Howdy, Stranger!

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





2008 Subaru Impreza WRX

1272830323374

Comments

  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    And there's understeer. Plenty of it. Part of this comes from Subaru's new Vehicle Dynamics Control, a system for stability and traction control. Although it can be disabled, its presence in an all-wheel-drive package has forced the elimination of the car's limited-slip rear differential, which had substantially improved the cornering attitude of the previous WRX.

    Taken from the article above it really clarifies a few things and yes I did read it posted better slalom numbers. 3 mph or so faster but lots of body roll and the video showed exactly what I thought it would. Subaru will probably sell a lot of these cars but I think enthusiasts will shy away from the car. But the word Camry comes up a lot when Edmunds talks about the WRX. Also I think Motor Trend will appeal to some posters in this forum as they really don't say anything negative about the car. For me the above says it all along with the video and watching the car while it's performing. If you look you can see the back end really digs in and the front wheels seem to come up a bit high on the 0-60 launch.
    The review and the video combined with all I have learned about the 2008 Impreza has caused me to put it at the bottom of my list of cars to buy. If I was in the US right now I'd be calling up dealerships to buy a 2007 WRX wagon, I'd get a good deal and good performance and more cargo room, better looks.
    People who sit in a Camry are not going to buy a Subaru. The Camry is just so comfortable and the Accord is really good as well. subaru I think got cocky with their pricing and it's all in the above article and $27K is just too much for a WRX IMO.
    You can buy a 2007 Honda Accord V6 with leather interior and a Nav system for that!
    AWD is good but it's not that good.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    An ugly hatch, doughy personality, and no extra power, plus increased competition may start the death-knell for the WRX.

    The Next Lancer Ralliart should be able to take care of this has-been.

    And strangly, this article hits, and misses, on a salient point.

    V6 Camry does 0-60 in six seconds. WRX's performance, and mission, isn't so unique anymore, beside the AWD. The MazdaSpeed is faster, and better-looking, and starts cheaper!

    At least it still has a stick, although the way things are going, it may not have one next time. Soft is in at Subaru. Way to lose your identity. ;)

    DrFill
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    reduction in weight (50 lbs ?), corresponds to the elimination of equipment that came in earlier versions, including the rear viscous LSD, the roof-rails (wagon), the narrower tires, the more "compact" (and lighter duty ?)rear suspension, plastic parts replacing Aluminium in the engine bay, the elimination of the front sub-frame etc.

    I doubt a viscous LSD weighs measurably more than an open differential.

    Roof rails save some weight, but that's offset by using less aluminum.

    10mm narrower tires must not weight more than a few ounces less than before. Not a significant difference here.

    I would not assume the rear suspension was lighter duty. The old one was a plain old strut, nothing special. The new one may be more compact, but it's more complex and advanced by a long shot. You imply it's lighter duty but note that Subaru used the struts on its smaller cars and now uses a design derived from its heavier duty models.

    Plastic is likely lighter than aluminum, sure.
  • SubyTrojanSubyTrojan Posts: 36
    Hi All,

    I wrote the Second Opinion piece for the Inside Line Full Test of the new 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX.

    You can read my pre-edited piece and some of my thoughts on the car on my CarSpace blog.
    http://www.carspace.com/blogs/theoutsideline/Inside-Line-Full-Test-2008-Subaru

    Any and all questions are welcome on here or through CarSpace. My work AIM screenname is "LWongEdmunds" if you would like to contact me that way.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Harsh review, no doubt.

    2nd opinion seems to contradict the first:

    the new WRX does everything better than its predecessor — but not by much

    And the funny thing is that editor owns a tuned 04 model.

    Only significant changes in performance measure are in braking and slalom (both better).

    From the video, the springs do seem too soft. That thing rolls around all over the place. Wonder what size the sway bars are.

    ***

    Edit: speak of the devil, his post creeped in just before mine! :D
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    So you felt the outgoing model didn't roll any less?

    And didn't feel the rear LSD made any difference?
  • stevecebustevecebu Posts: 493
    I wrote the Second Opinion piece for the Inside Line Full Test of the new 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX.

    Thanks for writing it although I've read a few reviews from other magazines and the New subaru isn't really getting an enthusiastic welcome especially from the guys who used to buy them. Oh sure guys who want a cushy ride and better sound insulation etc... but why not buy a Camry if what they want? Right now I'd say 60% are opposed to it being better but I've seen some tempered reviews where it's called an ugly toyota that drives poorly.
    Magazine reviews. I'm glad you liked the car, but for me it just dropped into last place. I can get VDC with the base model and the AWD as well. It has a lot of body roll for a sporty car. bye-bye rally roots. I think in this race the EVO is going to stomp Subaru flat with their EVO yes compared to the STI not the WRX and I think the Lancer Ralliart will brutalize the WRX. It's got it beat all over just in looks alone.
    Mitsubishi really needs something to pull it's fat out of the fire. They are losing money everyday. I think they put more thought into their car and it shows. Subaru went for the old man approach because of the increased sales of the Limited ie no spoiler.
    I'll bet it hurts them in the long run tho. Subie is a niche market car maker and breaking out of that niche isn't going to happen. The sooner they face that fact he better for their customers. VW is struggling as well and many other car makers left a long time ago for various reasons.
    What amazes me is all the guys who like it aren't in the market to buy one within 6 months.
    Easy to like a car you won't spend your own money on.
    I think the bad press is going to hurt them.

    SubyTrojan just curious but who wrote the first review?
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,657
    You seem to think your opinion is of more value than others here simply because you're putting money where your mouth is—as you've told us a bunch of times.

    I can't think of anything more arrogant!

    You have voiced your displeasure with the new WRX to the point that it's old and tiresome. There's nothing new that you've added to the discussion. It's just constant whining. Go buy your EVO or Accord since the WRX doesn't measure up to your standards—and let's move on.

    Bob
  • paisanpaisan Posts: 21,181
    I might also add that steve keeps comparing the WRX to an Accord and a Camry, of which there is zero in common in terms of anything other than price.

    Shall we start complaining that the Ford Ranger is way way better than the Camry because it can carry more cargo and is cheaper? That's what he is saying here when he tries to compare the Accord/Camry to an Impreza....

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    guys who want a cushy ride and better sound insulation etc... but why not buy a Camry if what they want?

    You go from one extreme to the other. Give us a break. It's all or nothing for you. This is why everyone argues with you, your opinions are too polar.

    The new 2008 slaloms significantly quicker (better transient handling) and stops better yet probably has a better ride to go with it, plus a roomier trunk. That makes it a Camry?! :confuse:

    The only person here that's driven one says it's better than the old one, and didn't notice any loss of handling for the lack of a rear LSD.

    I just don't see the major sacrifices you're talking about. OK, there's lots of body roll, but there was on the old one, too. All season tires, same thing, why do you think we call them BLOtenzas? That's not new.

    I drive a big Toyota, so believe me, I'm fully aware of how they drive. You get a serene, quiet, smooth ride, but you sacrifice handling COMPLETELY. Forget about quick slaloms, you wouldn't even bother trying to drive a big Toyota like that.

    Honestly, go drive a Camry again, then rejoin this thread. I think we'll all enjoy it much more.
  • SubyTrojanSubyTrojan Posts: 36
    ateixeira, I have a lightly modded 2004 WRX Sedan. What I was trying to do was compare a stock 2002-2007 WRX to the stock 2008. The editing of my piece seemed to change that.

    Please read what I originally wrote on my CarSpace blog. http://www.carspace.com/blogs/theoutsideline/Inside-Line-Full-Test-2008-Subaru

    The overall package is better on the 2008 WRX compared to the stock 2002-2007 WRX. Performance is the same to marginally better (compared to a stock 2006-2007 WRX). The new car is easily a better daily driver.
  • SubyTrojanSubyTrojan Posts: 36
    Body roll felt about the same as my 2004 WRX when it was stock with stock wheels and tires.

    The replacement of the rear LSD with an open diff didn't adversely affect the handling of the vehicle on a twisty mountain road (Glendora Mountain Road). I'm guessing perhaps only autocrossers would really notice the difference. I'm more of a road course guy and would have loved to take the new car on to the track like Motor Trend did.
  • SubyTrojanSubyTrojan Posts: 36
    Who wrote the first review? You should see Josh Jacquot's name clearly at the beginning of the article. :shrug: He's our Senior Road Test Editor. He used to write for Sport Compact Car before coming here a couple of years ago(?).

    Please see the reply to ateixeira a few minutes ago. Overall, the stock 2008 WRX is better than a stock 2002-2007 WRX.
  • aaykayaaykay Posts: 539
    You keep mentioning stock 2002-2007 WRX. I think you need to separate out the stock 2002-2005 from the stock 2006-2007, since the 2.5L engine makes a WORLD of difference. Bottomline, the power/torque comes on slightly sooner in the new model but fades away quicker than the 2006-2007 model, which accounts for the slower quarter mile and identical 0-60 (when compared to the 2006-2007 - NOT 2002-2005).

    Your 2004 with the 2.0L was a pure rubberband in the power delivery department and I am not surprised that you are thrilled with the 2008.

    You need to post your impressions (if any) after comparing it to the outgoing model (2006-2007) and compare it with the incoming model (2008)....which was what the "First Impressions" were all about and I believe he was right on the money. Comparing your 2004 to the 2008 from a PERFORMANCE standpoint, is not valid, since there is a world of difference between the real outgoing model (2006-2007) and your 2.0L model.
  • aaykayaaykay Posts: 539
    The review was certainly harsh and mirrors my thoughts on the new 2008 model, even though I have not driven it. Seems like they also messed up the steering feel, which is a biggie for me.
  • SubyTrojanSubyTrojan Posts: 36
    I drove a stock 2006 WRX before I submitted my final piece. Perhaps you should read what I posted in the link I provided earlier.

    As far as I know, the handling and interior of the 2006-2007 WRX is the same as the 2005 WRX. The 2005 WRX is pretty much the same as the 2002-2004 WRX save for the updated interior.
  • aaykayaaykay Posts: 539
    I would not assume the rear suspension was lighter duty. The old one was a plain old strut, nothing special. The new one may be more compact, but it's more complex and advanced by a long shot. You imply it's lighter duty but note that Subaru used the struts on its smaller cars and now uses a design derived from its heavier duty models.


    Actually, Honda also uses the term "compact" to describe the Double Wishbone employed in their bottom-feeder Civic (the Civic incidentally, has had the design similar to the 08 WRX with the struts in the front and "compact" Double Wishbones in the rear, for a couple of generations but I don't recall anybody praising the Civic's handling and dissing the Impreza's handling till date ;) ), while they don't use the term "compact" to describe the Double-wishbone in their Accord based brethren like the TSX or even the Accord itself.

    Thus when they stated that the Impreza rear suspension is a "compact" double wishbone, I tend to think it is a lighter duty version when compared to their strut-based design or even the heavier duty multi-link suspension in the Legacy-based models. Obviously, there is no comparison with the huge Double-wishbones employed in the Tribeca, from a lighter/heavier duty perspective, other than the term "Double Wishbone". :blush:

    This is one strike against the "modding" crowd, since they will not be able to replace their DB based suspension as readily/cheaply as they could replace their struts.
  • paisanpaisan Posts: 21,181
    Actually, Honda also uses the term "compact" to describe the Double Wishbone employed in their bottom-feeder Civic (the Civic incidentally, has had the design similar to the 08 WRX with the struts in the front and "compact" Double Wishbones in the rear, for a couple of generations but I don't recall anybody praising the Civic's handling and dissing the Impreza's handling till date ), while they don't use the term "compact" to describe the Double-wishbone in their Accord based brethren like the TSX or even the Accord itself.

    The civic which the Acura Integra Type R is based off of is highly regarded as one of the best, if not THE best handling sports compact car ever produced. It has double rear wishbone suspension, so I guess that's a bad thing! haaaaaa

    -mike
  • aaykayaaykay Posts: 539
    Mike, the Acura Integra (the basis for the Type-R), was the LAST generation of the Civic platform, which did not have the "compact" designation for the Double Wishbones and had Double Wishbones in the Front AND the rear.

    I used to have a GSR (Type-R's little brother with slightly less HP and without the LSD) and used to love the handling of that car.
Sign In or Register to comment.