Author Topic: CTC Review: 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback Ralliart (Read 6723 times)

Autos_Editor · « **on:** July 07, 2009, 09:05:06 pm »

Click Image to Enlarge

Somewhat fittingly, that this week I am in a rally-inspired car since I will be doing my own rallycross on Saturday. I won't be taking this car -- too risky -- but I'm sure it would be a blast! This week, I am zipping around town in a Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback Ralliart -- phew, that's a mouthful. I'd classify this week's car as Mitsubishi's answer to the Subaru WRX, an answer that Subaru counter-punched with the more-powerful WRX265 earlier this year. More...

Turbo Bob · « **Reply #1 on:** July 07, 2009, 11:35:47 pm »

Much as I love this car and am a bit of a Mitsubishi fan, I still think the WRX 265 is a better car, and better value for money.

Now if this car came with a manual 'box, the Evo's (300bhp) engine and a sensible price tag, I might be persuaded.

si · « **Reply #2 on:** July 08, 2009, 01:36:17 am »

The dog can't even sit comfortably out in the back. Thus this thing isn't particularly practical... Well, unless you compare it to the 7-cubic-foot-trunked Evo!

toolatecrew · « **Reply #3 on:** July 08, 2009, 06:12:22 am »

13.8 cu. ft. of cargo seat up? Bah my GTI has more space

Blueprint · « **Reply #4 on:** July 08, 2009, 12:29:13 pm »

Good-looking car, seen a few, but dropping the autobox and about 1500 $ would help sales a lot.

initial_D · « **Reply #5 on:** July 08, 2009, 07:39:37 pm »

I am waiting for the driving impressions.

Did spend a good 20 minutes testing the RalliArt sedan a while, thought it was a nice & comfort package, with a bit of a good. As for flat out sportiness, leave that to the EVO.

Alex_S · « **Reply #6 on:** July 08, 2009, 10:50:51 pm »

I think this would be a fun car to drive.. Interior looks bloated tho (how that swooping curve across the dash seem to take up more space than necessary) and simiply does not do it for me.. Seats a nice touch tho..

Tukas77 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 09, 2009, 12:21:39 am »

Totally piece of crap for 40K, this is insane!

Mitlov · « **Reply #8 on:** July 09, 2009, 12:30:15 am »

The manual seat adjustment doesn't bother me one iota. Lighter, cheaper, and allows for more foot-room under the seats.

But the lack of a telescoping steering wheel in a car this price is crazy. Part of a good performance car is making sure it fits the driver ergonomically, right? It's hard to really push a car if the wheel is too close or too far away, no?

Mitlov · « **Reply #9 on:** July 09, 2009, 12:37:06 am »

Quote from: toolatecrew on July 08, 2009, 06:12:22 am

13.8 cu. ft. of cargo seat up? Bah my GTI has more space

Your GTI also has FWD. The MkV Golf R32, with its 4Motion system taking up part of the cargo area, has 9.7 cubic feet of cargo space behind the rear seats.

GTEC28 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 09, 2009, 02:41:31 am »

interesting review of the navigation system!

According to JD POWER however
"The Mitsubishi Electric Navigation System Supplied to the Mitsubishi Lancer
Ranks Highest among Factory-Installed Navigation Systems (2008)"

toolatecrew · « **Reply #11 on:** July 09, 2009, 07:20:50 am »

Quote from: Mitlov on July 09, 2009, 12:37:06 am

Quote from: toolatecrew on July 08, 2009, 06:12:22 am
13.8 cu. ft. of cargo seat up? Bah my GTI has more space

Your GTI also has FWD. The MkV Golf R32, with its 4Motion system taking up part of the cargo area, has 9.7 cubic feet of cargo space behind the rear seats.

And the WRX has 19 cubic feet AND AWD .

I guess I expected more from the Mitsu based on the admittedly cool commercial where they throw all their gear out the window toland in the hatch. From the look of the hatch it appears cavernous in there but really its not

wing · « **Reply #12 on:** July 09, 2009, 08:00:27 am »

Quote from: GTEC28 on July 09, 2009, 02:41:31 am

interesting review of the navigation system!

According to JD POWER however
"The Mitsubishi Electric Navigation System Supplied to the Mitsubishi Lancer
Ranks Highest among Factory-Installed Navigation Systems (2008)"

That is interesting, I noticed another annoying thing today. The display is not inset into the dash at all and cannot be seen when it is sunny (it was raining the past few days).

The Mighty Duck · « **Reply #13 on:** July 09, 2009, 03:11:52 pm »

Quote from: toolatecrew on July 09, 2009, 07:20:50 am

And the WRX has 19 cubic feet AND AWD .

I guess I expected more from the Mitsu based on the admittedly cool commercial where they throw all their gear out the window toland in the hatch. From the look of the hatch it appears cavernous in there but really its not

I really think the WRX265 blows the Lancer out of the water. More power, real transmission, more practical... how do the AWD systems compare between the two? Is either one "better"?

vdk · « **Reply #14 on:** July 09, 2009, 04:25:30 pm »

Quote from: Demosthenes X on July 09, 2009, 03:11:52 pm

... how do the AWD systems compare between the two? Is either one "better"?

x2
Details on that please.

toolatecrew · « **Reply #15 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:15:55 am »

WHat does it rev on the highway? Curious if they geared it short. Tire and road noise on these type of cars is bad enough but buzzing engine would be a killer.

wing · « **Reply #16 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:18:30 am »

Buzzing engine it has 3000rpm at 120

toolatecrew · « **Reply #17 on:** July 10, 2009, 08:47:03 pm »

Quote from: wing on July 10, 2009, 09:18:30 am

Buzzing engine it has 3000rpm at 120

So its noisy at that RPM? Interesting. My GTI does 2900 at 120 and to be honest I don't even notice the engine. The tire and road noise is much more noticable. 3000 isn't horrible. My V50 2.4 wagon turned 3100 RPM. Its all about tone and feel of the engine I guess.

I really don't understand why they don't make 6th longer in these cars. 2500 RPM they still make plenty of power to climb a hill. So what if it drops an extra 500 rpm on upshift. If you redline in 5th you are WAYYYY over any legal limit in US or canada. Why do they do this?

Drover 500KM today and GTI didn't downshift once on the highway 120 steady up every hill you can imagine. Dropping tose extra rpms would alos give you some extar gas mileage. What is the rational?

nsmyhte · « **Reply #18 on:** July 11, 2009, 03:43:56 pm »

Wing, sure its the tranny not letting the turbos spool up from idle and not just good old fashioned turbo lag?

wing · « **Reply #19 on:** July 11, 2009, 04:31:00 pm »

Yes it is turbo lag, but a manual car would let you rev and dump which you can't really do with this transmission.

Author Topic: CTC Review: 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback Ralliart (Read 6723 times)

Tukas77