Mitsubishi took the wraps off the highly anticipated Lancer Ralliart at the New York Auto show earlier this year and now according to Autoweek the Ralliart is going to start under $27K.
The Lancer Ralliart is powered by the same 2.0L MIVEC engine as the acclaimed Lancer Evolution although it has been detuned a bit to 237 horsepower (Lancer Evo has 291 HP). The 2.0L engine is mated to Mitsubishi's Twin-Clutch SST transmission with paddle shifters and puts its power to the ground through all four wheels. Even with all-wheel-drive and 237 horsepower the Lancer Ralliart achieves 17/25mpg.
A loaded Ralliart with Recaro seats, Sirius satellite radio, HID headlights and a navigation system will top out near $30,000.
The Lancer Ralliart aka WRX competitor, will hit in showrooms in September and make up approximately 10 percent of Lancer's yearly sales in the US.
Final prices are still being finalized and may change due to fluctuations in the dollar and yen. Let's hope it's still close to $27K.
Full Story: Autoweek
Related Stories:
Detroit 2008: 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart Unveiled with 235HP
2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback Will be Unveiled in Paris
| « Previous | Next » |
Comments (19)
If its under 30k, it will be well worth the money.
the part i like best is the twin clutch SST transmission.
Posted by cobaltssman | July 9, 2008 10:49 PM
Posted on July 9, 2008 22:49
@ cobaltssman, the twin clutch gearboxes are amazing...I drove a 06 VW GTi DSG 2.0t and these things are PERFECT for turbo cars. Have you driven one yet? If you haven't, go test drive a used GTi DSG just for fun.
This will easily be Mitsu's best car for the money, it's a detuned Evo for $10k less. $1,500 in aftermarket goodies and I'm sure it will easily keep up with an Evo.
A slightly used creampuff (regretful purchase original owner) will be on my short list for a car to thrash until it's just inside of warranty coverage and then sell it.
Posted by Noya | July 10, 2008 12:37 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 00:37
"Even with all-wheel-drive and 237 horsepower the Lancer Ralliart achieves 17/25mpg."
Terrible... Same or worse gas mileage than most full size trucks get.
Lame
Posted by Boooo! | July 10, 2008 4:26 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 04:26
maybe 2009 comes after 2008....maybe.
Posted by Waldorf (statler is on holidays) | July 10, 2008 4:39 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 04:39
@Boooo!
What full size truck are you talking about that gets 17/25?
The top EPA rated full sizes are a 3.7L V6 Ram 1500 with a 6 speed manual with 16/19 and a Silverado 4.3 V6 with 15/20
Posted by Jake | July 10, 2008 6:02 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 06:02
I think the twin cluth tranny is a pretty nice option for consumers to have, but as stated this is the wrx competitor and with the way things are going today it's only going to be limited production car. What I do appreciate is that companies are starting to be more flexible on mixing and matching powertrain components in their vehicles. I miss the days when you could order a car with any option or engine you wanted. If you have a dual clutch tranny, why not offer it as an option on all models (with a similar platform). So, good job Mitsu on some good decsisions, but too bad $27k is still too much for Mitsu, only car company that can manage to depreciate faster than a Ford.
Posted by thetruth | July 10, 2008 6:50 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 06:50
My 287hp Nissan 350z gets 17/25..........weird.
Posted by Art | July 10, 2008 8:33 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 08:33
My 287hp Nissan 350z gets 17/25mpg..........weird.
Posted by Art | July 10, 2008 8:34 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 08:34
Art ,
agreed not that impressive. My 300c 340 hp 17/25
Posted by Bob Tschopp | July 10, 2008 9:10 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 09:10
17/25, those numbers look vaguely familiar on a window sticker I have laying around somewhere, but I believe that was 400hp. Then that other sticker I have laying around says 19/28 for 345hp?
Posted by Avatar | July 10, 2008 9:26 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 09:26
My 98 Trans Am with 315HP gets 17/28; Why so little gas mileage from a 4 banger?
Posted by Wayne | July 10, 2008 9:32 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 09:32
The gas mileage sucks just the same for the WRX (and probably the Evo as well) at like 17/20. You know it's a 2 liter engine, why is it burning that much gas cruising around? Sometimes I just think auto engineers are given very specific goals and they only achieve those:
Project specs for the Evo.
-You will be use the 2.0L engine with turbo.
-Needs to make at least 280 hp.
-Torque needs to be relatively good
-Handling great.
And that's it. They just built that car, no mind for economy or anything else. And I know you say, "But it's an Evo, it's not for the economy." Good grief if I want to burn money cruising on the interstate I'll do it in something better than a turbo four banger. Why not a classic muscle car with a blower? Then when people look at you, it's cause you have a kick ass car, not because it's a factory rice rocket.
That and it sounds much cooler than a turbo 4 banger.
Posted by Brian | July 10, 2008 9:57 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 09:57
this thing should be a hybrid and i bet it cant even tow a small boat / jet ski?
Posted by dennisil | July 10, 2008 11:58 AM
Posted on July 10, 2008 11:58
The price point is too high. Preliminary reports stated that it would start at around $25k, which is right in the ballpark to compete with the WRX, but pushing $25k base, which on a mitsu is pretty stripped, is gonna hurt sales quite a bit. Especially considering that to get a reasonably equipped model the price jumps to $30k or more. Might as well spend a few thousand more and get an Evo, or get a year-old Evo X for 30 grand or less.
I was really looking forward to this model as a spiritual successor to the 1st and 2nd gen DSMs (eclispe talon laser)...
Posted by pfroo40 | July 10, 2008 1:27 PM
Posted on July 10, 2008 13:27
My GOD! That car is ugly!
Posted by Chad | July 10, 2008 2:11 PM
Posted on July 10, 2008 14:11
First of all it's AWD you loose a bit of economy on an AWD car, sorry it's true if it FWD It would likely get like 19/27, And these are the new fuel economy numbers under the old system you would be looking at 2~3 mpg more for both figures, so under the old economy figures I would expect like 19/28 under the old measurement system. Even so I had hoped for 18/26 or better from this car. The handling is seriously jacked up .8g on the skid pad? I think I will pass for now.
Posted by Travis | July 11, 2008 12:33 AM
Posted on July 11, 2008 00:33
yeah great, in 2wd format its as fuel efficient as a hybrid suburban. lol
Posted by Boooo! | July 11, 2008 7:51 AM
Posted on July 11, 2008 07:51
This car is awesome, I was hoping that it would be closer to $25k but at 27 its still a great car for the money. Of course with Mitsu resale being the way it is, its probably best to pick up a used one in a year or 2.
Posted by gm0n3y | July 11, 2008 2:20 PM
Posted on July 11, 2008 14:20
I thought someone might bring up the new and old fuel ratings, so my 345hp car now gets 17/25, despite me getting over 30 on the highway all the time. Not exactly an around town car, so couldn't give real good numbers on that based on experiences driving the car.
Posted by Avatar | July 11, 2008 2:37 PM
Posted on July 11, 2008 14:37