The WRX could very much have some serious competition soon!

“[...] with the launch of the Mitsubishi Lancer EvoX and the continued availability of the Mitsubishi Lancer EX, what’s the Lancer EX Ralliart’s reason for being? We’ve got three words for you: Subaru Impreza WRX. Subaru’s proven success with the WRX line has prompted one of its chief rivals to test the waters as well.

[...] The segment of the car-buying market that’s caught hook, line and sinker by Subaru’s WRX will soon have an alternative to consider. It’s an alternative that’s got a very unique personality as well.”

Read more

If the WRX is a slip-sliding rally machine, the Speed3 is a point-and-shoot race car. The Mazda simply feels way more dialed in, ready to consume apexes for breakfast and checkered flags for lunch. There’s no slop or slack on the Speed’s menu. Sure the suspenders are discernibly tauter — the downside is a more jarring ride — but the reward is 0.90 g of lateral grip (best of the group) and a chassis that always feels alive. The body exhibits just a smidge of roll entering a turn, so steering inputs prompt instantaneous response. On-center steering feel is firm and precise, making the Subaru’s feel loose and vague in comparison.

Read more

We may get a watered-down version of the global performance hatch to meet our lower price points, or Ford may bite the bullet and offer a $30,000+ Focus. But to compete with the likes of the Mazdaspeed3, Volkswagen GTI, and Subaru WRX, it’ll need to find a sweet spot of performance (over 250 horsepower), price (likely well under $30,000) and features. That’s a tough mix to match, but at this point, anything is possible–there are even reports that the next RS will be an all-wheel-drive hybrid.

Read more

Car and Driver reviews the 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback Ralliart and compares it against the Subaru WRX. They write:

“Compared with the similarly situated Subaru Impreza WRX five-door, the Sportback sits on almost the same wheelbase but is nearly seven inches longer than the WRX, giving it heavier front and rear overhangs in side profile. There’s less cargo room behind the seats in the Sportback, 14 cubic feet versus 19 in the WRX, but more space if you fold the seats: 47 cubic feet against the Subaru’s 44.”

“At 237 hp, it’s notably down on power compared with the 265-hp WRX and feels it, partly because of the Sportback’s higher curb weight.”

“Running a mountain twisty, the Sportback proved it’s a good balance of ride comfort and handling, even better than the WRX, which skews to rather soft and roll prone.”

Volkswagen also says R32 rivals include the Subaru WRX STi and Mitsubishi Lancer Evo, but that is a bit cheeky given that each of those cars hase more power and more advanced AWD systems than the hot Golf.

IGN has a review of the 2006 WRX STI. They tend to compare the WRX to the EVO a lot, because they absolutely love the Mitsubishi EVO.

Many have said that the EVO is the more “precise” machine of the two. We’d have to agree with that statement, as the Subaru just doesn’t have that razor sharp feeling. However, the EVO is the most sensitive car we’ve ever driven, so it would be hard to find a car that just feels that telepathic… The STI has a lot of power and is more than capable of holding its own against the EVO, so one can only claim one car to be the winner when it comes to small personal preferences. Personally, we love both cars, but we happen to like the interior of the STI a lot more. It’s not as plastic-y feeling as the EVO’s cockpit, so if we had to choose between the two cars, we’d go with the STI.

Subaru WRX STI

$33,000

Mpg: 18 city/24 highway

0 to 60: 5.0 seconds

Big wing, muscular hood scoop, and Brembo brakes. Sound familiar? With virtually the same parts, price and exhaust rumble as the Mitsu Evo, is Subaru’s WRX STI any different? Well, sort of.

The STI cranks out 300 hp, about 14 more than the Evo. Yet the Evo is 1.1 seconds faster when rocketing from 0 to 100 mph.

The tasteful Subaru interior features more comfortable seating and easier-to-read gauges, but the Evo gets better mileage and stops a bit more quickly.

Like choosing a partner, the choice really boils down to personal taste: the Evo is more rugged, the STI more refined.

STi and Evo enter their respective ninth evolutions and both have been developed steadily every single year. And both are the last of a breed, for both Lancer and Impreza will be completely reworked in the near future and STi and Evo then will be entirely new cars.

[...]

Evolution IX is as ever powered by Mitsubishi’s turbocharged and intercooled 2.0-litre inline four-cylinder DOHC 16-valve enhanced for the first time with MIVEC innovative variable valve technology. This together with superior new ceramic compressor vane turbo technology hikes power to 220kW at 6500rpm, although local units will likely be slightly detuned to compensate for SA’s petrol. Torque is up 390Nm at 3500rpm, but it now also comes in a far fatter curve that starts pumping much earlier in the range.

But hang on a second: Subaru’s cheating! Big news is that STi nine is up from a 2.0-litre quad-cam 16-valve AVCS active valve control turbo and manually water spray-cooled intercooler boxer-four, to an equally endowed 2.5-litre unit. This move away from a long held tradition sees power up to 200kW at 6000rpm in SA (225 everywhere else thanks to local fuel) and 407Nm at 4000 but with a much fatter torque band for a far more driveable solution than in previous STis.

[...]

Evo also feels far more responsive and driveable. It took a lot longer to apply its MIVEC than Subaru did its AVCS, but the effect is as significant as its rival’s latest extra half-litre and it’s just as impressive: perhaps those turbo ceramics do the trick, but I reckon Evo wins this part of the progress race in that it achieved its gains through pure technology rather than that old cubic capacity shortcut.

Echo Online recommends three cars as post-graduation vehicles:

• Honda Civic Si
• Volkswagen GTI
• Subaru WRX

Here’s their take on the Subaru WRX 2006:

Subaru Impreza WRX TR: When you need all four wheels driven look no further than the Subaru Impreza WRX TR, TR stands for tuner ready.

New for 2006 the TR is an entry level WRX sedan that cuts out some little things that are not needed for the driving enjoyment, keeping only performance and technology features, according to Subaru.

Subaru’s Symmetrical All-Wheel Drive is what allows equal amounts of power to reach all four wheels, unless there is wheel slippage and then power is diverted from the slipping wheel and sent to a tire with more grip.

All WRX models, except the STI, receive new engines for 2006. A 2.5-liter flat four that replaces the 2.0-liter that had previously powered the rally inspired car. This increase in engine size also translates to an increase in power and torque, 3 hp and 18 lb-ft of torque have been added to make a total of 230 hp and 235 lb-ft of torque. Subaru says that this increase in torque will help the WRX perform at lower to mid range engine speeds. 17 inch wheels are now standard for all WRXs, up from 16 inch.

Subaru made changes to the Impreza’s exterior this year as well. They adapted the “three-section mesh-type grill inspired by the company’s aircraft heritage” for the 2006 Impreza.

According to the EPA the WRX gets 20 miles to the gallon of gasoline in the city and 26 on the highway, if you go with a manual transmission.

The guys at motoring.iafrica.com have compared 4 high performance cars together: the BMW M5, the Chrysler 300C, the Mitsubishi Lancer Evo and the Subaru WRX STI. Here’s what they have to say on the Subaru WRX STI versus the Mitsubishi Lancer Evo:

The Mitsubishi Lancer Evo and the newly faced Subaru STi proved too difficult to split without the assistance of our score sheets. It was Subaru that initially introduced the ‘giant-killing-performance’ genre cars with prices to make you smile. In fact the automotive world was turned on its head when the even hotter STi and Lancer Evos arrived.

You’ll notice that the STi just gets the better of the Evo – our schedule well indicating the few points difference. However the all-new 2.5 engine does not offer that blinding Subaru performance we’re used to. This time around it produces more torque and more power in a more docile manner and in the process has turned from the blindingly quick 2-litre cult-car to a softer feel yuppies would seek. The tornado-like response of the 2-litre engine is no longer there. In performance terms it’s just fractionally short of its banshee-like smaller-engined progenitor too.

The Evo matches the STi in almost every sphere except acceleration, tractability (due to its 2.5 litre engine) and engine refinement. The latter two areas of comparison are better due to the symmetrical layout the flat-four boxer engine offers via its centrally mounted gearbox resulting in equal length front and rear side-shafts respectively for better power distribution. Instead the Evo’s engine is a conventional 4-cyl twin-cam engine with an offset gearbox resulting in unequal length side shafts. But in all other aspects the two are equal and to choose the better would come down to personal preference.

In terms of hooligan-performance the Japanese twins have no peers in their segment – and almost totally so above them. To drive either for the first time is an indelible experience. The adjustable 4×4 set-ups in both are technologies not found in any other car, allowing adjustments to the front and rear diffs to suit personal competition requirements.

During the annual Canadian Car of the Year TestFest in Shannonville, Ont., last October, Subaru made a gutsy move: they pitted the redesigned (but still gritty) 2006 WRX against the polished Audi A4, BMW 330i and Lexus IS 350.

Never mind that those three cars come from pedigreed luxury marques, or that they came to the ring wearing sticker prices at least $15,000 north of the WRX’s. The Subaru fits in with this group about as well as Happy Gilmore at the country club. But that’s OK, because in my opinion the WRX best defines what a sports sedan should be. Even though it was my personal pick for best sports sedan, the Bimmer ended up at the head of its class in this competition. WRX was third. The Audi was fourth.

Read the rest at Playing with the big kids.

Two car tuners have compared the Subaru WRX STI 2006 with the Mitsubishi Lancer Evo 2006.

“The grille thing is huge,” said Tassi, who has customized his 2002 Ford Focus. “The Subaru’s honeycomb grille looks like something you’d put in the garden to keep out the rabbits. The Mitsubishi just looks better — and it has a better brand image. That’s why it gets my vote.”

Still, Tassi and Lysaght — with the eyes of younger enthusiasts — made a point of noting just how similar the two cars were, especially in areas like powertrain, length, width and height, as well as fuel economy.

The Evo won the duel because of its esthetics. The two tuners really didn’t like the new front end Subaru gave to the WRX.

Read the full comparison here.