The 2015 Mitsubishi Lancer comes in many trims: ES, SE, GT, Rallyart and the screaming Evo. The latter of which can probably qualify as a completely different car, but that's beside the point. We were granted the middle child to use for a trip to Atlanta to scout out mountain roads for our first annual Coker Tire Tour.
With …
Who cares about a road trip in essentially a 168 hp rental sedan? I mean unless you ramped it..but come on you should know what we are interested in.
I completely understand. And that's why we cherry-pick what new cars go into the magazine.
Our website, however, has pretty much unlimited space, and we give it away for free. We like to give you all as much content as possible here.
Five years ago I predicted that twin-clutch transmissions would replace CVTs. And apparently I was wrong.
Tom Suddard wrote: I completely understand. And that's why we cherry-pick what new cars go into the magazine. Our website, however, has pretty much unlimited space, and we give it away for free. We like to give you all as much content as possible here.
I agree. The more information the better even if it doesn't directly interest evrerybody. The Lancer GT is not a car I would ever consider owning but I still find it useful and interesting to read about it. Keep up the good work.
Feedyurhed wrote:Tom Suddard wrote: I completely understand. And that's why we cherry-pick what new cars go into the magazine. Our website, however, has pretty much unlimited space, and we give it away for free. We like to give you all as much content as possible here.I agree. The more information the better even if it doesn't directly interest evrerybody. The Lancer GT is not a car I would ever consider owning but I still find it useful and interesting to read about it. Keep up the good work.
Thanks for getting it. A lot of cars pass through our hands. Not all of them make the magazine, but we have the space to post something here.
David S. Wallens wrote: Five years ago I predicted that twin-clutch transmissions would replace CVTs. And apparently I was wrong.
This is YOUR fault.
Isn't the Lancer Ralliart sort of a baby Evo and available as a hatchback?
bgkast wrote: Isn't the Lancer Ralliart sort of a baby Evo and available as a hatchback?
Yes, and I think not anymore. Used to be, though. Just don't drive an Evo if you "just" came to buy a Ralliart. Don't ask how I know.
Five years ago I predicted that twin-clutch transmissions would replace CVTs. And apparently I was wrong.
To be fair, it almost doesn't matter what technological advances have been made in 5 years because Mitsubishi hasn't spent any money updating the Lancer for like 7 years now.
Wasn't Mitsubishi going to sh... ashcan the Evo "next year" for the past five or six years?
I guess they realized that it's the only car that people actually desire, instead of settle for because Mitsubishi dealers will finance to just about anyone with a pulse.
As far as i know the Outlander Sport and Mirage are doing pretty well. I think Mitsu is doing better now than they were 2 or 3 years ago... maybe?
Looked at the Lancer Ralliart, 70 hp more, but why the hell does it weigh 500 lbs more? Also no manual. 3461 lb vs the GTs 2966 lb
In reply to Fr3AkAzOiD:
Maybe it weighs 500lb more because it has a different engine, transmission, and AWD.
Knurled wrote: Wasn't Mitsubishi going to sh... ashcan the Evo "next year" for the past five or six years?
This year is it. Evo X production has already ended for some markets. The US is getting 2,000-2,500 commemorative editions later this year, and then it's all over. Source is here.
In reply to Knurled: ahh, forgot about the awd.
It's my car! Well, it's the refreshed version of my car. I've had a GTS since 2010. Surprisingly great little car. Not competitive in autocross in the least bit (thanks SCCA HS reorg, grrrr), not fast on track (B-Spec cars are just a little bit quicker around COTA), but it's just fun. A good all-around daily driver with decent handling. It's been the Energizer Bunny of cars: 116K miles, a road trip across the country and back, and butt-tons of track time and it's still going strong.
Mine's even the CVT, which is a good CVT for acting like a CVT! The ones that come with fake gear-changes in "D" mode are unbearable. That defeats the purpose of a CVT! Pin it to optimum revs and keep it there. This one actually kind of falls off power-wise at the top of its rev range, though. If it would perhaps just hummm along at 5,000-5,500 all the time, mwahahaha. That would be better. (I suppose they tuned it for economy and not hoonage, though.) It's one of the better autoboxes, though. I'm so used to driving CVTs and manuals where the pedal position has some correlation to the rev counter that driving a conventional automatic has become a source of pure, unadulterated irritation. Give me my CVT!
I probably need a tow vehicle more than I need the Lancer at this point. I admit this. But I'm really hesitant to get rid of a good, working car. It's quite good. Track time aside, it's been totally babied. I don't want to let go of it. The Lulzcer is that good.
The "rest of the story" link isn't working for me, don't see the story on the left either.
David S. Wallens wrote: Five years ago I predicted that twin-clutch transmissions would replace CVTs. And apparently I was wrong.
I wouldn't have expected that, a CVT can give major efficiency gains and possibly even performance gains at the cost of fun, so they'd definitely be around in the future. I would've expected that CVTs and DCTs would be the most common transmissions, but what I never saw coming was both transmissions being nerfed to have awful slushbox-like driving characteristics when used in everyday cars. CVTs are shifting in steps to feel like they have gears, and DCTs are using clutch-slipping and gear-blending to give a mushy feel because a nice solid driveline feels "rough" and "jerky" to soccer moms.
CVTs should not be allowed on GRM lol and automatics only if it's a DSG, Tiptronic, E-Gear, ect.
I own the most reliable auto trans in the world, and it's a CVT. It has many less moving parts than a typical automatic and makes like 290 lb ft of torque even without the engine running. 
You'll need to log in to post.
