carcounsel.com |HID|

Do you like your cars analogue or digital? With an inherently low CG and body weight or with a lot of technology to compensate for a high CG and a more portly whole?

As Peter Tomalin points out in this month’s evo...

Yes it still rolls a bit, certainly more than an Evo, which also has sharper steering responses, but there’s an honesty and transparency to the STI, a kind of analogue feel, that’s very appealing.

I’m not arguing for one over the other, I’m arguing against anyone who obsesses over numbers and spec sheets when buying cars.

The problem is that the Ralliart is a heavy machine, what with all that transmission, and the SST transmission has an annoyingly tardy getaway. All would be forgiven were the Ralliart a rousing drive, but for all its claimed power the engine never really lets rip. You find yourself revving it to death to goad it along, easily done given the strange shortness of the intermediate gear ratios, and it’s much harder work than a torquey turbomotor should be. It sounds nondescript, too. But it will all come good in the corners, yes? No. This Lancer really misses its tougher brother’s AYC and the resultant favourable torque distribution to each rear wheel. There’ll be no lovely powerslides here; go too quickly into a tight bend and it understeers like the nose-heavy car it is. – evo

If you read the mainstream U.S. magazines, you’re probably of the opinion that the new EVO is better than/faster than the STI. But there’s something troubling about the weight gain and the packaging and something even more disconcerting about the new platform that places you much higher off the ground, not to mention shares its roots with a Caliber.

Problem is, most U.S. magazines get so hellbent on numbers and trick technology that they don’t remember to steward the essentials: subjective accomplishment, involvement.

Thank goodness the British magazines aren’t similarly afflicted… Here’s a quote from evo

You always feel like you’re sitting slightly higher and more upright in an Evo… Somewhere inside the Evo X is the brilliantly pointy, adjustable chassis that has been improving for nine generations. But Mitsubishi has tried to civilize the tenth gen and it’s missed the mark. The steering is more direct than the Impreza’s and therefore initially nicer, but you very soon realise that it has no real feel. For a car that you want to drive on its nose this is not good, because you just don’t have the confidence to throw it into corners. It feels up on tiptoes and it’s more instantly sensitive and adjustable than the STI but you can’t enjoy it because you feel like you’re controlling what’s going on underneath you by remote. It really is like playing a computer game. The engine is disappointing too, feeling very thin in its delivery and lacking in grunt compared with the STI. It is also possibly the dullest sounding engine ever to drone from a performance car – it’s like listening to someone Hoovering a couple of rooms away. The gearing is very short, which is fine when you can flick up and down the box so easily, but as Roger Green says, there’s a permanent flurry of activity going on yet somehow you’re never quite in the right gear. The best solution is to leave it in Drive and let the spookily intuitive computer program shuffle cogs for you. Not something I ever thought I’d say about an Evo. The Evo X SST is still a very quick car across the ground, its ability to carry speed is phenomenal and there are moments when you catch glimpses of why we love Evos, but they’re fleeting thanks to the layer of desensitising civility Mitsubishi has added in. A car like the Evo is not, should not, be a mainstream car. Jumping back into the Impreza as the sun sinks, it’s clear the STI wins this battle. It’s more engaging to drive, the engine feels much stronger and there’s simply more of what you want, what you expect, from a thrilling rally-stage refugee. When you add in the price difference too, it’s a clear winner.

Another thing you’ve probably heard about is likely to be the new STI’s incessant, stubborn understeer. Like I’ve said before, this is a red flag that the reviewer is employing a textbook driving technique rather than learning the nuances of a car. Just as the new EVO/BMW X6, Acura TL, BMW M3 want you to squeeze down on the throttle at the moment understeer wants to rear its head, the Impreza favors a different driving style which is, not surprisingly, the way rally cars are driven. As Henry Catchpole describes in the same article:

The steering is nicely weighted, but it’s curiously indistinct around the dead ahead. There’s a certain amount of roll as you turn into a corner too, so there’s a moment before you really feel the chassis start to bite and the steering start to feed back. If you’re timid or just ambling along, then the Subaru can seem slightly reluctant. What you need to do is be bold; turn in hard and, once into the meat of the steering, you’ll feel the front Dunlops grip and possibly scrub a little into understeer if you’re carrying good speed. As soon as you’re into the corner you should be thinking about getting back on the power. With 300lb ft you’re not short of urge whichever gear you’re in, so it’s just a case of how you deploy it. The slightly slow-acting viscous coupling of the central diff works best if you progressively squeeze the throttle to the carpet rather than just jumping on it. This way you’ll feel the tail move round before the front pulls you out of the corner in one smooth flow. There is of course another way to approach a corner, which is to trail-brake as you turn in. The brakes make a slightly odd sound (like a huge computer powering down) but with the weight over the front axle the steering weights up instantly and the rear swings round nicely as you turn in…

Of course, you’ll never experience this on a test drive and probably won’t have the guts (or permission) to experience it on the road or track, but it’s nice to know that there’s something we know that most others don’t and that the STI holds something to experience as your familiarity with the car deepens. Sounds like the kind of stuff that makes Porsche 911 drivers snicker when people say 911’s are fundamentally flawed, the depth of character that let’s some cars dig deep beneath your skin while others just tickle you which is no surprise when you consider Subaru has always fancied itself as the Japanese equivalent to Porsche (whereas Toyota’s like Mercedes and Honda like BMW).

It occurs to me that the Mitsubishi i I mentioned in a previous piece might not be a car that many are familiar with.

Click here for more on a car that will be at the top of my ‘gotta drive it’ list next time I am in Europe…

Automobile reports that VW is considering a small, affordable rear engine car in the mold of a modern Beetle. Their writer rather surprisingly poo poos the idea but I could not feel more differently. Here’s why:

-Now that stability control exists there’s really no reason not to use rear wheel drive other than cost and space efficiency.

-If anyone can pull off a rear engine rear drive small car it’s VW. The last Beetle resonated for a reason and that reason’s called character. The new Beetle is a Golf with less space efficiency and the wrong wheels driven, the proposed car would feel different from the herd. In today’s marketplace with everyone from the Koreans to the Americans making a decent driving front driver, that will mean a lot.

-The Smart ForTwo will be in the US next spring. If an unknown brand thinks it can sell a small ,three cylinder turbo city car, VW can.

-The most significant small car to come out in the past few years is the Japanese market Mitsubishi i. I say ‘most significant’ because it takes a clean sheet approach to car design. Mclaren F1 engineer Gordon Murray happens to be a fan of both the i and the Smart Roadster – I trust him over the guy assigned to cover a small story at Automobile.

-A 911 has a nearly 4 liter 6 in the rear and can be made to handle. This car, with a three cylinder of less than half the size and manual steering, could have agility that its front engine peers – or even the 911 – can’t match.

VW, you need to build this car. Sometimes the cars that are biggest sellers and icons are those that make the least sense.

Here are pics of the car the next Evo will be based on.

The dynamics of the recently revised Outlander the Lancer shares its platform with and rumors that Mitsubishi’s readying a dual clutch sequential transmission and an SH-AWD style drive system gives me hope for the new Evo (seen here in concept form). The fact that components are also shared with the Dodge Caliber, Jeep Compass and Jeep Patriot and that some form of active steering may be used gives me pause.

Click here for a look at how the Super AYC (similar to Acura’s SH-AWD) turns a car that can be chucked into a corner and pull itself out of trouble into a car that points itself through turns under power…