2008 Mazdaspeed 3 vs. 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX vs. 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer

16 messages, Last post on Jul 29, 2008 at 12:06 PM

You are in the Mazda3 Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

What is this discussion about? Mazda MAZDASPEED MAZDA3, Subaru Impreza WRX STi, Mitsubishi Lancer, Car Comparisons, Hatchback

2008 Mazdaspeed 3 vs. 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX vs. 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart - This is the second time the 2008 Mazdaspeed 3 has beaten the 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX in a head-to-head comparison, so we're not surprised to see this result again. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 2 of 2: 1; 2; Prev; Next; Last

#6 of 16 MS3 Rules by wjpms3 Jul 15, 2008 (7:04 pm)
I was pleasantly surprised again by another sold MS3 review, but not shocked. I have owned an 02 WRX (blue wagon) and 05 WRX (silver with a CBE that had a sound like no other) and wore them out, not to mention an 05 Legacy and 06 Tribeca (that is for sale). However, when I went looking for a new ride I agonized over the WRX (turbo issues, no performance, high price), EVO (ridiculous trunk and high price), and MS3. The STI and EVO were $40,000 with the essential options, tax, title, and license. That is crazy to me. In the end I had to go with the MS3 (with all the Mazdaspeed Accessories). The WRX has lost its way. NO ONE is a bigger fan of the WRX than me. I wanted the new WRX to be great, instead it is a Camry. I'll live with the torque steer b/c everything else on the MS3 is just like the reviews say. I got it for a song and with the MS coil-overs and CBE installed plus tax, title and license it still cost less than a base WRX. There is no choice. Edmunds is right on.
#7 of 16 Re: 2008 Mazdaspeed 3 vs. 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX vs. 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer [KarenS] by ahightower Jul 15, 2008 (7:08 pm)
Replying to: KarenS (Jul 15, 2008 11:29 am) While I'm glad to see the Mazda win despite no AWD and the oldest platform by far, I think the scoring methodology is flawed. They gave 20% weight for price and another 15% for fuel economy. Fuel economy is really just another way of expressing price, or rather cost of ownership, isn't it? Seems like too much weight on such practical matter for performance cars aimed at younger buyers. Since Edmunds is famous for "True Cost to Own", I think they should combine price, resale value, and fuel economy in just one "cost of ownership" category, and that should only be worth about 20% total. Or perhaps put "sliders" on the different scoring categories so that readers themselves can set the importance of the categories according to their own priorities and come up with their own winner. Also, it was mentioned more than once that the Lancer lacked practicality because of the sedan body style, yet a Ralliart sportback was recently tested. So that's basically a wash, right? Replies to this message: aviboy97 (Jul 15, 2008 8:39 pm)
#8 of 16 Re: 2008 Mazdaspeed 3 vs. 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX vs. 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer [ahightower] by aviboy97 Jul 15, 2008 (8:39 pm)
Replying to: ahightower (Jul 15, 2008 7:08 pm) While I'm glad to see the Mazda win despite no AWD and the oldest platform by far The platforms that a vehicle is built on really have no influence over the total package of the vehicle. There are many vehicles out there that use similar platforms and yet perform totally different. Example Mazda CX-9 > Ford Edge. TOTALLY different
#9 of 16 No Cobalt SS... by nsu300zx Jul 16, 2008 (8:02 am)
Not a real win. Replies to this message: wrecker (Jul 16, 2008 2:54 pm) socal2006 (Jul 17, 2008 7:38 pm)
#10 of 16 Re:Not a real win by wrecker Jul 16, 2008 (2:54 pm)
Replying to: nsu300zx (Jul 16, 2008 8:02 am) I doubt the car that placed last, 5 places behind the MS3 in the 2006 comparo would make any difference to the results. Replies to this message: socal2006 (Jul 17, 2008 7:38 pm)
#11 of 16 re: torque steer by wrecker Jul 16, 2008 (2:57 pm)
For the difference in $$ I am willing to hold onto the steering wheel when I depart the stoplights briskly.
#12 of 16 Transmission fail. by drive571 Jul 16, 2008 (9:01 pm)
The Ralliart would have likely fulfilled the author's "$1,000 cheaper" wish had it been available with a proper transmission. I know the DCT shifts faster, but since when have manual transmissions been about time-saving rather than pleasure? I spend enough hours in the day clicking buttons; no DCT I've driven comes close to the feeling of involvement and mechanical connection afforded by a stick and three pedals. I had this car pegged as my next purchase. Now that hinges on if and when Mitsubishi announces a "base" stick-shift model. Replies to this message: merrycynic (Jul 18, 2008 7:15 am)
#13 of 16 Re:Not a real win [wrecker] by socal2006 Jul 17, 2008 (7:38 pm)
Replying to: wrecker (Jul 16, 2008 2:54 pm) Cobalt SS has been given a significant upgrade with the 2008 or 2009 model. Early reviews have been very positive both in the power and handling departments. I would like to see a comparo against this new Cobalt, although I anticipate the MS3 retaining the crown. I would've thought this Lancer had the best chance of unseating the MS3 in an edmunds comparo.
#14 of 16 Re: Transmission fail. [drive571] by merrycynic Jul 18, 2008 (7:15 am)
Replying to: drive571 (Jul 16, 2008 9:01 pm) It appears that some believe that the Ralliart really only needed better "shoes" to to run away with this win.
#15 of 16 Re: 2008 Mazdaspeed 3 vs. 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX vs. 2009 Mitsubishi Lance [svtguy] by subiepride Jul 23, 2008 (5:12 pm)
Replying to: svtguy (Jul 15, 2008 4:46 pm) Check out Cobb Tuning (www.cobbtuning.com). They have all sorts of suspension components for the '08 WRX.