Nothing but rumors on pricing. Many expect it to be in the mid-high $30K range. It will be a cool automobile for sure but probably to small for me. I would however like to test drive or at the very least take one for a spin.....
Ooh, that's too much for me. Now if it were low $30k range I could see it. Mid-high 30k is significantly more than the STI though (which unfortunately doesn't have a DSG...).
I'm sure I'll at least test drive one myself though, but I guess I'll have to settle for the Outlander.
Well your getting a lot more automobile and may I say refined for the extra money. The subie, is a tinament on wheels compared to the EVO-X and it doesn't come close in the technology department.
Yeah, but HAVING the extra money helps, and I'm not sure I can come up with another $10k in time. $5k yes (get through the winter and wait for the magic tax refund) but not $10k.
Well if I couldn't afford the EVO-X, I sure wouldn't settle for the Subie. I'd save for a year or two and then get the better car. Well that's my opinion. We are only speculating on prices anyways. The STI, will not cost $10K less that the EVO-X, but $5K more it could and should as it is a much better car IMHO. It's so much better that I feel I could whip Paisan, around a road course if he was driving a second class machinje like the STi, and he's a pro driver while I'm merely have never drove a rally car. I believe the EVO-X, will enhance a driver's skill level that much with it's sophisticated S-AWC. Just imagine what somebody like Pasian, could do with one ?
Yeah, that EVO just seems SO appealing. Thing is, I need to get myself into something AWD fairly soon, or driving in snowstorms is going to kill me (I'm one of those types that has to go in to work even if Armageddon is in progress). So we'll have to see how pricing settles out and all.
jobs, too, where you have to go in no matter what kind of creek is rising. Builds character. Right.
Judging by the stance and stealthiness of our Lancer GTS' whoever gets an EVO 10 with that AWD drivetrain is going to have a great handler and turbo-charge engine to boot. That car will be awesome.
As for price, well, there was a 2006 EVO 9 in the showroom the night we were in there buying our '08 Lancer GTS and it was selling for $34,950, IIRC, on sale to move it.
I would wait and get a 2008 EVO 10 if I really needed a small race-ready car. I much prefer this new bodystyle to the old one.
Well the new EVO-X, could very well cross the $40K mark then if the 06's are $37K+ as I just looked it up. That might be a lil too expensive ! :surprise:
I have a 98 Mirage with 130k on the odometer (im the only owner)and keeps going strong. I love my Mitsu! I really believe Mitsubishi will be here for years to come. I recently went to test drive the new Lancer and im already making plans on trading in my Mirage for a Lancer. I want a ES black with black interior and a 5 speed manual. Very well equipped and around the 16k so its perfect for me.
Maybe what they need is what Subaru has...a detuned version. The regular WRX sells quite a bit too. Give the Lancer Ralliart AWD, the DSG, and 220 HP instead of 320. Make it the mid-rallysport version to give customers an in-between step.
ES, CVT, alittle over 17,599(could have got i for 17,299, or less), color was black. Spouse and I went, test drove, and , well, unimpressed. Sat in it, was ok in seat comfort. Acceptable room. The problem began the minute I tried to "take off" our of the parking lot. The salesman was with us, and he did not like our commentary. We would have purchased one today, but, this thing is SLOWER than death! :surprise: I tried again, for a 0-55 MPH run, from a stop. It went forward, but my "Slow" V6 Sonata( around 9 seconds to 60)felt like a jet in comaprison(and it will "Squeal tires", where the Lancer does nothing. Even our tC chirps 'em!). 29 MPG for 152HP vs 34MPG for 161 HP( Lancer vs Larger Optima, Same 0-60, btw, for the I-4's). Same feeling of "slow". Why? This thing felt as slow as the VT last year, and the new Sebring with 173HP(but it is a larger car).
That killed it right there. That over 10+ seconds to 60, and 29 MPG. Sorry iluv... I know you have the GTS model, but I feel if I raced you in either our Scion tC or Sonata, I'd win.
For 17,599, you get no sunroof, either, tC you do(and a hatch). 29-30MPG vs 32-34MPG. 8.2 to 60 in tC, 10+ in Lancer. Hmmmmmmmmm! Which one do I want?
I guess if you have kids and need the rear seat room, the Lancer is ok, for a sporty -looking economy car(with the 152HP engine).
Sorry, folks. It's #1 in looks, but unless you are getting the EVO(maybe the GTS is faster, with the paddle shifter, but at 21-22K... I'll get a "boring" Prius, or Honda Civic hybrid, and 45-50 MPG).
We could have lived with the 29 MPG, but not with 0-60 of 10-11 seconds. What shocke dme was my spouse and I both said the SX4 "CUV" felt faster, and more fun to drive, with sharper handling! :surprise: If the SX4 FWD sedan, coming out thsi Fallm has( at least as an option) fold down arm rest for both passengers up front, 29-31MPG, adn 0-60 under 10 seconds, and handles liek the SX4, I'm In! Sorry guys, I gave it a fair try, and my spouse did not even want to drive it after we went 5 miles. Said she could tell by take offs it was "not fun". That is not cool when a Kia Optima(larger car) with maybe 9 more HP(5 speed automanual) family car is about as fast and fun as a Lancer ES with CVT. And the heavier car with more HP gets 34 MPG! :surprise:
Anyhow, not attacking anyone's choices. Just a BIG let down, to us. Others may like it, others don't. Same with any other vehicles on the road. take care/not offense.
we can't all like the same rigs. I am cool with your decision to not like the '08 Lancer.
I am just so smitten by the car's looks and I love it's steady steering and handling. The sunroof, RF 650-watt stereo, on and on, but it's the stellar menacing looks that got me with this car. I am not one that cares any or at all about speed. I'm all about enjoying and smelling the roses along the way, and with a car that looks like this, Mitsu made it easy for me.
Buy what you like, I respect your decision to not like the '08 Lancer. I've been at these sites for too long to get sensitive if someone doesn't like my choice of rigs.
Remember, I'm the guy who loved Kia when pert-near everyone else hated them!
Car and Driver rate the 2008 Lancer at 0-60 of 7.8 seconds, not exactly a rocket but not slow either. Wonder why your tester was so slow? Maybe the CVT makes it slower.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
All the test drives on the net, well, they are about the Manual Shifter or GTS/CVT( paddle shifter). DE and ES(IIRC, it is the DE for the most base model), Nothing! I tell you, in all honesty, I felt nothing that could be called "exhilaration"(more like exasperation) from flooring the thing!
When we went there, the spouse said" if we like this, we can trade in the Sonata today". 29-30 MPG beats 24-26 MPG daily averarges. I was ready to buy! That was until we got into the thing, and tried to have fun! I heard the GTS is tuned differently thant the 2 other models, and the 6 speed(holding) gears on the CVT help with 0-60, and same of rthe manual,making it really fast.
Yeah, a manual tC will do 0-60 in 7.8 also(another time I heard 7.7 seconds with manual) and 8.2 with automatic(yes, it goes!). But the Lancer? It felt s-l-o-w! The guy tried too talk us in to the 21K version, GTS, but, by the time the ES drive was over... I told him I'll wait for the rumored xr, (4 door) from Scion.
Really a let down.
I have been checking this thing out on the net since last Nov, 06.... then to get into something that makes the Elantra feel sporty(0-60 in 10 seconds with automatic)...is scarey(although it is EPA rated Mid-sized sedan now, and no manual/auto deal like on the Sonata, unfortunately).
Well, I'm in no hurry...so I got awhile.
Here's hoping whatever replaces the tC is good( hoping for the 3 door tC replacment to remain 3 doors, and the 4 door sporty sedan to come out, also, by 09, at the latest, if intellichoice.com future cars thing is true).
If not, I'll get a "Dull" Corolla, and 40 MPG( at least that's cool.... seeing as gas is voer 3 dollars a gallon again).
I think the paddle shifters in the Lancer GTS make a huge difference in actual acceleration times. I know that if I keep the car in drive the engine never has a chance to remain in its upper RPM levels where it begins to sing. Switch to manual mode and the CVT acts more like a regular stick shift, complete with engine braking. The shifts are crisp and there is no "rubber band" feeling.
There is a point around 4000 RPM where the engine in the Lancer gets a second life and starts to pull with more gusto. With the paddle shifters I am able to keep the engine in its "sweet" spot where it produces the most power.
I don't think I would have bought the Lancer if it did not have the manual mode paddle shifters. They really do enhance the driving characteristics of the car.
truedat. These little aluminum flippers are fun to play with and I do notice the sporty sedan take on another tack when using the CVT paddle shifters.
shado4's right the shifts are crisp and clean and I noticed this about them on my first drive of my car. If they weren't so fun I would've just waited for a stick shift from another Arizona dealer. To me the car has more than adequate acceleration and power, but driving in the 'D' old-fashioned automatic mode is truly the mellow and slower method with this car. The paddle shifter lifts you and your Lancer to a different, zippier fun-level that one would expect from a beauty like this.
These little aluminum flippers are fun to play with
Aluminum is so yesterday. The paddle shifters in the Lancer are magnesium. The reason for that? I read that the magnesium shifters do not get hot to the touch if the car has been sitting out in the sun all day. The steering wheel may be blistering, but the paddle shifters will not be.
The new Lancer is off to a hot start, posting a 263% increase over Lancer sales from April 2006, making it the largest sales month for the Lancer in nearly 3 years.
This makes the sixth straight month of sales increases for Mitsubishi when comparing sales to a year ago.
yeah, Mitsubishi is staking a comeback, but for a lot of us, we could see that particular train coming. Still, it's good to see the actual numbers show it.
My Mitsu baby needs a bath and will receive it tomorrow morning, save for a thunderstorm or something. Arizona's sand and dust deposits are constantly shifting, shifty. (!!)
Is Mitsubishi really staging a comeback? You have to be suspicious when virtually all of the other car manufacturers reported lower sales for April. After all, this is a company that reported major sales increases in the past by making huge fleet sales and offering cheap financing to people with poor credit, both of which later led to billions of dollars in loses. Mitsubishi finally made a profit this year, but it was due to favorable exchange rates, the sale of a subsidiary in Japan, and $40 million in concessions from the workers in Normal. The plant in Normal is running far below capacity and Mitsubishi Japan has not guaranteed that they will keep it open.
Mitsu has abandoned those bad practices that you are citing. Also, the sales increase of 11% is strictly for the US market. So the sell of a subsidiary has no impact. When has a manufacter ever guaranteed that it will keep a plant open? Mitsu is taking corrective actions and hopefully these steps will keep them in the US for a long time. Well, that's my hope, at least.
if cars like my '08 Mitsu Lancer GTS continue to be produced and sold by Mitsubishi they are for sure making a comeback as I post this. I have confidence that they're back.
Shared platform. CVT and engine, too? I noticed in the link to the 2nd article, it said manual would be the quickest, and mentions the GTS/6 speed CVT( no mention of the CVT-only versions,like ES/DE).
Yeah, there is some platform sharing going on here between DCX, Hyundai, and Mitsu. Although, relations broke down between the 3 which freed up Mitsu to complete the platform development on its own terms. I think that Hyundai was only involved in the 2.0L engine development and not the actual platform though. Edmunds (I'll search for the article) said that the breakup of the alliance provided Mitsu the opportunity to finish up the platform on its own terms and that's why the Lancer/Outlander feel so solid.
That Car and Driver report gave #1 to the Mustang 6. I've driven that car an was not impressed. As in the article I thought it sounded like a washing machine over 4000rpm. Handling was not real good either. I can only hope the GT is better.
On the plus side the Lancer was rated 7.8sec. 0-60.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Yes, 7.8 seconds, WITH THE MANUAL, NOT THE CVT We only are(were) interested in the CVT version. The CVT/GTS, with the 6 speed paddle shifters took 9 seconds to 60. And Edmunds did not sound thrilled about those times, either, or the CVT. CVT's may be cheaper to build or repair, but the sure sap the power, too! Since out of 8 cars in 22 years, only 1 had tranny issues... bring out the normal automatics!
The ES, w/o the 6 speed paddle shifters, to "help" get more out of the CVT(and faster 0-60 times).. I heard 10+ seconds to 60. I drove one. Besides iluv, and myself, how many others have driven a Lancer? :confuse: My feelings are along the lines of Edmunds test drive. Nice car, yes, sluggish, yes. They should have just dropped a 5 or 6 speed automatic in it, or 5 speed auto manual, at least.
Not saying it's a horrible car, just not as fast as it looks(outside of the manual, that is. CVT's? OK speed. Not slugs, but, the ES is on 0-60 times of an Elantra! :surprise: ). A family sedan!
Now, Edmunds said a Ralliart(or it may be called something else, 2.4 Liter) will be out by next year, iirc. If this is the 173HP, 2.4 L I-4 from the Sebring/Avenger... it may help the 0-60 times with the CVT(or manual) models, 6 speed paddle shifter,or not. I bet you might lose a few MPG, but gain some time on the 0-60, also. If it could hit 60 in say 8.5 seconds with the CVT, ES model(or whatever they'll call it)...and keep the msrp around 18,500....may be interested. I have another year, at least. Will have to wait and see.
http://car-reviews.automobile.com/Nissan/review/2007-nissan-sentra-2-0-s-road-te- st/2832/ Says Nissan has best CVT, but do argue it is alittle slow, and argue the need for a "Shifter" with CVT(something like that). Maybe a larger engine helps, like on the Altima( they mention it in the review as being better than the Sentra, CVT, slightly better?). I wonder if CVT's aren't cheaper to make nowadays, and automakers use 'em to save money, and make more profit? They say if one breaks, it cost less than a normal automatic to fix? And the Big MPG pay off? 152HP getting 29 hwy? Our tC gets 30(EPA) but 32-34 in reality, 160HP(it may weigh less than the Lancer by 100 lbs, too?). I don't see the "big gains" in 0-60 times and mpg over 4-5-6 speed automatics. Only thing maybe if CVT breaks, it could possibly cost less to repair? I dunno. tc/no
Well, CVTs are comparatively simple, with very few moving parts compared to any other transmission. They also eliminate the torque converter, which lessens drivetrain power loss. Those two factors by themselves are pretty attractive reasons for pursuing them IF a solid implementation can be worked out.
Point is, Nissan did it. From what I hear, it's the same physical CVT transmission too. I wonder the key is how Nissan programs the control software?
Am I missing something? If CVT lessens power loss, why would a car equipped with CVT be slower than a regular auto trans.?
As a side note. I read here on Edmunds that the Eclipse will have stability control for 2008. Is this replacing the traction control which now comes with the car? Anyone care to speculate how this will effect handling?
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
CVTs are heavier than an auto: that's one downside.
Also, I would think a lot is based on how the "gearing" is programmed to match up with the engine. A CVT tranny might not work well "out of the box" unless it's programmed to match up well with the engine's characteristics.
I got my first subscription issue of Road & Track in a good number of years. The EVO-X (TEN) vs. Subie WRX. It's a good read and I just love the production model of the EVO-X. It will be worth taking a look at that's for sure. I don't think the Rockford Fosgate will be loud enough or offer those who like R&B or Hip Hop enough bass will it ? :surprise:
So it doesn't have enough bass ???? Have you turned up the bass all the way to test it out ?
0-60 in 4.5 seconds and 12.5 in the quarter-mile is what is predicted for the EVO-X and STI WRX. WOW, that is moving !!! :surprise: The EVO-10, is predicted to be one of the best handling automobiles ever with it's S-AWC. I sure would like to test one to find out.
Comments
Any word on the pricing on the new EVO X? I'm too lazy to look...maybe it's worth waiting for one of those instead of buying an Outlander. :shades:
Rocky
I'm sure I'll at least test drive one myself though, but I guess I'll have to settle for the Outlander.
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Judging by the stance and stealthiness of our Lancer GTS' whoever gets an EVO 10 with that AWD drivetrain is going to have a great handler and turbo-charge engine to boot. That car will be awesome.
As for price, well, there was a 2006 EVO 9 in the showroom the night we were in there buying our '08 Lancer GTS and it was selling for $34,950, IIRC, on sale to move it.
I would wait and get a 2008 EVO 10 if I really needed a small race-ready car. I much prefer this new bodystyle to the old one.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Rocky
Spouse and I went, test drove, and , well, unimpressed.
Sat in it, was ok in seat comfort. Acceptable room.
The problem began the minute I tried to "take off" our of the parking lot.
The salesman was with us, and he did not like our commentary. We would have purchased one today, but, this thing is SLOWER than death! :surprise:
I tried again, for a 0-55 MPH run, from a stop.
It went forward, but my "Slow" V6 Sonata( around 9 seconds to 60)felt like a jet in comaprison(and it will "Squeal tires", where the Lancer does nothing. Even our tC chirps 'em!).
29 MPG for 152HP vs 34MPG for 161 HP( Lancer vs Larger Optima, Same 0-60, btw, for the I-4's). Same feeling of "slow".
Why? This thing felt as slow as the VT last year, and the new Sebring with 173HP(but it is a larger car).
That killed it right there. That over 10+ seconds to 60, and 29 MPG.
Sorry iluv... I know you have the GTS model, but I feel if I raced you in either our Scion tC or Sonata, I'd win.
For 17,599, you get no sunroof, either, tC you do(and a hatch).
29-30MPG vs 32-34MPG.
8.2 to 60 in tC, 10+ in Lancer.
Hmmmmmmmmm! Which one do I want?
I guess if you have kids and need the rear seat room, the Lancer is ok, for a sporty -looking economy car(with the 152HP engine).
Sorry, folks. It's #1 in looks, but unless you are getting the EVO(maybe the GTS is faster, with the paddle shifter, but at 21-22K... I'll get a "boring" Prius, or Honda Civic hybrid, and 45-50 MPG).
We could have lived with the 29 MPG, but not with 0-60 of 10-11 seconds.
What shocke dme was my spouse and I both said the SX4 "CUV" felt faster, and more fun to drive, with sharper handling! :surprise:
If the SX4 FWD sedan, coming out thsi Fallm has( at least as an option) fold down arm rest for both passengers up front, 29-31MPG, adn 0-60 under 10 seconds, and handles liek the SX4, I'm In!
Sorry guys, I gave it a fair try, and my spouse did not even want to drive it after we went 5 miles.
Said she could tell by take offs it was "not fun".
That is not cool when a Kia Optima(larger car) with maybe 9 more HP(5 speed automanual) family car is about as fast and fun as a Lancer ES with CVT.
And the heavier car with more HP gets 34 MPG! :surprise:
Anyhow, not attacking anyone's choices.
Just a BIG let down, to us.
Others may like it, others don't. Same with any other vehicles on the road.
take care/not offense.
Rocky
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I am just so smitten by the car's looks and I love it's steady steering and handling. The sunroof, RF 650-watt stereo, on and on, but it's the stellar menacing looks that got me with this car. I am not one that cares any or at all about speed. I'm all about enjoying and smelling the roses along the way, and with a car that looks like this, Mitsu made it easy for me.
Buy what you like, I respect your decision to not like the '08 Lancer. I've been at these sites for too long to get sensitive if someone doesn't like my choice of rigs.
Remember, I'm the guy who loved Kia when pert-near everyone else hated them!
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Not a bad looking car.
Car and Driver rate the 2008 Lancer at 0-60 of 7.8 seconds, not exactly a rocket but not slow either. Wonder why your tester was so slow? Maybe the CVT makes it slower.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
DE and ES(IIRC, it is the DE for the most base model),
Nothing!
I tell you, in all honesty, I felt nothing that could be called "exhilaration"(more like exasperation) from flooring the thing!
When we went there, the spouse said" if we like this, we can trade in the Sonata today".
29-30 MPG beats 24-26 MPG daily averarges.
I was ready to buy!
That was until we got into the thing, and tried to have fun!
I heard the GTS is tuned differently thant the 2 other models, and the 6 speed(holding) gears on the CVT help with 0-60, and same of rthe manual,making it really fast.
Yeah, a manual tC will do 0-60 in 7.8 also(another time I heard 7.7 seconds with manual) and 8.2 with automatic(yes, it goes!).
But the Lancer? It felt s-l-o-w!
The guy tried too talk us in to the 21K version, GTS, but, by the time the ES drive was over... I told him I'll wait for the rumored xr, (4 door) from Scion.
Really a let down.
I have been checking this thing out on the net since last Nov, 06.... then to get into something that makes the Elantra feel sporty(0-60 in 10 seconds with automatic)...is scarey(although it is EPA rated Mid-sized sedan now, and no manual/auto deal like on the Sonata, unfortunately).
Well, I'm in no hurry...so I got awhile.
Here's hoping whatever replaces the tC is good( hoping for the 3 door tC replacment to remain 3 doors, and the 4 door sporty sedan to come out, also, by 09, at the latest, if intellichoice.com future cars thing is true).
If not, I'll get a "Dull" Corolla, and 40 MPG( at least that's cool.... seeing as gas is voer 3 dollars a gallon again).
Oh well.
see ya.
tc/no
There is a point around 4000 RPM where the engine in the Lancer gets a second life and starts to pull with more gusto. With the paddle shifters I am able to keep the engine in its "sweet" spot where it produces the most power.
I don't think I would have bought the Lancer if it did not have the manual mode paddle shifters. They really do enhance the driving characteristics of the car.
shado4's right the shifts are crisp and clean and I noticed this about them on my first drive of my car. If they weren't so fun I would've just waited for a stick shift from another Arizona dealer. To me the car has more than adequate acceleration and power, but driving in the 'D' old-fashioned automatic mode is truly the mellow and slower method with this car. The paddle shifter lifts you and your Lancer to a different, zippier fun-level that one would expect from a beauty like this.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Aluminum is so yesterday. The paddle shifters in the Lancer are magnesium. The reason for that? I read that the magnesium shifters do not get hot to the touch if the car has been sitting out in the sun all day. The steering wheel may be blistering, but the paddle shifters will not be.
Great...we can shift the car but not steer it. :P
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Mitsubishi April Sales
The new Lancer is off to a hot start, posting a 263% increase over Lancer sales from April 2006, making it the largest sales month for the Lancer in nearly 3 years.
This makes the sixth straight month of sales increases for Mitsubishi when comparing sales to a year ago.
Mitsubishi April Sales
The new Lancer seems to be making a solid start.
Continue.
Welcome, also, as a new carspace friend!
Mitsubishi rocks and rules!
I still love Kia, BTW, but am riding a Mitsubishi Lancer GTS high that shows no signs of letting up.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Nah!
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Good News for Mitsubishi!(see paragraph #6)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aV4ENEziyEX0&refer=home
My Mitsu baby needs a bath and will receive it tomorrow morning, save for a thunderstorm or something. Arizona's sand and dust deposits are constantly shifting, shifty. (!!)
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/Daily_Auto_News/April_Sales_Slow_Signi- ficantly.S173.A12285.html
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
This says Caliber CVT 0-60 in 10.1 seconds. Isn''t the Lancer platform(and cvt) from Caliber, a shared deal?
http://car-reviews.automobile.com/Mitsubishi/review/2008-mitsubishi-lancer-previ- ew/2625/
Shared platform.
CVT and engine, too?
I noticed in the link to the 2nd article, it said manual would be the quickest, and mentions the GTS/6 speed CVT( no mention of the CVT-only versions,like ES/DE).
Anyhow....tc/no.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/12849/2007-scion-tc.html
0-60times for 10 sport(y) cars. (this is on tC page, but look around).
tc/no
http://research.cars.com/go/crp/research.jsp?revid=50410&indcriteria=ASSET_TYPE-- Affiliate+Review%2CBuying+Guide%2CVehicle+Profile%7CM-_34_%7CD-_6708_%7CY-_2007_- %7CresultStructure-combined&revlogtype=19&makeid=34&modelid=6708&year=2007&myid=- &revlogtype=19§ion=reviews&mode=&aff=sacbee
On the plus side the Lancer was rated 7.8sec. 0-60.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
The CVT/GTS, with the 6 speed paddle shifters took 9 seconds to 60.
And Edmunds did not sound thrilled about those times, either, or the CVT.
CVT's may be cheaper to build or repair, but the sure sap the power, too!
Since out of 8 cars in 22 years, only 1 had tranny issues... bring out the normal automatics!
The ES, w/o the 6 speed paddle shifters, to "help" get more out of the CVT(and faster 0-60 times).. I heard 10+ seconds to 60.
I drove one. Besides iluv, and myself, how many others have driven a Lancer? :confuse: My feelings are along the lines of Edmunds test drive. Nice car, yes, sluggish, yes.
They should have just dropped a 5 or 6 speed automatic in it, or 5 speed auto manual, at least.
Not saying it's a horrible car, just not as fast as it looks(outside of the manual, that is. CVT's? OK speed. Not slugs, but, the ES is on 0-60 times of an Elantra! :surprise: ).
A family sedan!
Now, Edmunds said a Ralliart(or it may be called something else, 2.4 Liter) will be out by next year, iirc.
If this is the 173HP, 2.4 L I-4 from the Sebring/Avenger...
it may help the 0-60 times with the CVT(or manual) models, 6 speed paddle shifter,or not.
I bet you might lose a few MPG, but gain some time on the 0-60, also.
If it could hit 60 in say 8.5 seconds with the CVT, ES model(or whatever they'll call it)...and keep the msrp around 18,500....may be interested.
I have another year, at least.
Will have to wait and see.
tc/no
Says Nissan has best CVT, but do argue it is alittle slow, and argue the need for a "Shifter" with CVT(something like that).
Maybe a larger engine helps, like on the Altima( they mention it in the review as being better than the Sentra, CVT, slightly better?).
I wonder if CVT's aren't cheaper to make nowadays, and automakers use 'em to save money, and make more profit?
They say if one breaks, it cost less than a normal automatic to fix?
And the Big MPG pay off? 152HP getting 29 hwy?
Our tC gets 30(EPA) but 32-34 in reality, 160HP(it may weigh less than the Lancer by 100 lbs, too?).
I don't see the "big gains" in 0-60 times and mpg over 4-5-6 speed automatics.
Only thing maybe if CVT breaks, it could possibly cost less to repair?
I dunno.
tc/no
Point is, Nissan did it. From what I hear, it's the same physical CVT transmission too. I wonder the key is how Nissan programs the control software?
Am I missing something? If CVT lessens power loss, why would a car equipped with CVT be slower than a regular auto trans.?
As a side note. I read here on Edmunds that the Eclipse will have stability control for 2008. Is this replacing the traction control which now comes with the car? Anyone care to speculate how this will effect handling?
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Also, I would think a lot is based on how the "gearing" is programmed to match up with the engine. A CVT tranny might not work well "out of the box" unless it's programmed to match up well with the engine's characteristics.
-Da Rock
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
0-60 in 4.5 seconds and 12.5 in the quarter-mile is what is predicted for the EVO-X and STI WRX. WOW, that is moving !!! :surprise: The EVO-10, is predicted to be one of the best handling automobiles ever with it's S-AWC. I sure would like to test one to find out.
-Rocky