you have yours. Ultimately, it won't matter to the OP anymore cuz he already picked his choice :-)
Quantify styling.
I have no problem with people citing their opinion, that's what makes this a great forum, but please don't act as if you're in on some secret or that others don't evaluate cars as closely as you do.
Dec 17, 2009, 02:49 PM
#290
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 1,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Superior to the 4g63? Certainly. Better MIVEC, better internal construction, and less weight.
Superior to the ej25? That's a debate that could rage on for a long time.
Dec 17, 2009, 02:53 PM
#291
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
)
Last edited by tipoytm; Dec 17, 2009 at 02:59 PM.
Dec 17, 2009, 02:59 PM
#293
Yes, I believe the Ralliart has better styling, technology, value (considering the deals to be had in the US, n/a to you since you are in Canada), potential, over the WRX and some might agree with me, but never did I say ALL of you should see it the same way I do. I'm just basing my opinion on the stuff I read about on forums, research, user & publication reviews, and my own taste. I don't ever recall acting like I know something everyone else doesn't (cuz I don't), never did I even hint of being a know-it-all (unlike some individuals here )
)Hopefully Amby isn't going to accuse me of being Rob's crony like he did last with GPtourer (remember?) He may be baised, but he does talk sense and mostly true facts (even with broken english). Sure the WRX wins most of the performance categories stock-for-stock, but some people do see past numbers and publication reviews. I am one of those people. I tend to look at the whole package: technology, reliability, styling, appeal, potential, VALUE, current deals/incentives/financing, etc. I don't dismiss a car just because it showed inferior stock performance just due to bad tires from the factory or that it has less advertised horsepower. I won't deny that I like Mitsu, but I also like other brands (latest one we purchased is a VW). Heck, I even liked the new Subaru Outback (if only the deals were good, we would have gotten it instead)
Some people just like to get the most out of our money when choosing a car, not just by face value (in this case, stock performance).
He may be baised, but he does talk sense and mostly true facts (even with broken english). Sure the WRX wins most of the performance categories stock-for-stock, but some people do see past numbers and publication reviews. I am one of those people. I tend to look at the whole package: technology, reliability, styling, appeal, potential, VALUE, current deals/incentives/financing, etc. I don't dismiss a car just because it showed inferior stock performance just due to bad tires from the factory or that it has less advertised horsepower. I won't deny that I like Mitsu, but I also like other brands (latest one we purchased is a VW). Heck, I even liked the new Subaru Outback (if only the deals were good, we would have gotten it instead)Some people just like to get the most out of our money when choosing a car, not just by face value (in this case, stock performance).
Dec 17, 2009, 03:06 PM
#294
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
User reviews are always tossups... fanboys will be fanboys, but I usually weed out the garbage and look at more sensible ones. I also did test drive an RA (failed to mention that on my last post), and it impressed me A LOT, especially the TC-SST... it made me question why I got a GSR instead of an MR (when they had the same discounts at the time of purchase).
Anything else you can thow at me? :
Dec 17, 2009, 03:10 PM
#295
The publications (ie. the edmunds RA vs WRX articles) stated that performance stock-for-stock the WRX is superior, but after they swapped tires... well you know how that went.
User reviews are always tossups... fanboys will be fanboys, but I usually weed out the garbage and look at more sensible ones. I also did test drive an RA (failed to mention that on my last post), and it impressed me A LOT, especially the TC-SST... it made me question why I got a GSR instead of an MR (when they had the same discounts at the time of purchase).
Anything else you can thow at me? :
User reviews are always tossups... fanboys will be fanboys, but I usually weed out the garbage and look at more sensible ones. I also did test drive an RA (failed to mention that on my last post), and it impressed me A LOT, especially the TC-SST... it made me question why I got a GSR instead of an MR (when they had the same discounts at the time of purchase).
Anything else you can thow at me? :
By the sounds of it, you weed out the reviews that like the WRX and only focus on small sections of a single review. You've clearly made your decision on your own.
Dec 17, 2009, 03:14 PM
#296
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't matter what you think of how I came to my own preference/conclusions regarding the WRX vs. RA debate. Can't say you aren't that much different since you are pretty adamant about expressing how the WRX trumps the RA (not just on performance numbers) but overall package, correct? I respect your opinion and I do see your point(s) believe it or not...
I just don't agree with you. Apparently, the OP doesn't also since he made his choice after test driving both.
Bet this thread will get closed soon enough.
I just don't agree with you. Apparently, the OP doesn't also since he made his choice after test driving both.
Bet this thread will get closed soon enough.
Last edited by tipoytm; Dec 17, 2009 at 03:18 PM.
Dec 17, 2009, 03:20 PM
#297
I said the WRX trumps it in stock form, sure, that's undeniable. However, read the first post I made
I openly say much of it comes down to personal opinion because the cars are so close. I adviced the OP to drive both and decide for himself which car he wanted.
The OP didn't test drive both, he test drove the Ralliart and bought it that day by the sounds of it. He said he's driven the 09 WRX but who knows how long that was. Based on his post, price played a big role, or at least what options you get for a given price. I'm glad he found a car he likes though. Not everyone will like the WRX just as not everyone likes the Ralliart.
In this entire thread, not once did I say the WRX was a better overall package or that it was clearly a better car than the Ralliart. I kept to discussing quantifiable aspects of the two cars.
I haven't posted in the on-topic forums for some time but given that RA owners are giving their opinions, here's a WRX owner's opinion.
Overall cost: Agree with Ladogaboy, depends on the deals.
Cost of ownership: Agree with Ladogaboy, they're basically even. Get insurance quotes to confirm this.
External styling: Personal opinion, like Ladogaboy said.
Internal styling: Again, personal opinion.
Straight line performance: WRX wins this easily. Out of the box it has more power and when you start modding the cars, it will have more given that it has more displacement and a larger turbo. 350 HP and 350+ ft/lbs of torque are but a TBE and tune away.
Track/autocross performance: WRX, I have no idea why someone would say RA given that the RA puts down worse handling numbers than the WRX and we have yet to see a shootout (like the MRT shootout) where the RA wins. The RA is not an Evo, it doesn't have S-AYC, it doesn't have Brembos and it doesn't have the track-oriented suspension. Yes it can handle well but as we have all seen, you need to replace the tires and upgrade the brakes which adds 2000$ to the cost rather quickly. Even with new tires, the RA doesn't blow the doors off the WRX as Edmunds showed (even though they put better tires on the RA than the WRX had). It does make a huge difference though and makes the car far too close to determine a winner.
Drive both and decide for yourself.
Overall cost: Agree with Ladogaboy, depends on the deals.
Cost of ownership: Agree with Ladogaboy, they're basically even. Get insurance quotes to confirm this.
External styling: Personal opinion, like Ladogaboy said.
Internal styling: Again, personal opinion.
Straight line performance: WRX wins this easily. Out of the box it has more power and when you start modding the cars, it will have more given that it has more displacement and a larger turbo. 350 HP and 350+ ft/lbs of torque are but a TBE and tune away.
Track/autocross performance: WRX, I have no idea why someone would say RA given that the RA puts down worse handling numbers than the WRX and we have yet to see a shootout (like the MRT shootout) where the RA wins. The RA is not an Evo, it doesn't have S-AYC, it doesn't have Brembos and it doesn't have the track-oriented suspension. Yes it can handle well but as we have all seen, you need to replace the tires and upgrade the brakes which adds 2000$ to the cost rather quickly. Even with new tires, the RA doesn't blow the doors off the WRX as Edmunds showed (even though they put better tires on the RA than the WRX had). It does make a huge difference though and makes the car far too close to determine a winner.
Drive both and decide for yourself.
The OP didn't test drive both, he test drove the Ralliart and bought it that day by the sounds of it. He said he's driven the 09 WRX but who knows how long that was. Based on his post, price played a big role, or at least what options you get for a given price. I'm glad he found a car he likes though. Not everyone will like the WRX just as not everyone likes the Ralliart.
In this entire thread, not once did I say the WRX was a better overall package or that it was clearly a better car than the Ralliart. I kept to discussing quantifiable aspects of the two cars.
Last edited by ambystom01; Dec 17, 2009 at 03:29 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Robert Wesker
Evo X General
16
Jul 27, 2016 12:14 PM
keithislegit
04-06 Ralliart General
93
Jul 31, 2011 02:18 PM
Adirunnerpmc
The Loft / EvoM Car Talk Corner
8
Jul 1, 2007 11:34 AM
