Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2008 Subaru Impreza WRX

191012141549

Comments

  • dino001dino001 Tampa, FLPosts: 3,486
    It must be US. No low-end 3- or 5-series (w/4 cylinders), no 1-series at all, no diesel models (huge in Europe). And profit they do - perhaps not every single one, but they do.

    2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.

  • paisanpaisan Posts: 21,181
    The chassis for the new cars is the same...

    Evo
    Lancer
    Caliber
    Compass
    Avenger
    Sebring
    Patriot

    That's the part that Juice was getting at.

    -mike
  • paisanpaisan Posts: 21,181
    Hmm, I guess since I go out and RACE a Subaru and put it on the Podium giving them free advertising coupled with my owning upward of 6 Subarus over the years my opinion should count the most.

    The 1/2+hr I spent on the phone with their engineers explaining how 200+ of their cars got stolen in a 20 mile radius of Newark, NJ in a 6 month period and how they can prevent the thefts I guess then I definitely have an opinion that could be counted more.

    Or perhaps it's just my overall weight that is more :) haaaa

    -mike
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    These are obviously US figures (so high-end stuff only, no cheap(er) models).

    Yes, but I think it would be too far off topic to post all of BMW's sales figures worldwide. The comparison is basically because both companies have a lot of similarities yet one is booming and the other is not.

    So it just hit me - BMW has same sales volume, larger margins and MANY MORE models than Subaru (counting by powertrain varieties and body styles) - by far.

    Yes and i believe this is because BMW has a very purposely set direction in their corporate strategy.
    Oh sure they do have problems and recalls and anything thing like any other car maker but they don't mind being in a niche market and have capitalized on it.
    Subaru is still IMO floundering with what they want to be.
    That's why they bounce around so much, no clear and dedicated corporate goal.
    Subaru could clean up if they actually had a strategy but looking at the company over the years I've been dealing with them they make a lot of funky vehicles, ok so make really great funky vehicles and specialize in it and make solid reliability the foundation, with quirky but functional styling and be innovators instead of following the lead dogs.

    So it can be done, even by relatively small company. You just need to have right stuff and clear strategy.

    Yes, precisely, but they won't do it because it's very risky.
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    Is that just US or is that world sales? It looks like they sold 75,000 3 series and 7,500 7 series, so they sold 10 3 series for every single 7 series.

    That was just US sales and it is for the month of June ONLY not the entire year to date. I did include the link for it right?

    The other thing is they have 57!!! models listed for just cars, not counting light trucks (teehee I just can't think of a BMW as a light truck). I am amazed they can keep that many models straight, let alone profit from cars they only sell 4-5 vehicles/year.

    That's in a month, and yeah it's lot of models to keep track of but look at Subaru and when you include trip levels etc... It's quite a lot. I can post Subaru if you want but I think it was posted before.
    The point is a small company CAN make it but it takes time, money and a lot of dedication to fill the niche market rather than try and beat Honda at their own game.
  • dino001dino001 Tampa, FLPosts: 3,486
    The point is a small company CAN make it but it takes time, money and a lot of dedication to fill the niche market rather than try and beat Honda at their own game.

    Exactly. To be fair, there are other factors to consider, of course. For example, BMW enjoys family holding, which protects them from hostile takeover - FHI does not. There are also tons of examples of small independent companies that didn't make it, which can have a chilling effect on everyone. Margin for error is definitely very small and they know it.

    To be brutaly honest, I'm not sure Subaru leaders and engineers really do have what it takes and they probably know it - hence their "bouncey" attempts from infamous upscale-schmapscale move, to inconsistencies in their lineup.

    I think the biggest weakness of their leadership is they didn't let any new "strategy" (whatever it was) to really work before they got scared by early problems - instead of correcting/tweaking they run away screaming and changing direction. One thing is to recognize something isn't working (Baja fiasco, Tribeca shortcomings), quite another is scrapping everything else because of some issues that could be solved by much smaller moves.

    When you're on quick sands, the last thing you want is start jerking around.

    2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.

  • aaykayaaykay Posts: 539
    So that means all of the others are benefitting from sharing some of the mechanical components from the super-stiff-designed-to-outhandle-anything-else-within-twice-its-price-range EVO. Good for them !

    Also, since the EVO is made with 100% Japanese componentry and comes off of an exclusively Japanese assembly line, and the others mentioned are all made in the US or Mexico, the only commonality might lie in the DESIGN of some of the mechanicals. Either way, good for them, since they are partaking the componentry design from a world beater !

    I believe even the new 08 WRX has sourced its Turbo from Mitsubishi....not trying to put it down in any way, of course. :P
  • dino001dino001 Tampa, FLPosts: 3,486
    If certain design features are shared between vehicles and some of them happen be not so great, it does not mean the other must be bad, too.

    Never underestimate Detroit's execs' ability to screw up. Track record shows their minds are very capable ;)

    2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.

  • paisanpaisan Posts: 21,181
    Not saying it's good or bad that they share stuff, just saying it's odd. Also is the new EVO all Japanese or perhaps they have farmed some stuff out to save money to Chrysler?

    I never had a real issue with DSM cars over the years, always wanted a Conquest TSI/Starion and wanted a Talon TSI/Eclipse during my HS years....

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    People love to point that out, but the Mitsu turbo is actually the weak link in the powertrain.

    Note the special edition JDM models all swap out that turbo for a twin scroll or ball bearing turbos.
  • aaykayaaykay Posts: 539
    People might also point out the fact that during the core development of the new 08 Impreza, General Motors had a 20% stake in FHI (Subaru's parent company) and was the single largest shareholder and most of the design direction of the new products from Subaru (including the new Impreza), probably had GM's prodding behind them. Cutting corners, eliminating the more expensive Aluminium components, cutting out things that people would not notice right away etc., probably with an eye to using the Impreza platform as the basis for their next generation Chevy Cavalier or Aveo.

    Not saying that has happened but people could always speculate, right ? ;)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I'm sure you don't actually believe that, but it was a funny point!

    GM could not find any synergy at all with Subaru, none. Longitudinal layout, boxer engines, symmetrical AWD. There was simply nothing in common with any GM models.

    Closest we got to that was the Saab 9-2x, and I'm sure Saab mechanics struggle to work on those to this day due to being completely unfamiliar with them.
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    To be brutally honest, I'm not sure Subaru leaders and engineers really do have what it takes and they probably know it - hence their "bouncey" attempts from infamous upscale-schmapscale move, to inconsistencies in their lineup.

    I agree but you need a leader with a vision, publicly held or not someone has to have a clear vision for the future of the company. I don't think the leadership at Subaru has that. Some new blood and forward thinking might help that but Ferrari doesn't sell many cars compared to many other auto makers but everyone knows what a Ferrari is. Subaru needs to head in that direction rather than in the direction of Toyota. The Baja was a mistake but it could have been swung around with the right people doing the job. Re-creating the BRAT didn't work for a ton of reasons and combining it with the Chevy Avalanche, another mistake. The Tribeca, well, I didn't keep on top of that one. I don't think a better interior is going to sell the WRX and considering what they took out and if it's not such a big deal then just leave it in. But the car was de-contented from before regardless of the consumers knowing it and the bland looks. This makes as someone on here said the base impreza to be a much better deal by far. You get everything but the turbo and the sport suspension well I can't say how different that is but my guess is you can add a turbo and remap the ECU and get gobs more power which enthusiasts do anyway. The suspension bits, no idea but it seems you pay too high a premium for a few more HP and almost everything else is the same.
    This is NOT The way to sell higher volume. Make a full line of Rally type cars, get one on a TV show and make everyone want to buy one and keep pushing the cars abilities. Hey I owned a 1969 Charger General Lee style and it was a good car, looked great, but mine was brown, and cost $800 :P
    Still that orange car became an Icon the KITT car from Knight Rider was just a Camaro and Selleck had the 308 Ferrari in Magnum, The Mustang in Bullit etc... Subaru needs an aggressive look and aggressive performance at a good price. Put it on TV in some sort of action show and of course do a lot of stunts with it. But looking like it does it's not going to impress.
    Subie does have to be careful as they are small but at some point you have to make the move to go for it or be left behind. Total unit 2008 sales will tell a better story. But I don't think the profit margin will be that much greater. So maybe better than 2007 but by how much? Enough or Wow what a great year! Time will tell.
  • aaykayaaykay Posts: 539
    The Saab 9-2x had ZERO input from GM, since that was an existing Subaru product (pre-08 Impreza) in existence, prior to GM's acquiring a stake in Subaru's parent (thank goodness ! :) ).

    But as a major share-holder (part owner), who intended to make a killing from their investment (a company like GM does not do investments for charity reasons ;) ), even without any other synergies, they almost certainly would have prodded Subaru into severely cutting costs to increase their margins, wouldn't they ? Why would they not ?

    Any new products in development (like the 08 Impreza), would have been BULLS-EYE in General Motor's cross-hairs, I would venture. Thus when people speculate that the new 08 Impreza is not what it should have been, they are not being merely mean, are they ? ;) Removing a component like the rear LSD or Aluminium hood or replacing Aluminium with Plastic etc are obvious changes that are visible....what other changes have happened under the surface of the car, that are not as easily visible or not that obviously noticeable ? ;)
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    And now it a chunk is owned by Toyota, who doesn't make a sports car, doesn't make a turbo car, makes very few manual transmission cars, etc. :sick:
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    Still that orange car became an Icon the KITT car from Knight Rider was just a Camaro

    Pontiac Trans Am (Firebird), not Chevrolet Camaro, but we get the idea.
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    People might also point out the fact that during the core development of the new 08 Impreza, General Motors had a 20% stake in FHI (Subaru's parent company) and was the single largest shareholder and most of the design direction of the new products from Subaru (including the new Impreza), probably had GM's prodding behind them. Cutting corners, eliminating the more expensive Aluminium components, cutting out things that people would not notice right away etc., probably with an eye to using the Impreza platform as the basis for their next generation Chevy Cavalier or Aveo.

    Now that really WOULD explain a lot of things. :mad:
    The Aveo is a 2 year old Suzuki Sprint and we have the new sprints here and they look great but Chevy is buying old cars from Suzuki! I posted a pic of the new Suzuki Swift to the Fit forum and it's an eye catcher but of course GM doesn't want that! Chevy makes good trucks and the Corvette and that's it! You can keep everything else including any Camaro's or Trans Am's or anything! Ford doesn't make a single car I'd own except for a fleeting thought about the Ford GT. But I'd rather have a Porsche GT3 over that so.... not one Ford.
    US car makers have lost the plot and apparently they helped Subaru to lose their vision as well. :sick:
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    Any new products in development (like the 08 Impreza), would have been BULLS-EYE in General Motor's cross-hairs, I would venture. Thus when people speculate that the new 08 Impreza is not what it should have been, they are not being merely mean, are they ? Removing a component like the rear LSD or Aluminium hood or replacing Aluminium with Plastic etc are obvious changes that are visible....what other changes have happened under the surface of the car, that are not as easily visible or not that obviously noticeable ?

    Was I just being mean? I didn't think so and I think you've summed up what I've been saying pretty well.
    GM is all about maxing profit while killing quality and reliability. Imagine if GM bought BMW, how long before the company's sales tank and it becomes second place to the Vette, which of course they would do that since nothing is allowed to surpass the Vette.
    If only I had enough dosh for a Porsche 911 S....
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    I thought we were talking about the WRX? :confuse:
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    All speculation, besides, the synergy never happened, that's why the whole GM-Subaru partnership never worked at all. Subaru refused to be just another generic GM division.

    If GM had even half the influence you imply they had, the 08 Impreza would have a transverse engine and we'd be seeing FWD models in the lineup.
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    If GM had even half the influence you imply they had, the 08 Impreza would have a transverse engine and we'd be seeing FWD models in the lineup

    I don't think so GM is pretty heavy handed in the way they deal with things. Use the 900 lb. Gorilla analogy if you like. I can see this happening which would explain a lot to me about why Subaru did some of the things it did. But yes, it's not provable so it remains speculation but very believable. Cost cutting is alot different than radical changes which Subaru would severely object to. Cost cutting is a GM thing as well as Ford. Low budget the car I mean look how long it's taken for GM to give the Corvette a decent interior. How many years was it? Most of them? Is an interior that expensive? No it's to save every penny they can.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I still don't think the Corvette interior is that good... :D

    GM was very different to Isuzu vs. Subaru. With Isuzu, they gobbled up their diesel technology, starved them of new product, then eventually used Isuzu dealers to sell more GMC trucks.

    They really didn't do that at all with Subaru. Well, Japan got the Subaru Traviq (actually an Opel), and Saab got the 9-2x, and Chevy even sold a Forester in India. But we just didn't see them control Subaru they way they did to Isuzu.

    If anything, Subaru has accelerated new product launches. Look how quickly the Tribeca came out and was revised.
  • dino001dino001 Tampa, FLPosts: 3,486
    Yeah - as much as would like to blame GM for everything, including Locust in Africa, Subaru stumbles are most likely on them, not GM.

    2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.

  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    I still don't think the Corvette interior is that good...

    :shades:

    Yeah but I'm trying to be nice about a $60,000 car. :D

    I think we as consumers will see all this for ourselves in just a few months but I still think at this point in time the base Impreza has a lot going for it over the WRX model since it seems like a lot of changes have diminished the WRX model in order to make the STI look better. I could be wrong, but I am heavily weighing other options.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Well, since GM's involvement they have added content to most models, FWIW. I really don't see much cost cutting.

    They shared some models, cloned a few cars, negotiating big purchases with suppliers to get prices down, but there isn't any evidence that I see of rampant cost cutting.

    You may counter with the LSD delete but they deleted the LSD from the 2002 Impreza RS, too. Plus they add VDC in its place now.
  • dstew1dstew1 Posts: 275
    Steve said: This makes as someone on here said the base impreza to be a much better deal by far. You get everything but the turbo and the sport suspension well I can't say how different that is but my guess is you can add a turbo and remap the ECU and get gobs more power which enthusiasts do anyway.

    This is generally not a good idea with these cars. The NA 2.5L is NOT the exact same engine as the 2.5L turbo.

    The general consensus has been that if you were going to spend the money to do a NA to turbo conversion on one of these cars, and do it RIGHT, you'd be better off buying the turbo (whether it be WRX, XT, GT) in the first place. Not to mention if you buy the turbo'd version, you get a warranty.

    Doug
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    This makes as someone on here said the base impreza to be a much better deal by far. You get everything but the turbo and the sport suspension well I can't say how different that is but my guess is you can add a turbo and remap the ECU and get gobs more power which enthusiasts do anyway.

    Pistons, rods, compression ratios, head gasket design could all be changed, and then add standalone fuel management and a couple wide band O2 sensors and 40 hours of dyno tuning....
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    The general consensus has been that if you were going to spend the money to do a NA to turbo conversion on one of these cars, and do it RIGHT, you'd be better off buying the turbo (whether it be WRX, XT, GT) in the first place. Not to mention if you buy the turbo'd version, you get a warranty.

    Perhaps but guys who buy knowing they will tune the cr don't worry as much.
    Myself the only mods I will make to a car are Cross tower strut brace, Different sway bars, Rims and tires, brakes, I like performance brake pads. Better brake fluid and a change of tranny fluid to Redline after 10K miles.
    I would also upgrade the shocks when they originals wear out and none of that stuff is a big deal, all bolt on stuff and the tranny fluid makes a huge difference in shifting.
    I won't remap the ECU or major mods even once it's not under warranty.
    Have you seen the video where they dropped the motor from the Suzuki Hayabusa into a Smartfortwo car? OMG! All it would do was burn rubber in every gear! 175HP in a 1,000 lb car! A friend of mine had a twin turbo Miata. But it did have a bit of lag down low but once it was spun up it was a screamer!
  • jeffmcjeffmc Posts: 1,742
    "All of the WRX pics I have seen are the wagon, is there no sedan being released?"

    Looks like no one answered your question. Here are pics of the WRX sedan, available exclusively in North America (& maybe Australia, too?):
    image
    image
  • aaykayaaykay Posts: 539
    Frankly, if you were to ignore things like Juice's pet phrases like "concave side panels" etc., the new Sedan's overall look is of the current Toyota Corolla. The Wagon/Hatch on the other hand has an overall tasteful appearance, however.

    I am glad the STI is based on the wagon than the sedan, this go around. I might even buy one. :shades:
This discussion has been closed.