Evo MR, if your going to try and make the Ralliart faster/better.

EVO FTW!

 

Can I add the choice of 09 WRX because I can't afford MR and the R/A handles/brakes like crap.

 

the 09 WRX should be faster then a X MR... since they tested it with the Cobalt SS and beats the SS on track. Now in other tests the SS beats the X MR..
OOHHHH i LOOOve Those great independent test results

WRX beats SS on track
"quicker than the Cobalt SS and the Ralliart"

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=7106


SS beats X MR track
"Quickest of those behind the Cobalt was the Mitsubishi Lancer Evo MR, "

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...re+page-9.html

 

I would have to go with the majority and say go for the MR. If you can afford the Evo experience then why settle.

 

mee toooo GSR FTW

 

MR !!! ......... 300 whp fo life FTW! or Limp mode every day if you go past 300 whp. GSR fo tha ***** fackin click !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OL4I6_XibHU

 

i agree. many people buy a wrx and spend $ to replicate the performance of an sti.
the only problem is once you do that, you have no warranty in many cases. the same may happen with the ralliart/mr issue.

 

Dude, the differences between the two cars is more than you realize. The AWD system on the ralliart is a lot more than just a missing AYC, it's ALL OF THE DIFFS, front, center and rear that are all different. The center diff isn't even an active type, it's a standard clutch pack type. Moving on, the suspension setup on the X isn't just stiffer, it's layout and geometry is entirely different and can't be used on the narrower track ralliart. You would have to push the wheels further out, which means that you would need the front fenders and rear doors, and rear fenders of the evo to fit them. Plus, you would need the front and rear axles too since they are longer on the evo. Moving onto the engine; despite what the OP said, the internals of the ralliart are NOT the same as the evo.

Subaru put much stronger internals in the STI then what's in the WRX and I guarantee that mitsu did the same. It wouldn 't make financial sense to put stronger, more expensive internals than what the engine needs. Then you have the fact that the tranny is a handicapped version of the SST and well, I don't think I have to make my point anymore. There's a reason that the EVO costs 10k more, and if you were to order and install all of the parts needed to convert a ralliart to an EVO you would spend 20k in parts and labor!

That's like the old joke with body shops, that if you look at the cost of replacing a door, a bumper, etc and you were to piece the entire car together based on parts costs and labor to install them, a 15k civic would cost you about 150k! Anyway, if you are looking for a lancer that's a bit more sporty than the base model and don't plan on doing much modification, then a ralliart is for you. If you want a race car with big potential from modifications, get the evo. Just remember, you need to get that "evo-lite" crap out of your head and realize that like road and track says, "it's more of a maxi lancer than a mini evo."

Car and driver also made a similar comment and here is a direct quote, "Is the Ralliart a cut-price Evo? Actually, it’s more of a Lancer in lipstick." Sorry man, but it's just the truth. I am not trying to rain on your parade, but if you can't afford an EVO and get a ralliart make sure you realize that it's never gonna be an evo. Realizing this now will save you lots of money in wasted mods in the future. Again, not trying to be a dick, I'm just trying to make you realize the truth and to try to better educate you on the REAL differences between the 2 cars. Good luck with whatever you end up purchasing. BTW, here are links to road and track's review of the car as well as car and driver's.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=7103

 

Then that means the 2009 WRX is faster around a track than the STI.

 

EVO all day every day even on Kwanza.

 

and the Evo MR and the GSR since faster then a Cobalt SS.

 

They never tested the GSR on the track against the cobalt, Rob. The GSR has been shown to be faster than the MR in many tests because it's lighter and stiffer sprung. Anyway, the evo, as you should know, is the far superior car to the cobalt or wrx. The MR is just slow in a straight line in stock form and that's the only reason that it was so close in lap times with that POS cobalt; because the test track in that test had long straights.

In terms of handling and braking there's no comparison. Plus, the cobalt was actually slower than the evo in road and track's test, remember that. It was only car and driver that showed the cobalt to be basically tied, and even then it was only like 1/100th of a second faster. Also, I assure you that the WRX is not faster than the STi, subaru woud not allow that. Not only that but the EVO is already proven to be faster than the STi, so I think that you're misinterpreting the test results.

Most importantly though, the WRX is not faster than a Cobalt SS and certainly not faster than an EVO around a track. In this test all they did was the usual 0-60 and skidpad, and they ran the cars on an AUTO CROSS, NOT A ROAD RACE COURSE. That's why the WRX beat the cobalt, because of AWD. On an auto cross the EVO would crush and embaress a cobalt SS or a WRX, so again, I think you're not really interpreting the facts correctly here.

 

You didn't say money was a worry, so I would say MR is the option.

 

i drove the raliart yesterday and its really nothing compared to the evo. i like the interior/extier, but same feeling i get from an evo is just not there. plus its wayyyyy overpriced. here i can pay 3gs more and get a evo gsr. or a used evo for less.
my 2 cents

 

I'll be the first to agree that how a car feels on a daily driven basis takes precedence over how the car is actually performing. My '93 Sentra SE-R is a lot more fun to drive on the street than the X in a lot of regards. However if you're tracking the car, how it feels goes right out the window. Just because a person can't feel that the X is stiffer than the IX won't translate into the X performing less. My X felt slower with the ACS on than when I had it turned off, but the difference in my lap times were quite significant.