2008-'09 Sport Compact Comparison TestSecond OpinionTop 6 FeaturesData and ChartsEditors' EvaluationsFinal Rankings and Scoring Explanation
Thanks to three turbochargers, 724 horsepower and five limited-slip differentials, comparing the 2008 Mazdaspeed 3, 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX and 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart should be more entertaining than a cage match between Quinton "Rampage" Jackson and New Kids on the Block. Imagine the fun! Donny and Danny hangin' tough from the walls of the cage while Joey, Jordan and Jonathan get tossed into the crowd.
The way we see it, our Rampage vs. New Kids bout is no different from pitting the Mazdaspeed 3 — the current champ of the sport compact world — against the Lancer Ralliart and Subaru WRX. On the track, an epic ass-kicking is bound to ensue.
But comparison tests aren't always won on the track. Since these cars all share a focus on real-world driving for enthusiasts, we weighted performance as 25 percent of this test's scoring total, leaving the remaining points to price (20 percent), feature content (20 percent), fuel economy (15 percent), our subjective evaluation (15 percent) and personal and recommended picks (5 percent).
So performance is important, but in the end, the most well-rounded car wins.
The Contenders
When it comes to sheer muscle, none of the challengers measure up to the champ. The 2008 Mazdaspeed 3 is the most powerful in this group with a turbocharged, direct-injected, 2.3-liter inline-4 engine cranking out 263 horsepower and 280 pound-feet of torque. It uses a six-speed manual transmission, limited-slip differential, gear-specific torque management and a steering-angle sensor to create a front-wheel-drive package that's unmatched in its ability to precisely meter power to the ground.
It's also a hatchback with dramatic styling, excellent build quality and top-notch interior materials. Plus, you can have one like our test car with leather seats, a Bose audio system with satellite radio and a navigation system for $26,640.
The 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX is the new-generation version of the car that set the standard for all-wheel-drive performance. The current car features a new multilink rear suspension, more feature content and more interior space, while keeping weight in check. Its turbocharged 2.5-liter horizontally opposed four-cylinder engine produces 224 hp and 226 lb-ft of torque. Subaru's claim to fame is its symmetrical all-wheel-drive system, which uses a viscous center differential to send power to all four wheels.
We evaluated a WRX wagon with satellite navigation, vehicle dynamics control, a $163 center armrest and $75 cargo tray, and it lists for $29,833 as tested.
The 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart offers a detuned version of the turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-4 engine from the 2008 Mitsubishi Evo X. In Ralliart trim, this engine produces 237 hp and 253 lb-ft of torque. Included as standard equipment is Mitsubishi's brilliant twin-clutch six-speed transmission with shift paddles, an active center differential with selectable modes for tarmac, gravel and snow, as well as front and rear limited-slip differentials. The Ralliart is the Evo X's little brother in every way.
Pricing for the Lancer Ralliart isn't yet official, but our best estimate puts this car's as-tested price at $29,415, including the $1,750 Recaro Sport package, which adds supportive Recaro seats, xenon HID headlamps and a 650-watt Rockford Fosgate audio system with a six-disc CD changer and satellite radio.
3rd Place: 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX
Subaru's WRX is, on paper, the Lancer Ralliart's most obvious competitor. Its all-wheel-drive powertrain offers the same all-weather flexibility as the Lancer. But its performance just isn't on par with its competition in the sport-compact category.
Subaru has made a clear about-face with the second-generation WRX's attitude. Where the first-generation car was sharp and responsive, this one is muted and even dull. It's clear these tuning choices were made to expand the WRX's market appeal — perhaps to your average Corolla or Camry buyer. The downside, however, is that the car's performance suffers. An enthusiast is left with only one choice if he/she wants a high-performance Subaru: the $36,995 Subaru Impreza WRX STI.
At the track the Mazda worked over the WRX with the same indifference Rampage would show while tossing the New Kids around the cage. Even the WRX's all-wheel drive and manual transmission weren't enough to capture the quickest 0-60 time. The Subaru did, however, feel honestly durable, as it withstood multiple standing-start launches at 5,500 rpm to produce a best 0-60 time of 6.2 seconds (6.0 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip). It went on to finish the quarter-mile in 14.6 seconds at 92.2 mph.
The WRX's braking performance bested the Lancer Ralliart. Though halting from 60 mph in 123 feet isn't exactly a stellar effort, the WRX edges the Lancer's 128-foot stop. More troubling, though, were the soft brake pedal and substantial dive and squirm the softly sprung WRX demonstrated during maximum deceleration.
Squirming between our slalom cones at 63.5 mph, the WRX proved it isn't as focused on pure driving performance as it once was. This effort is 1.5 mph slower than the Lancer and 4.3 mph slower than the Mazda. The combination of hard-to-ignore body roll and meager damping makes the WRX susceptible to midcorner bumps, and this hurts driver confidence as much in instrumented tests as it does in the real world. On our skid pad, the WRX tied the Lancer in lateral acceleration at 0.81g — a performance that won't win either car any awards.
One advantage the WRX does enjoy over the Ralliart lies in overall utility. Our WRX wagon proved time and again to be more user-friendly than the Lancer sedan. With flat-folding rear seats, it was able to more easily carry large cargo. It also has a navigation system, which the Lancer lacks.
The Subaru Impreza WRX wagon is a nice car. It offers supreme utility, comfort and function, but when measured as a performance car, it simply comes up short.
2nd Place: 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart
Forget what you think you know about this car and consider this: The 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart gets you 90 percent of the Evo MR's hardware for only about 75 percent of its price. Sure, the Ralliart might lack the Evo's fancy aluminum suspension bits, its wider track and some of its power. But you get the best parts, like the bitchin' twin-clutch transmission, three limited-slip differentials and a suspension tuned for someone who cares about driving.
Next to the incredibly dynamic tranny with its shift paddles on the steering column, the most significant of these features is the Ralliart's all-wheel-drive system. It offers the WRX's all-weather abilities, but thanks to front and rear limited-slip differentials, it adds a level of driving involvement the WRX cannot match. And it helps the Ralliart rocket out of slow corners with far more speed than any front-driver.
There's good control feel — steering and turn-in feel resemble that of an Evo — but with rock-hard tires and no yaw control the Ralliart's overall limits are much lower than an Evo X. The tires squeal more than a buff book editor who just got scooped and their grip on reality is just about as reliable. We were only able to eke 0.81g out of the Ralliart on the skid pad, while its 65-mph slalom performance is slower than a Nissan Altima (though still better than the WRX).
The Ralliart's Achilles' heel is its inability to leave quickly from a standing start, a side effect of the twin-clutch transmission. Acceleration to 60 mph requires 6.6 seconds (6.2 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip). The quarter-mile performance suffers as well, as the Ralliart's effort of 14.8 seconds at 94.6 mph is the slowest of this group. Yet these numbers don't tell the whole story. The Ralliart takes 11.7 seconds to accelerate between 20 and 90 mph. The Subaru, which gains its only advantage off the line, requires 12.6 seconds. Meanwhile, the Mazda covers the same spread in 10.7 seconds.
The Lancer Ralliart's braking performance is also unimpressive, since it takes 128 feet to stop from 60 mph, as much stopping distance as some small SUVs. We did witness mild brake fade when driving the Ralliart aggressively down a mountain road. Predictably, its brakes lack the heat capacity and fade resistance of the Evo's Brembos — not surprising considering they are burdened with similar weight (3,512 pounds for the Ralliart vs. 3,630 pounds for the Evo X).
The Ralliart comes standard with keyless ignition and a driver-side knee airbag — features not available on the Mazdaspeed 3 or WRX. And with the right tires it would run down a Mazdaspeed 3 on many roads.
Add it all up and it's obvious why two of our three judging editors chose the Ralliart as their personal pick. It's simply a lot of car for the money.
1st Place: 2008 Mazdaspeed 3
There's a reason the Mazdaspeed 3 has won every comparison test we've put it through. Like we said when it won our 2006 comparison test, it's impossible to go this fast, have this much fun or be more practical for less money. OK, so that's three reasons, but you get the point.
When it comes to "fast," nothing in this test can touch the Mazda. It hits 60 in 6.1 seconds (5.8 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) and blasts through the quarter-mile traps in 14.4 seconds at 97 mph — bettering the WRX and Ralliart in both tests. It also stops from 60 mph with the stability of a pure sports car, and it does the job in just 111 feet, the shortest distance in the group by a considerable margin.
Handling, too, is better in the Mazda. Its 0.88g skid pad performance and 67.8-mph slalom speed (slower than our last test) are light-years ahead of the Ralliart and WRX. And on the road it shows. The Mazda easily carries more speed through medium- and high-speed corners and its straight-line acceleration is unmatched. It's also 321 pounds lighter than the Ralliart (it weighs exactly the same as the WRX), which is a huge advantage in any dynamic maneuver. In fact, the only place the Lancer has an advantage is hauling out of slow corners, where its all-wheel drive allows earlier throttle application and provides superior thrust sooner.
We also prefer the Mazda's steering feel. It offers the Ralliart's confidence in its effort and precision, and backs it up with real tire grip and chassis poise. Its brakes are also marginally more fade-resistant than either of the other cars in this test, although they, too, will fade with enough hard driving. The Mazdaspeed 3 is simply the best driving car here. If we had to find fault it would be that the damping could be more aggressive in both compression and rebound — an issue Mazda is soon going to address, we understand.
The Mazda also gives up nothing when it comes to build quality or utility. Its five-door body is more practical than the Ralliart and it falls insignificantly short of the WRX's interior space. Meanwhile, it's nicer than both inside the cabin. The combination of all-black materials, surfaces of differing textures and intelligently designed sport seats is brilliant. The seats also don't leave those of us with short torsos sitting on the floor like we do in the Ralliart's otherwise excellent Recaros (which aren't height-adjustable).
As we've said before, the Mazdaspeed 3 is a tough combination to beat for this kind of money. Unless the confidence of all-wheel drive is a must, it's the car to have.
Final Thoughts
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. Frankly, we're a little confused by Subaru's strategy. It's the most expensive car in the test, yet it's the least involving to drive. And, symmetrical all-wheel drive or not, its powertrain doesn't come close to matching the Ralliart's sophistication or confidence.
The 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart, however, puts up a genuine fight with a good overall driving experience and lots of amenities. If it cost $1,000 less and had better tires, the Ralliart would win this contest hands down.
But once again, it's the Mazdaspeed 3's combination of muscle, poise, practicality and price that lets it keep the champion's belt. It might not have doled out the same ass-whuppin' Rampage would put on the New Kids, but the result is the same — the champ still reigns.
The manufacturers provided Edmunds these vehicles for the purposes of evaluation.
The way we see it, our Rampage vs. New Kids bout is no different from pitting the Mazdaspeed 3 — the current champ of the sport compact world — against the Lancer Ralliart and Subaru WRX. On the track, an epic ass-kicking is bound to ensue.
But comparison tests aren't always won on the track. Since these cars all share a focus on real-world driving for enthusiasts, we weighted performance as 25 percent of this test's scoring total, leaving the remaining points to price (20 percent), feature content (20 percent), fuel economy (15 percent), our subjective evaluation (15 percent) and personal and recommended picks (5 percent).
So performance is important, but in the end, the most well-rounded car wins.
The Contenders
When it comes to sheer muscle, none of the challengers measure up to the champ. The 2008 Mazdaspeed 3 is the most powerful in this group with a turbocharged, direct-injected, 2.3-liter inline-4 engine cranking out 263 horsepower and 280 pound-feet of torque. It uses a six-speed manual transmission, limited-slip differential, gear-specific torque management and a steering-angle sensor to create a front-wheel-drive package that's unmatched in its ability to precisely meter power to the ground.
It's also a hatchback with dramatic styling, excellent build quality and top-notch interior materials. Plus, you can have one like our test car with leather seats, a Bose audio system with satellite radio and a navigation system for $26,640.
The 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX is the new-generation version of the car that set the standard for all-wheel-drive performance. The current car features a new multilink rear suspension, more feature content and more interior space, while keeping weight in check. Its turbocharged 2.5-liter horizontally opposed four-cylinder engine produces 224 hp and 226 lb-ft of torque. Subaru's claim to fame is its symmetrical all-wheel-drive system, which uses a viscous center differential to send power to all four wheels.
We evaluated a WRX wagon with satellite navigation, vehicle dynamics control, a $163 center armrest and $75 cargo tray, and it lists for $29,833 as tested.
The 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart offers a detuned version of the turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-4 engine from the 2008 Mitsubishi Evo X. In Ralliart trim, this engine produces 237 hp and 253 lb-ft of torque. Included as standard equipment is Mitsubishi's brilliant twin-clutch six-speed transmission with shift paddles, an active center differential with selectable modes for tarmac, gravel and snow, as well as front and rear limited-slip differentials. The Ralliart is the Evo X's little brother in every way.
Pricing for the Lancer Ralliart isn't yet official, but our best estimate puts this car's as-tested price at $29,415, including the $1,750 Recaro Sport package, which adds supportive Recaro seats, xenon HID headlamps and a 650-watt Rockford Fosgate audio system with a six-disc CD changer and satellite radio.
3rd Place: 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX
Subaru's WRX is, on paper, the Lancer Ralliart's most obvious competitor. Its all-wheel-drive powertrain offers the same all-weather flexibility as the Lancer. But its performance just isn't on par with its competition in the sport-compact category.
Subaru has made a clear about-face with the second-generation WRX's attitude. Where the first-generation car was sharp and responsive, this one is muted and even dull. It's clear these tuning choices were made to expand the WRX's market appeal — perhaps to your average Corolla or Camry buyer. The downside, however, is that the car's performance suffers. An enthusiast is left with only one choice if he/she wants a high-performance Subaru: the $36,995 Subaru Impreza WRX STI.
At the track the Mazda worked over the WRX with the same indifference Rampage would show while tossing the New Kids around the cage. Even the WRX's all-wheel drive and manual transmission weren't enough to capture the quickest 0-60 time. The Subaru did, however, feel honestly durable, as it withstood multiple standing-start launches at 5,500 rpm to produce a best 0-60 time of 6.2 seconds (6.0 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip). It went on to finish the quarter-mile in 14.6 seconds at 92.2 mph.
The WRX's braking performance bested the Lancer Ralliart. Though halting from 60 mph in 123 feet isn't exactly a stellar effort, the WRX edges the Lancer's 128-foot stop. More troubling, though, were the soft brake pedal and substantial dive and squirm the softly sprung WRX demonstrated during maximum deceleration.
Squirming between our slalom cones at 63.5 mph, the WRX proved it isn't as focused on pure driving performance as it once was. This effort is 1.5 mph slower than the Lancer and 4.3 mph slower than the Mazda. The combination of hard-to-ignore body roll and meager damping makes the WRX susceptible to midcorner bumps, and this hurts driver confidence as much in instrumented tests as it does in the real world. On our skid pad, the WRX tied the Lancer in lateral acceleration at 0.81g — a performance that won't win either car any awards.
One advantage the WRX does enjoy over the Ralliart lies in overall utility. Our WRX wagon proved time and again to be more user-friendly than the Lancer sedan. With flat-folding rear seats, it was able to more easily carry large cargo. It also has a navigation system, which the Lancer lacks.
The Subaru Impreza WRX wagon is a nice car. It offers supreme utility, comfort and function, but when measured as a performance car, it simply comes up short.
2nd Place: 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart
Forget what you think you know about this car and consider this: The 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart gets you 90 percent of the Evo MR's hardware for only about 75 percent of its price. Sure, the Ralliart might lack the Evo's fancy aluminum suspension bits, its wider track and some of its power. But you get the best parts, like the bitchin' twin-clutch transmission, three limited-slip differentials and a suspension tuned for someone who cares about driving.
Next to the incredibly dynamic tranny with its shift paddles on the steering column, the most significant of these features is the Ralliart's all-wheel-drive system. It offers the WRX's all-weather abilities, but thanks to front and rear limited-slip differentials, it adds a level of driving involvement the WRX cannot match. And it helps the Ralliart rocket out of slow corners with far more speed than any front-driver.
There's good control feel — steering and turn-in feel resemble that of an Evo — but with rock-hard tires and no yaw control the Ralliart's overall limits are much lower than an Evo X. The tires squeal more than a buff book editor who just got scooped and their grip on reality is just about as reliable. We were only able to eke 0.81g out of the Ralliart on the skid pad, while its 65-mph slalom performance is slower than a Nissan Altima (though still better than the WRX).
The Ralliart's Achilles' heel is its inability to leave quickly from a standing start, a side effect of the twin-clutch transmission. Acceleration to 60 mph requires 6.6 seconds (6.2 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip). The quarter-mile performance suffers as well, as the Ralliart's effort of 14.8 seconds at 94.6 mph is the slowest of this group. Yet these numbers don't tell the whole story. The Ralliart takes 11.7 seconds to accelerate between 20 and 90 mph. The Subaru, which gains its only advantage off the line, requires 12.6 seconds. Meanwhile, the Mazda covers the same spread in 10.7 seconds.
The Lancer Ralliart's braking performance is also unimpressive, since it takes 128 feet to stop from 60 mph, as much stopping distance as some small SUVs. We did witness mild brake fade when driving the Ralliart aggressively down a mountain road. Predictably, its brakes lack the heat capacity and fade resistance of the Evo's Brembos — not surprising considering they are burdened with similar weight (3,512 pounds for the Ralliart vs. 3,630 pounds for the Evo X).
The Ralliart comes standard with keyless ignition and a driver-side knee airbag — features not available on the Mazdaspeed 3 or WRX. And with the right tires it would run down a Mazdaspeed 3 on many roads.
Add it all up and it's obvious why two of our three judging editors chose the Ralliart as their personal pick. It's simply a lot of car for the money.
1st Place: 2008 Mazdaspeed 3
There's a reason the Mazdaspeed 3 has won every comparison test we've put it through. Like we said when it won our 2006 comparison test, it's impossible to go this fast, have this much fun or be more practical for less money. OK, so that's three reasons, but you get the point.
When it comes to "fast," nothing in this test can touch the Mazda. It hits 60 in 6.1 seconds (5.8 seconds with 1 foot of rollout like on a drag strip) and blasts through the quarter-mile traps in 14.4 seconds at 97 mph — bettering the WRX and Ralliart in both tests. It also stops from 60 mph with the stability of a pure sports car, and it does the job in just 111 feet, the shortest distance in the group by a considerable margin.
Handling, too, is better in the Mazda. Its 0.88g skid pad performance and 67.8-mph slalom speed (slower than our last test) are light-years ahead of the Ralliart and WRX. And on the road it shows. The Mazda easily carries more speed through medium- and high-speed corners and its straight-line acceleration is unmatched. It's also 321 pounds lighter than the Ralliart (it weighs exactly the same as the WRX), which is a huge advantage in any dynamic maneuver. In fact, the only place the Lancer has an advantage is hauling out of slow corners, where its all-wheel drive allows earlier throttle application and provides superior thrust sooner.
We also prefer the Mazda's steering feel. It offers the Ralliart's confidence in its effort and precision, and backs it up with real tire grip and chassis poise. Its brakes are also marginally more fade-resistant than either of the other cars in this test, although they, too, will fade with enough hard driving. The Mazdaspeed 3 is simply the best driving car here. If we had to find fault it would be that the damping could be more aggressive in both compression and rebound — an issue Mazda is soon going to address, we understand.
The Mazda also gives up nothing when it comes to build quality or utility. Its five-door body is more practical than the Ralliart and it falls insignificantly short of the WRX's interior space. Meanwhile, it's nicer than both inside the cabin. The combination of all-black materials, surfaces of differing textures and intelligently designed sport seats is brilliant. The seats also don't leave those of us with short torsos sitting on the floor like we do in the Ralliart's otherwise excellent Recaros (which aren't height-adjustable).
As we've said before, the Mazdaspeed 3 is a tough combination to beat for this kind of money. Unless the confidence of all-wheel drive is a must, it's the car to have.
Final Thoughts
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. Frankly, we're a little confused by Subaru's strategy. It's the most expensive car in the test, yet it's the least involving to drive. And, symmetrical all-wheel drive or not, its powertrain doesn't come close to matching the Ralliart's sophistication or confidence.
The 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart, however, puts up a genuine fight with a good overall driving experience and lots of amenities. If it cost $1,000 less and had better tires, the Ralliart would win this contest hands down.
But once again, it's the Mazdaspeed 3's combination of muscle, poise, practicality and price that lets it keep the champion's belt. It might not have doled out the same ass-whuppin' Rampage would put on the New Kids, but the result is the same — the champ still reigns.
The manufacturers provided Edmunds these vehicles for the purposes of evaluation.
Add A Comment »