So which is it?

 

You said you had a 2008 WRX, so how exactly is that relevant when the comparison is to a 2009+ WRX to a 2009+ Ralliart? It's hilarious how you want to draw into question my posts because of a lack of experience when you haven't indicated you have driven a 2009+ WRX.

Source? If you want to play hardball and question my posts, I will do the same to you.

If by defensive you mean wanting real facts and by smacking down you mean wanting real facts, than yes, I do want real facts to be posted.

 

Didn't the speed3 and the cobalt ss beat both the WRX and the RA?

 

Are you ****ing kidding me? You are aware that someone saying "in stock trim, the WRX is the better performer" is not the same as saying "the Ralliart is a POS" or do you only think in extremes? The WRX is the better performer in stock trim, that much is obvious based on the data I've posted, but that same data reveals that the Ralliart is still a quick car. Is it as quick as a WRX? No, but is it slow? No.

 

My Mustang has better numbers all over the internet, I have a superior car than your X. You agree?

 

At the end of the day, yep. Both the WRX and the Ralliart were quicker (0-60 times) but the reviewers liked the MS3 and the Cobalt SS better.

 

I don't own an X but no I would not agree. However, that is for subjective reasons. That is my entire point, deciding between the Ralliart and the WRX boils down to personal preference. My only issue was with the misinformation being spread by one member, namely that the Ralliart is a better performer in stock trim and that the Ralliart is superior in modified trim. Both those statements are false. The WRX is the better performer in stock trim and it is just as good in modified trim. Does this make it the better car? No, there are some aspects that cannot be quantified and that is why it is important for someone to drive both cars and then decide. I'm sure if you asked people on a Mustang forum, they'd agree a Mustang is better than an Evo. If you asked this on an Evo forum, you'd get a very different response.

 

To help remind you (dang long term memory, so difficult for trolls), I've quote myself:
What do you know, you once again have mis-quoted:
So this just proves that once again, yes AGAIN since this is the umpteen millionth time you've come trolling on through, you are not interested in anything more than argument for the sake of arguing. So much so that you mis-read and mis-quote just to fan the flames of a fire that never was.

 

That brings me to my point. I do not own a mustang but AWD gives you a nice feeling coming out of corners than driving a RWD monster with little room for error. Is this included in any of the "numbers" you posted on the internet? It does not, therefore you cannot state which car is "better" or "worse" based on the numbers, there are several other factors which appeals to different crowds. Would I have given up 0.5 seconds 0-60 and 0.05 skidpad ratings for a transmission that performs like a manual and can handle intense stop-and-go traffic? No.
Everyone of your post about RA's are about how ****ty of a car it is. You do not own one, nor have you given any attempt at looking at the technologies behind it, as well as the potential it holds.
It would be like someone posting, "my Munstang has better numbers than your evo x" every time an EVO post has been made.
You need to stop bashing on this car. At least not in its own forum section.

 

Find one post of mine in this thread where I say the Ralliart is ****ty. Find one. In fact, I have said that is a good performer and people should drive both cars and decide for themselves. That is hardly the statements of someone who thinks the Ralliart sucks.

I can say, based on the performance numbers, which car has the better performance numbers, which is what I have been doing. Have I said anything about how the cars drive? No, have I said anything about feel? No. What I have said is that, in stock trim, the WRX is the better performer. That is made clear by the better speed numbers, the better handling numbers and the better braking numbers.

How do you know I have not looked into the technology behind the Ralliart? That's a pretty baseless assumption, and is incorrect at that.

 

What Amby is tiptoeing around in that statement (because it completely destroys his stance) is that internet performance number hold little, if any, credibility. But hey "source"?

 

Since you seem to suffer from short-term memory loss.

Post #7
Post #20

Hmmm...stock for stock, the Ralliart is not quicker than the WRX nor is it able to dance around like a 300 lb ballerina.

From then, all you have done is repeatedly fan the flames by claiming I'm a troll, haven't driven the cars in question and, in general, have not provided any actual information but have just attacked me. Yeah, I'm definitely the problem here .

 

Right. blindly repeating your "internet numbers" argument over and over in everyone of your post shows that you do not hate on a certain car. You, sir, are and idiot.

LOL MUSTANG HAS BETTER NUMBERS THAN EVERY CAR LOL AND EVERY CAR IS GOOD

 

I provided the sources. In fact, three separate sources that show the WRX is the better performer. Would you rather we just take your "expert" opinion as fact?

 

Quicker is accelerating off the line, don't know why that translate as more power. If the reviewer just buried the throttle, the SST limits itslef in an act of self preservation.
Yes the RA is quicker, even stock against a stock STi (I've done both of those as well). It jumps off the line faster, then the larger power of the STi finally kicks in in 3rd and the car starts to gain/pass.
But hey, you've driven all of them, why should it even be a question.