Subaru Impreza WRX

dop50

It would be one thing to "drop" the clutch on ice covered pavement, but then yet another to "drop" it if you are on hot asphalt. You can break anything mechanical if you beat it to death long enough. You just need to have a little consideration that there are "limits" whether those limits are well defined or not. On the other hand, if money is no object, go for it!

Hey, everybody, have a GREAT and SAFE holiday!

Ken

WarpDrive

It was M2Performance that stated that the clutch did not need to be upgraded, not C&D. The guys at M2 felt that the clutch was good enough to handle the power. It has more credibility since it comes from a tuner. I'd like to hear what other tuners say about it.

I still think the weakness of the clutch is exaggerated for regular drivers.

nutyirishman

Hey all!

Just an FYI. If any one is looking to purchase a WRX in the central Valley in CA, go see Jeff Sandrini at Sangera Subaru. My wife and I are members to Costco and they have an Autoby program. Jeff quoted me a price ONLY $300.00 over invoice and only 20% markup on the turbo gauge and spoiler. All the opitons I wanted for under $23,000. HE IS AWESOME!!!

Website is sangerasubaru.com
Jeff Sandrini
800-848-3494

paisan

I've spoken to several local tuners who feel the same way. Only reason to upgrade tranny is if you upgrade the engine. Which makes sense IMHO.

-mike

kevin111

That is what I suspected. I was under the assumption that many of the tranny failures were due to extreme abuse as opposed to a weak component.

I remember one of the Subaru dealers telling me about a teenager that purchased one from them, put engine upgrades on it, and then was seen doing clutch drops right by the dealership, and bragging about doing 6000 rpm clutch drops. After a few months went by, he was back in the dealership with a broken tranny (I forget which component broke) and complaining about the weak tranny.

sonya4

Ed--Maybe I should have added "Real Drivers drive clutches"...? instead of making it a gender thing... I was just responding to aa717driver. :-)

Anyway it's not just a matter of "gauging gender identity by their ability to depress a clutch pedal" ... as most of you know, it's HOW WELL they can drive a car with manual transmission, and believe me I know some women who can drive a manual really well (I've driven manuals all my life so I should know).

On to another question for all: Which all-season tires would you recommend for the WRX? I know you've mentioned some here, but I was wondering what the most popular (tried-and-true) ones were.

--sonya4

kevin111

Both the 5000s and the KDWS were talked about very highly here. I think someone mentioned about the 8000s as well.

jwilson1

I assume you've all seen the comparo in the reviews on Edmund's home page. What do you folks think?

I don't own the WRX, just like it, but it doesn't really seem like an accurate comparison. If they'd waited until the STi the Sube would have done better in competition, obviously, and still have had the advantage in its streetability. Of course they could have waited for the US spec Mitsu, too.

I guess they just couldn't wait. And I don't blame them a bit. Sounds like a ball!

JW

lark6

I gotcha. I just get tired of the whole macho mindset that views automatics as somehow less than manly. I have bad knees (old football injury - really! - among other things) that have made it difficult for me to drive manual so I've had autos for a long time. Living in the NE Corridor of the US an auto makes the mos sense for the heavy traffic we have. Still I'd like the ability to row my own when the situation allows it so am watching the development of manumatics or clutchless manuals with great interest.

Ed

WarpDrive

Talk about apples and oranges. I could have written the same things without driving the two cars because it's well know that the EVO VII is a far more hardcore performance car than a regular WRX.

I wish people would stop comparing the two cars until the STi gets here. If it was a $31K STi vs a $29K EVO VIII (prices are guesses), then it starts getting interesting.

merrycynic

Thanks for the heads up on the mitsubishi. Just read it. Till we see a U.S. version and a U.S. STi with real prices it doesn't seem to really mean anything. Unless mitsubishi makes a wagon it doesn't mean anything to me. Really wish Subaru would bring on a full tilt uncompromised STi wagon here. Depending on the cost of course. I'm pretty sure I'd buy one in a heartbeat. I'm pretty confident Subaru could bring it in at a price I could handle.
I too am interested in others thoughts on all season tires. Are the Michellins worth the extra money?

greddygtr

I'm sure we'll be seeing a lot more WRX vs Evo comparisons in the coming months. Despite its horrid interior the performance figures on the Evo were very impressive. The STi will probably still slightly trail the Evo in maximum performance but it should be relatively close, depending on how much the Evo is softened for the US market.

WarpDrive

All-season tires will always compromise dry and snow grip.

What kind of weather do you get?

Popular choices for a/s tires include the Dunlop SP5000. For those who have a lot of money, the Michelin Pilot Sport (All-Season version) are good tires.

People that really want to use their car in the snow are best off with Nokian NRW http://www.nokiantires.com/html/NRW.html. These are truly winter capable all-seasons. However, they won't be nearly as capable as the high performance Pilots in good weather.

mikenk

A few months ago, I researched as much as I could find on various forums and specs. I concluded that the best choices seemed to be the Dunlop sp5000 or the BFG KDWS from a best value / performance perspective. I got the KDWS and have been very pleased; they are quiet, ride well, and handle much better that the OEM's.

Mike

paisan

I know several (about 6-10) people running SP5000s and love em. That is what I just picked up for the SVX 245-45-16s for it.

-mike

corkfish

The new Car and Driver has an article on the Evolution. It says the car will not be detuned to the extent that people thought it would ( around 275 horsepower) will still have brembos but will lose the yaw control. Some of the hard core elements of the car will be left out to reduce costs. I wish one thing they would leave out is that ridiculous wing on the back. It's very boy racer for a car which they state will cost from $27K to $29K. I can't believe people would want something that silly on their car. Yeah, ok, you're a race car driver! Oh brother. I'd have to get it removed if I decide to buy one

WarpDrive

Yes, it's boy racer. It has always been. That's its identity. The EVO was designed on a whole to be the best performing rally style car that you can buy from Misubishi. It's legendary around the world for its performance and its rally looks. In fact, the styling has been muted from the previous EVO's.

Personally, I am disappointed that AYC and other handling goodies are not available right away. Those are what makes the EVO brilliant. Without them, it's not the real thing.

robmarch

I really hope the wing is a no cost delete option on the STi. it looks like there are 2 versions on the Evo, the tall bookshelf and a shorter version.

I would prefer no wing at all to stay below the street racer radar.

I also disagree that the wing is critical to the car's identity. The Evo's identity is advanced electronic all wheel drive and turbo. The STi's identity is advanced mechanical all wheel drive and turbo. wings are personal choices.

merrycynic

I understand that all season tires are a compromise at both ends of the spectrum, Part of the appeal of the WRX is it's ability to perform at all but the extreme ends of the total spectrum. Very little in the way of rude surprises. I live in the north east. We have real winters and real summers and everything in between. Really harsh winter weather is not very common, but that and plain wet weather is when you really appreciate the confidence that super high performance tires don't usually provide. I really am not interested in dealing with seasonal changes and quite frankly the conditions here change from day to day as much as from season to season. I have just less than 10k on my WRX wagons stock tires and don't plan to change them until they need to be replaced. A lot has been said about significant improvements available with other offerings. I believe it. My gut tells me the car is more capable than the stock tires permit. I wanted the 17" but they only came with summer tires, so I ruled them out. Besides the dealers prices seemed way out of line for this upgrade, quite a mark up considering what percentage it is vis a vis the basic cost of the car itself. Other manufacturers don't seem to require such a stiff tariff for this simple upgrade. I know smaller wheels are usually better in the cold wet stuff. I have to admit getting rid of otherwise perfectly fine wheels seems frivolous to my personal sensibilities. When it comes to get new tires do you recommend upgraded bigger wheels or is my all weather preference going to be compromised too much? Seems as though wheel size also limits choices. Which wheels? Which tires? What are the best combinations? Oh, what to do?

merrycynic

merrycynic

BTW, I have been reluctant to do much in way of upgrades hoping that I might be able to trade in towards an STi wagon should it become available. Seemed like it would have been a bad investment. Recent posts here have me reconsidering.

bluesubie

If you want to stay with all-seasons, check out the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S. Quite pricey, but considered one of the best all-season tires.

The Dunlop SP5000 (as mentioned)has lots of good reviews.
Check out the tire surveys at tirerack.com and see what other owners say.

Here's a great list of wheels that fit the Impreza:
http://wac.addr.com/auto/obs/wheels.html

-Dennis

ateixeira

In that Edmunds comparo, the plain WRX is preferred by both editors. :-)

-juice

thecat

What a waste of time! Can somebody explain the purpose of this article? We took an all out race car with features that will never be available in the US and compare it to a street legal car currently on sale. The conclusion - the WRX is more comfortable and a better choice as a daily driver - the Evo is faster and handled better ... DUH !
- Hutch

robmarch

I'm surprised they didn't compare the STi to the Lancer Rally edition for good measure

jwilson1

Somebody offered them a chance to test one of the other and ('idea' bulb goes off) they had an 'in' somewhere so they could, maybe, get the other at the same time, so .... why the heck not? I'd sure jump at the chance.

Next up: a comparo of an F-16 with a Ferrari 'Enzo.' (Somewhere, someone's saying "HEY.....??!)

JW

ateixeira

It was an excuse to get more time behind the wheel of the WRX, at least until the STi arrives.

-juice

wrx_al

I just changed from the stock RE-92's to the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S on stock 16 inch rims. The difference is dramatic. The ride is a little rougher on the pilots but the steering response and traction is MUCH improved. The tires are expensive but I kept the stock rims and still have a tire I can go up to the snow with.

hunter001

I simply could not find any reason or justification for this comparison. They are not even close in price or features. A comparison with the STi would have been more appropriate, since they are direct competitors even though even the STi does not have Active Electronically controlled Differentials like the EVO. If Subaru equips the STi with the VTD differential, then it would be an apples to apples comparison with the all-out EVO....but that would involve re-engineering the whole center diff.

I also hear that the US version of the Mitsubishi EVO VII is not going to be equipped with Active Differentials (like in the rest of the world) and they are going to go with cheaper mechanical/viscous center diff. Without the real Active diff, they are basically neutering the EVO....which takes it closer to the STi. So comparing an all-out EVO with active diffs (front, center and rear) and all-out sport-suspension with a soft WRX with Viscous center diff and viscous rear LSD, is laughable, even if we exclude the extra power/torque of the EVO from the equation. Of course the EVO will outgun and out-handle the WRX....and the WRX will ride softer (with the soft suspension). No rocket science there. JMHO.

Later...AH

dop50

Maybe they were just having a hard time trying to find something as good as the WRX, and that's the closest they could come.

I mean maybe, what they are saying is the WRX don't really have any competition, unless you compare it with an all out race car.

Kinda makes the WRX look even better, don't it!?

Just an observation.

Ken

thecat

Did anybody else notice that the braking tests were very close despite the fact that the Evo had much larger and better rubber and fancy brakes? It spoke well for the WRX's stopping power.
- Hutch

celica115

http://www.nicb.org/services/top_stolen_100vehicles.html

rsholland

the latest issue of R&T. The compare test a stock WRX against a WRX with the STi suspension, against a Tommy Kaira M20b 2.2-built WRX, in terms of performance and handling.

It's an interesting read. The stock model does quite well, BTW. Bottom line: R&T loves the WRX.

Bob

lippolds

The rank is based total number stolen for a given model (even if it has changed over time) which is why high volume cars like the Accord are always at the top of the list. With Subaru being a relatively small volume maker I'm not surprised. They should add a ratio of stolen per number on the road which would be more useful

wrxsoon1

is also for 2001. The WRX is a 2002 model (granted it started arriving in March of '01). I think of all cars Subaru makes this would be the one theives would prefer (I guess the 2.5RS could be included as well). It might show on their 2002 list.

-Ian

greddygtr

Does anyone know when the restyled Impreza might be coming to the US? I saw pictures of the new STI from some European auto show and it had a set of restyled HID headlights with slightly updated taillights that made a noticeable improvement compared to the version we currently have imo.

sonya4

Maybe I'm the one of the last to know this, but Car and Driver has the WRX again on their '03 "10 Best" list. (Acura RSX was also there, along with the Ford Focus and others...)

Cool, huh!

--sonya4

axp696

I have read the STi sedan will be out summer 2003 for the 2004 year. No word on an STi wagon.

atluskane

Hi on the edmunds page on the WRX they list the 0-60 times for the WRX as 6.1 and the quarter mile at 14.9. I was just curious to see what other people usually get

hunter001

I think those are very good timings, especially from a heavy AWD car with 227HP/217Torque. Of course they do high rpm clutch dumps to obtain these timings but they would do that with every vehicle they test.

Of course, they may be able to squeeze even better timings by abusing the car even more, but those are not timings obtainable in the real world by normal people.

The manual version recently tested by Edmunds obtained 6.3secs 0-60. The Automatic wagon version (heavier than sedan) tested earlier, obtained 6.7secs 0-60.

Later...AH

thecat

reports have been all over the spectrum. The following is from the Motorweek website :
"With manual trans and Continuous all-wheel-drive on-board, the WRX dashes to 60 in 5.6 seconds. And through the 1/4 mile in 14.3 seconds at 95 miles-per-hour."

These folks are usually fairly conservative. It's hard to explain the variations in the reported times. I'm sure weather conditions are a factor.
- Hutch

hunter001

Weather conditions, testing conditions, the amount of abuse the testers are willing to put the cars through etc., all play a role in 0-60 timings.

I would trust figures obtained for various cars by the same tester on the same day under the same operating conditions, for a relative comparison. Unless the same magazine adjusts the timings, after factoring in the test conditions for a test done on a different car on a different day. I am told that Motortrend makes adjustments for timings, after factoring in test conditions.

I would not rely on 0-60 figure xxx for car A done on a certain day by a certain Auto mag to compare against a figure YYY for car B done on a different day by a totally different Automag. Those comparisons are absolutely meaningless. So all these figures should be taken only for their relative values, within the ambit of the same test conditions/same testers/same amount of abuse done on the various cars. JMHO.

Later...AH

axp696

These folks are usually fairly conservative. It's hard to explain the variations in the reported times. I'm sure weather conditions are a factor.

I would imagine driver style/error could easily account for the variation, as a 0.4 second difference is a miniscule amount of time. It's still just a professional driver on a track, right, or is there a more scientific method at work? Even taking an average of times you can still come out with differences, but ~6 seconds is a good enough estimate for me.

herculespeanut

I am considering a WRX but one of the reviews I read mentions that the Air Conditioning is a weak spot. I live in Florida where it is Hot much of the year and humid all year long. I cannot handle a weak A/C.

Can anyone living in a hot location confirm or deny these reports? I am curious as to whether the test car was a little off or if this is a weakness of Subaru.

Thanks in advance.

mikenk

I live in Dallas. I had no problem keeping the car cool this summer and I never ran it at max cooling. I do agree that it does not cool as quickly as other cars I have had, but it is certainly adequate. I do have tinted windows as I suspect you would also have in Florida.

jwilson1

There were inconsistencies in a recent C&D test which the editors (in the following issue) opined was due not to the weather (they claim to compensate for temp. differences, etc.) but to picking up a load of bad fuel on the day of the test.

To me, the most important factor that influences many tests is the choice of tire itself, or the wear on the tire, and of course how temperature and different track surfaces effect different tires. In this area we're not just talking about a tenth of a second!

JW

ateixeira

In 0-60 there is a lot of variance even within the same magazines. C&D has quoted the S2000 at 5.8 and at 6.8 seconds. That's a pretty big variance.

I prefer to look at 5-60 and even 1/4 mile times, which mean more. You could actually be ahead at 60 and still lose the 1/4 mile. Look at this month's C&D SUV test, that is the case.

-juice

rsholland

<< C&D has quoted the S2000 at 5.8 and at 6.8 seconds. That's a pretty big variance. >>

I think the S2000 is somewhat harder to launch consistently because of its narrow powerband. It's simply a harder vehicle to drive fast, hence the wide timing discrepancies. If you don't get the "launch" from a dead stop right, you've blown it...

Bob

ateixeira

Yeah, and the 5-60 times are much more consistent, proving your theory.

-juice

jwilson1

The discrepancy on the S2000 was in fact one of those mentioned in the letter I referred to.

JW