stupid question is the RA awd??

 

^^ yes, i believe it is the same awd system from the IX.

 

the reason i think Mitsu is DOING this is to compete with the WRX they have the regular wrx ,the wrx turbo ,wrx TR , and the sti soo they have something to compete with the subby market thats just my OP.

 

ERROR
The WRX is turbo, maybe you meant Impreza
The TR was dropped after the 06-07 model years, SUbaru hasn't made a tr version for the last two years.

 

It's funny, on the ralliart page everyone thinks the RA performance is not that good. Keep in mind the turbo and intercooler are different and it will not be an easy swap up to X specs. But I do hope TTP can do the zchip for the RA and get 30-40 more HP out of it. No one knows what a stock baseline is yet as the first buyers just got them over the weekend. So who knows if it has more power than advertised.

Keep in mind also that the RA has the GTS suspension with some upgraded rates. No reinforced chassis like the X. No where near the brakes, nor the wide stance and wider tires. Straight line it may hang with some work but not in the corners. I believe it does weigh a few hundred pounds less than the MR due to no AYC.

 

LOL what, compared to a non turbo Lancer?

We know that much of the power missing on the Evo X was the factory rich tune that could quite easily be changed for better power delivery. In terms of turbocharger, they should consider sacrificing 100-200 rpms of spoolup for a larger turbo that will hold 22 psi at redline and then set the boost to be 24 in the low to mid and taper to 20 psi at redline stock. That along with some better tuning would put the Evo X in the 350 HP range as a starting point with minimal impact of reliability and drivability.

I think the RA should perform as it does now to be competitive with the WRX and they should improve the Evo X models if need be.

 

It's all relative. The wrx isn't that much slower than the STi either, if you wanna look at it like that

 

You haven't seen a RA on the track yet. Evo will tear it up with the new suspension setup vs RA using Evo 9 crap setup.

 

The 09 WRX 265. It beats the RA by .3 0-60. Trans difference just like GSR/MR. RA has no launch mode so it probably takes a little longer to get spooled up and going. Top end it is not close...WRX. Turbo must be falling flat on the RA on the upper end.

 

So now the IX AWD system is crap because it doesn't have AYC? Better let those guys know.

 

He said suspension, not drivetrain.

 

LS460L or H and the GS400 comes damn close (speaking for boats of course).
As for Evo's and RA's seeing track time...granted I was surprised when I first went to a road course, but there were more Evos then any other brand let alone vehicle there (and no, it wasnt an evo event).
I think more people autox and road the evo then people on there think-or maybe they dont post up as much as the rest of us do. In the end, who the F cares that the RA is a quick car? In 5 years, the X will be the slow Evo...its not always about numbers-if thats your thing-go by a hemi and a ***** pump.

 

Well, since the RA doesn't have the IX suspension, that's not really an issue. The RA has the lancer suspension, which is worse, which would have helped his position of ****ting on the RA.

 

In 5 years???? Hell, the damn thing is slow now! Granted it's not all about 0-60 and numbers, but when you design a car around 0-60, numbers and handling, then in a redesign you loose 0-60 while every other competitor is nipping at your heals, then yes, it is about numbers.

 

I assure you that the 1/4 mile times are noticeably faster on the MR and even faster on the GSR. Aside from that the EVO will absolutely destroy the ralliart in every other way. Look to some more tests before judging the two cars, because magazines vary greatly. Hell, I've seen such differences on the X's 0-60 tests that you'd think they weren't even the same car. One magazine got 4.6 out of the X GSR and another got 5.4!?!?!? It all depends on the track conditions that day, the driver, and that driver's familiarity with the car. Car and driver figured out that to get that 4.6 0-60 you gotta take the revs up to the 7600 rpm fuel cut, NOT just shifting at the 7k redline. So like I said, wait for some more reviews and I assure you the numbers will be further off from each other.