My understanding was that aluminum didn't have metal memory like steel, so it doesn't simply pop back to shape.

 

Material is more expensive, it requires specific tooling (can't use the same stamps as the same part made of steel). It can't be spot welded to the steel unibody. It requires more engineering. There is simply more cost all around..

 

It's a softer material and tends to stretch when it gets dinged. Once the material stretches it's really hard to get the panel to conform to it's original shape.

I think if it's a car like the Evo that is going to have it's own dedicated tooling for the front fenders purely because they are wider and they literally just bolt on to the structure the cost of going to aluminum is pretty negligible. However I'm pretty sure the RS was never getting it's own fenders so, when you factor in just the cost of the tooling your bang for your buck on weight reduction goes way down. Especially when you look at things you have to redesign for making the car AWD. If you knock out 2 gallons of fuel capacity while making clearance for the driveshaft, well there is your aluminum fender savings and them some for no additional cost. You need to redesign a cross member and make it aluminum versus the steel one, etc...

 

Everything about aluminum is expensive, the cost is not negligible as some has mentioned, I promise you.


It's really why you don't see it that often.
It was amazing the Evo 8 & 9 MR came with so much aluminum, one benefit to the Evo9 being a minor model change to the Evo8
As an OE you have to dedicate yourself to it like Ford has with the F150 to get it cheaper as the volume is so high, but for something like an NSX full body aluminum, it could never be a cheap vehicle no matter what the drivetrain is.

 

I guess im just not getting how this is an advantageous feature. Like I said before a stall is a stall and time/engineering really should not have been in my view wasted when you can hit the button, turn the key or learn appropriately.

 

With the RS coming state side and having HP & TQ figures of 350, do you think that that will force Subaru to upgrade the new FA20 from the WRX engine to an FA25 for the next STi and finally increase the HP & TQ figures to compete with the RS?


But if that does happen, do you think it would also now be priced in between the Golf R & RS around the $50K range?

 

no way anyone is paying 50k for a subawoooo NO WAY!

 

Barely, and more based on the body panels than the chassis.

Focus ST: 172" L x 72" W x 58" H
Golf R: 168" L x 71" W x 57" H
S3 (same chassis as Golf R): 176" L x 71" W x 55" H

Actually the Golf R hatch is larger with the back seats up and larger with the seats down than the Focus RS. Interior is basically the same as the Focus RS but the Golf R has more legroom in the back but a little less in the front. You guys really need to do more research.

Golf R:
Front Head room: 38.4 in.
Rear Head room: 38.1 in.
Front Leg room: 41.2 in.
Rear Leg room: 35.6 in.
Rear cargo space: 22.8 cubic feet
Rear cargo space with seats down: 52.7 cubic feet

Focus RS:
Front Head room: 38.3 in.
Rear Head room: 38.0 in.
Front Leg room: 43.1 in.
Rear Leg room: 33.2 in.
Rear cargo space: 19.8 cubic feet
Rear cargo space with seats down: 43.8 cubic feet

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Ford basically copied the Golf and Polo when they made the Focus and the Fiesta. The suspension design is almost a 1:1 copy.

 

Why no one copy the Evo 1:1? Seriously though, its interesting to consider that Mitsu put so much effort into building a robust AWD system, and now there is the potential for no further use of it. Mitsu should sell the design to another auto maker.

 

I think it's handy. I've stalled in traffic before, and I've been driving manual for more than a decade, and enjoy competing. Sometimes I'm lazy or tired or distracted, and that can lead to a stall. Being able to restart the car my just depressing the clutch is useful when you have a jackass in a lifted truck behind you who thinks he's at the Daytona 500. I doubt this took hundreds of hours to engineer.

 

Mitsubishi management has missed the mark on so many things its amazing they are still in business. I remember reading Mitsu was going to pull out of making sedans because there was too much competition and instead focus on crossovers. Meanwhile every automaker and their brother are making crossovers.

Mitsubishi needs do some top down house cleaning and hire the guys running Hyundai and Kia.

 

They still use variants of it in the outlander, outlander sport and Lancer SE/GT AWC.

In fact the AWC in that variation has some similarities with Haldex systems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_AWC

 

In all honestly it's probably just a few lines of code added to or removed from the start/stop system they already have.

 

Focus RS “rebirth of an icon” - Ep 4: Test-track trials

 

I know that's early production and in the wet but it looks like it has some wimpy valving. Lots of pogoing around. I've been getting a bit less and less excited for this car and think an EvoX or STI would be a better choice still.


If STI ever gets a new motor to keep up with the power of other things offered right now it should easily be the top car to have.