It's in this week's Autoweek. Got bored so I scanned it.


Article here

 

Subject says it all. What is it that people can't separate the two? A similar comparison might be a civic type R and a civic EX...although the difference is less, nobody buying/reviewing an EX expects a type R.

You'd think that auto reviewers, of all people, would take that into consideration. Has anyone EVER read a review of a US Lancer that didn't have equally as much about the Evolutions as it did about how the Lancer doesn't stack up? I wish people would learn to just say what the car is rather than what it is not. ...and was never intended to be.

 

Ditto...it's all the same **** being fed from the mags. People just can't separate Lancer from Evo. It's annoying.

 

Yes and its very annoying that I have to go to other sites that bash the Lancer because its not an "evo" Lancer. I guess i'll have to keep educating them...

 

Couldn't agree more.. Only seen like another 30 other magazines bash the lancer. YEAH, Granted it's not an Evo but hell not like it's incapable of more power then what it comes with.

 

I tend to agree with you guys, the Lancer is a very nice vehicle and I personally would be proud to own one.

But I think you have it a tad wrong. The problem that the magazines have with the car is it's name. When you call something "The Lancer OZ Rally Edition, you expect more than is offered. Once again, I do believe that the Lancer is a great car, and has excellent value. I just don't understand why they would name the car a "Rally" Edition, while handicapping it so much (no AWD, SOHC, etc). Throwing on some sporty rims and a spoiler in no way qualifies you to carry the name "Rally". That is the problem here! And YES, I understand you can add some basic mods to boost engine performance, but it is coming from the Factory and being called the "Rally Edition"!

Just my 2 cents. And please, I am NOT bashing the Lancer. I think it's a sweet car, and almost bought one myself last week! I am just offering my perspective!!!

 

Thats the biggest reason why all the mags have been bashing it, mitsu calling it something it is'nt.

 

Well, mitsu done it for the lancer, but I'm proud to say that my lancer performs very well in the track and the road. I'm a proud owner of this car, inspite of mitsu trying make what it's not.

 

I do not think that is the magazine's exact problem. I think they share the rest of the country's failure to possess common sense. They call it the OZ Rally Edition because it comes with OZ Rally Wheels and OZ Rally Embroidered Floor mats. I seriously wish more people would take their english studies a little bit more seriously, because frankly it seems that many people are failing to understand this country's suposed 1st language. Magazines tend to forget that the Lancer is a Mirage replacement. Whoever bought a Mirage and complained that IT wasn't as good as its AWD cousing the Evolutions I-VI? I highly doubt anyone did. Thusly why the Lancer comes with such small rims even in the OZ package: The Mirage came with 13's if I recall, so 15s are a pretty big step up production-wise. Mirage came with an uggggggly interior the OZ gets the Evo VII/Cedia Interior much better. Mirage front struts with rear Multi-Link the OZ gets Front Struts with Anti-Roll Bars and Rear Multi-link with Anti-Roll Bars. 130lb-ft to 116lb-ft. In short the OZ is farrrrr more upgradable than the Mirage ever was despite the 600lb weight difference.

 

I prefer to think of mine as a Mirage Plus with a better name and nicer looks.

 

Its all about the Anti-Roll Bars.

 

Yeah, what they said