Driving a turbo would take some getting used to coming from a V8. You won't have the power down low because of the turbo lag. Once the turbo kicks in though, it's a beauty. You also might want to consider the VDC like paisan mentioned. Won't be as fun as a Rex though. Like the VDC, the automatic WRX comes with Subaru's most advanced all wheel drive system Variable Torque Distribution (just with out the traction control).
I don't have experience with a WRX in the snow, but I do have experience with an OB Sport (BF Goodrich OEM tires) and OB (Michelin OEM tires). We got a total of over 30" of snow last winter and both cars performed beautifully. At the time my wife drove an hour to work in NW NJ in a couple of snow storms. Try to go for a test drive. I sound like a Subaru commercial. :-p
Haven't looked at the H6 isn't it much more expensive? I noticed the turbo lag immediately when I drove the Super-ru WRX,but I kind of liked it. I thought the lag made it nice to be able to just kinda chug around town and not call undo attention,especially when the cop was following me. The feeling when it comes on boost is similar to the feeling my '70 Cuda gives you when it hooks up. Generally if there is more than a few inches of snow on the road she won't be driving but we have occasionally got four or five inches very quickly and have to drive home in it. I would not be opposed to putting a more all season oriented tire on the car if need be,she isn't a canyon carver,more of a drag racer. But she always did fine with her 300M and her Talon in the winter so I'm not that concerned. The luxury of the Jeep isn't really an issue,she never really cared that much about it but due to her injuries she needed power seats to get in and out of it. That is the beauty of the Impreza for her,the seat adjuster is on the right hand side of the seat so she can work it therefore we don't have to buy the most expensive model in the lineup for a change.
Yeah, the H6's are ~US$27-30k sticker. Off-boost the WRX is perfect for just cruising around town.
I was at the dealer last weekend and my wife and I both took an Auto Rex for a test drive. She had a huge grin on her face. I had to calmly say, "Uh, honey. You're doing 85".
You can get an H6 LL Bean wagon for less than $27k US. The 2001s have a $750 incentive if you can still find them. You get AWD and a rear LSD. The VDC goes a step further and manages both axles with traction and stability control. I'd say with 7.9" and all that technology they're perfect for snow.
WRX has adequate clearance and is a lot of fun. If you don't get tons of snow, go with that.
A question for people who've driven both the WRX wagon and sedan: How much more road & tire noise intrudes into the wagon's cabin compared to the sedan's because the wagon dosen't have a covered trunk? This is supposed to be one of the disadvantages of the Golf vs. the Jetta, for example. If the wagon is much noisier, can some sort of soundproofing be added?
I test drove a WRX wagon recently and would have placed an order had the trade in value on my '00 Outback been a little better ($15,800). I then started to rationalize the large cost difference, but I really could not, for the following reasons. The WRX did not "feel" anywhere near as fast as the figures would indicate. A major concern was that the a/c was nowhere near as good as my Outback. Maybe there was something wrong with the test car's a/c, as I am sure they must be similar units. While the seats had very good lateral support, the lower back part seemed too concave. This could be because any change takes getting used to. In spite of these concerns I am still seriously considering the car, but will try to sell mine privately. I would be interested in hearing from others who have gone from an OB to a WRX. Does the turbocharged engine lose as much power at the higher altitudes as does the OB. I am also disappointed with the handling of the OB on typical Forest gravel roads as it slides around all over the place. It is even worse on larger sized gravel. Also the WRX seems to facilitate "heel and toeing" a lot easier than the OB. Comments please?
I was fortunate enough to take unexpected delivery of my WRX wagon about 4 hours before a scheduled departure on a 1200 mile trip from northern New Mexico to Wyoming and back. I had only has a couple of brief test drives before making my buying decision. I was a Jeep Grand Cherokee driver for the past 6 years. Anyway, the trip was a real joy, even being restricted by the break in limits. The most noticeable pleasant suprise was how quiet and smooth the car is at highway (75-95mph) speeds. I expected great handling and speed but the smoothness wasn't expected. As for performance at altitude, it's great. Between Albuquerque and Santa Fe is a hill about a mile long and 7% grade. I can put the car in fifth gear with cruise control on and maintain 85 mph without a whimper at 7000ft. Bottom line is the wagon is quiet and performance in the mountains is a lot of fun. I can't wait till I start chasing the snow this ski season.
The WRX is quiet for the class, so I'm sure even the wagon is at least average at noise suppression. I imagine using the cargo cover helps some. Other than that, quieter tires would have the biggest impact.
The turbo will likely deal with high altitudes far better than the 2.5l engine would, because it can compensate for the thin air.
As one who did just that, trade a 00'OB for a 02'WRX wagon, I don't regret it! Oh sure, on my OB Ltd I had heated seats and mirrors (plus sunroof & leather). I would love to have the heated items on my WRX (for those that have heard my rants before about this, I'll stop). The wagon is quiet. The only noises I'm noticing after 8200 miles is the cargo cover can rattle a bit at times and I have an annoying squeak in the front passenger seat when someone is sitting in it. The car cruises effortlessly and is pretty quiet except for some tire noise. The outside rearview mirrors have a tendency to whistle when the window is open. I know what the fix is but haven't done it yet. Something about a piece of velcro between where the mirror bends in on itself (collaspable). The turbo is ideally suited for higher altitudes as Juice pointed out and I can personally attest to this (and the success of the radar detector I was using). The WRX never seems as fast as it actually is, but beware, it is FAST! BTW, I got $20k trade-in for my OB Ltd w/12k on it.
The WRX wagon is very quiet, so much so that when I passed a car at 100 mph once I asked my wife how fast she thought we were going and she thought it was 80. I too was amazed at the quiet smooth nature of the car. This is why it does not seem as fast as it is. As to altitude, any turbo car shoud have the better performance at altitude over any normally aspirated car. Wish Subaru would do the Pikes Peak hill climb with the WRX. Much quieter and more refined car than my '98.
I test drove a new Outback Sport, but that was enough that I can agree. Indeed it's more quiet and refined than my Forester, also a '98. I was impressed by how rigid the chassis felt, too.
Does anyone have any experience with 17 inch wheels and 225/45 tires on the wagon? According to Tire Rack they fit but I have not seen this in person or in print. Seems like there is less room in the wheel wells of the wagon. Also curious about Sport Compact Car claims that the wagon is half a second slower then the Sedan to 60, handling drop off of .79 vs .84 and slalom speed for the wagon at 65.8 vs 67.9 mph for the sedan. Was it a bad day at the test track or is the difference that big? Trying to decide between the two. (We are selling our current sedan and keeping our 2000 SUV) Any input would be helpful.
Yes, the 225/45x17 tires will fit the wagon. Because of the lack of fender bulges it is very important to get at least 48mm offset or higher and maintain at least -1 degree camber on the rear wheels. The WRX wagon already comes with negative rear wheel camber so this shouldn't be a problem. The SCC article on the wagon was a bad day to be sure. I believe the wagon was experiencing significant heat soak as the temp at the test track that day was well into the 90's. The handling is a little less than the sedan but that is mainly attributed to the narrower 17mm rear sway bar that's std vs the sedan's 20mm. For less than $100 you can buy the 20mm from the sedan and put it on the wagon. I did this and it made a world of difference.
Here's a link to a thread on the i-club where I posed the specific rubbing question :
Stephen, thanks for your help. Those links were just what I needed. I decided on a silver WRX Wagon and picked it up this afternoon. I now know I made the right choice.
My WRX wagon has many options that I could have lived without but didn't mind having. What I really like is the turbo gauge on the steering column and the air filtration system. Ambivalent towards the armrest extension, premium sound, auto dimming mirror and security system upgrade. I will probably never use the cross bar kit. Got a good deal so I didn't complain. I didn't feel like waiting for the "perfect" car. I will try to get the windows tinted and get 3M clearcoat put on this week. Next I will probably upgrade the rear sway bar(17 to 20mm), get new wheels (17" Prodrive P7 or P1 or OZ Superleggra), silver side under spoiler and maybe the rear differential protector for my annual runs up Pikes Peak. Couldn't find your photo album, maybe I looked in the wrong spot.
BTW: I have the armrest extension (like a place to rest my arm when I'm on the freeway and the extra storage is appreciated), upgr sec system (this works well enough for me and saves me the hassle of going aftermarket), and the auto dimming mirror w/compass (I had this on my OB and I really came to appreciate for the auto dimming feature...the compass is more of a novelty). I've since replaced the 17mm rear sway w/the sedan's 20mm, upgraded to a Whiteline 22mm front sway, replaced the black side sills w/factory painted silver, and debadged the rear tailgate. I have rear cupholders on order from the UK. I will be changing the stock crappy RE92s w/a performance winter tire (still handles better than the RE92s in the dry/wet) and upgrade to 17"wheel/tire combo in the spring. If my funds hold out, I will be going w/the COBB Stage1 kit. It's includes many items to improve the breathing of the engine but mostly it's a chip upgrade to the ECU. Reliability w/mods is COBB's big thing. The pkg is good for 280hp w/acceleration times for about 4.8secs to 60 for the wagon w/an under 14 sec 1/4 mile. Most importantly it improves the low-end torque (read below 3000 rpm). I'll probably need a "mod intervention" by then! :-)
Silver is the way to go. Are the side sills a straight swap or do I have to drill? I would assume your upgraded sway bars help in constant radius corners, but what about sudden lane changes, in a slalom or emergency maneuvers? What kind of handling characteristics does your WRX exhibit? I am sure a tire upgrade would make a huge difference and wheel and tire even more so. I am not so interested in upgrading the power though having it come on sooner would be very nice. Handling is a different story. My last ride had H&R springs and Koni adjustable struts with Potenza RE71 tires on stock wheels. It handled like a go kart, but it was a Ford so it spent most of the time in the shop.
Yeah...I like the silver too! The side sills snap right into place after unsnapping the black ones, really easy.
When I first upgraded the rear to 20mm I experienced less understeer and found it was easy to go into oversteer and that the crappy tires wanted to rollover on themselves a bit. Once I got use to it, it wasn't too bad but I decided I wanted better balance. I upgraded the front to 22mm since it's supporting more weight than the rear. The front now turns crisper and sharper w/less roll. Emergency manuevers are much better than stock or w/just the rear upgrade. The tires still need to be upgraded. If anything, the sway bar mods illustrate the tires lack of ability to match the mods. You're absolutely correct that an upgrade in tire is in order, whether or not it's 16" or 17".
One sure way to help w/better throttle response in lower rpms is to open up the breathing of the motor. An intake and exhaust mod would help toward this goal.
My wife struck up a deal last weekend,we now have the first non Mopar either of us have ever owned in over a dozen purchases. But it didn't end up being the WRX. After driving the WRX sedan with the automatic she decided it wasn't worth the extra money,so she bought a midnight black pearl Imprezza Outback sport wagon. We will see how she likes the little wagon after some time. I would have bought the WRX if it was up to me but my wife tells me that is because I'm a power crazed motor head,well I guess nobody is perfect.
Well, let's be honest... the WRX is a waste of money if you're going to buy it in a slushbox and drive it like the little 'ol lady from Pasadena. May as well save money on the car and insurance too.
OBS was a good choice for her. The 2.5l is torquey and mates up well with the automatic. It is reliable, durable, efficient, and offer all-season traction without any buttons to fuss over.
I guess until they get that PT Cruiser-based AWD wagon from Dodge, Mopar doesn't really offer you an alternative. Tell her congrats for me, and invite her to join the Subaru Crew weekly chat, which is tomorrow night.
Since I am lazy to write it again, I will copy the post in the i-club about the auto/manual WRX:
=========================== Subaru has 2 quite distinct AWD systems used in its Automatic Transmissioned cars. The most advanced among all Subaru AWD systems, is the VTD-AWD system. This is comparable to the best among all AWD systems currently available on the market, among all road-going vehicles.
VTD = Variable Torque Distribution.
Unlike the regular Automatic equipped Subarus, only the Subaru WRX Automatic and the VDC Outback (both of which costs 1000s more than the model immediately below them), gets this sophisticated system. Also, unlike the regular Automatic equipped Subarus, where the power split is 90/10 in normal driving, with most of the power going to the front wheels and a slight dribble of power going to the back, the Torque split in the Auto-equipped WRX equipped with the VTD-AWD system, is 45/55 front/back, with a slight RWD bias - all the time - unless more is needed front or back.
This system, as stated earlier, employs Electronically controlled hydraulic multi-plate clutch packs, working in association with a true planetary gear center differential , that pro-actively re-distributes torque, according to the needs. Along with the rear LSD, the torque is redistributed front to back, back to front and side to side, with un-believably fast immediacy of response, BEFORE slip occurs. This is the basic AWD system, found in the World Rally Conquering Subaru Racecars, of course in a much lighter duty form.
The manual WRX on the other hand, soldiers on with the simple viscous center differential - tractor technology - that gets the job done, but is nowhere close to the effectiveness of the VTD-AWD system of the Auto WRX. It does not/cannot react as fast, nor does it have the breadth or the broad range of operation, of the VTD-AWD system. Also, since the differential, locks on the basis of the shearing of the viscous fluid, the manual Subaru system needs slippage before it can react, and begin to transfer power front or back. Thus, this is a reactive system, as opposed to the proactive nature of the VTD-AWD system.
Unfortunately, Subaru will not win many Rallys with the kind of AWD system that is available in the Manual equipped Subarus, including the manual WRX !!! The Auto-WRX has an AWD that is something special, unlike the manual WRX.
=======================
So if you want the Rally-proven AWD system, you will have to spring for the Auto-equipped WRX. By buying the manual WRX, you are just buying a car with a good suspension (also available in the Auto-WRX) with a turbo-charged engine (also available in the Auto-WRX). The AWD system itself, is what is available in all the lower-end Manual equipped Subarus.
Also, in addition to that, the Outback Sport does not have a rear Limited Slip Differential. Due to this short-coming, there is no side-to-side power transfer. In other words, if both the wheels on the left or both the wheels on the right is on a surface that does not have traction, the Outback Sport is like a helpless baby - will not go anywhere - while the WRX Auto would smoothly power out of this situation (due to the side to side power transfer. The cars that do not have the rear LSD would only transfer power front/back or vice-versa
I disagree. The WRC cars have a manually adjustable AWD torque split, and probably shares few parts with the production model.
The manual starts at 50/50, so in a way that is proactive. There is torque to both axles before any slip occurs. The adjustment of that split is reactive, yes, but each axle is already getting at least some power, proactively.
"The AWD system itself, is what is available in all the lower-end Manual equipped Subarus" :-(
Careful there Arthur, you're starting to sound like a BMW elitist ;-)
The manual trans AWD system may not be the most sophisticated but it's a proven system that is still one of the better ones going. It's also a maintenance free system that benefits from simplicity since there are far fewer things that can break or go wrong.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking the auto equipped WRX's excellent AWD system, just pointing out that the manual version isn't all that bad.
You are correct. In the rally car, the driver can manually adjust the torque split in the Rally cars (upto a certain limit), as opposed to the "non-manually adjustable" 45/55 split in the Auto-WRX in normal driving . But, as I mentioned earlier, the basic AWD set-up and the basic design (of the Rally cars), is exactly the same as the Auto-equipped WRX .
Basically, what it boils down to is that everything else remaining the same, the manual WRX would be preferable to the Auto-equipped WRX. But in this particular case, everything is NOT the same. Far, far from it.....
You have a point, just you are exxagerating a little, perhaps.
The design concept is the same, yes, but the actual parts and components are certaily not exactly the same. I'm sure the rally components are much heavier duty. The manual adjustments takes even the concept a bit further.
I do think the VTD is a benefit over the VC because of the slight rear bias, but the 4 ratios vs. 5 and the presence of a torque converter are more significant trade-offs, IMO.
"This is the basic AWD system, found in the World Rally Conquering Subaru Racecars, of course in a much lighter duty form."
So, I did say that it is a "much lighter duty form"....
Also, as far as the "pro-activeness" of the Viscous coupling is concerned, consider this:
Say in a FWD car, if the rear wheels slip, the car will not even know it, in-spite of it being FWD. Reason: All the power is in the front wheels. Of course, if the slip in the FWD vehicle happens in the front wheels, then the FWD vehicle is totally "lost".
But in a normally fixed 50:50 split (like with the manual equipped Subaru), the slipping wheels in this case are always powered regardless of whether it happens in the front or the back. Then and only then, does the Viscous fluid in the VC, "react" (thus locking the differential) and transfers the power in the reverse direction. Thus in the above mentioned instance, a FWD car is "better" than the AWD equipped manual Subaru.
"Careful there Arthur, you're starting to sound like a BMW elitist ;-)"
No offense to manual owners...I was just reacting to an earlier post from "cupholder1", where he stated something along the lines of "WRX is a waste of money if equipped with the Auto.....".
a compromise in performance in regards to acceleration..specifically. If so, then this is absolutely true. I, for one, did not want to compromise the sporting nature of the WRX by saddling the turbo w/an automatic. Additionally, a manual tranny (despite the simplier, manual AWD) is a much easier (read: better as well) car to take in the twisties than an automatic version. With the manual tranny you have much more control of the WRX. The driver feels much more involved as well. Afterall, this is what the WRX is....a driver's car. The manual transmission assures that it stays that way. BTW, I've driven an automatic WRX when I was test driving before buying and no way, no thanks!
Hey, do I smell that old MT v. AT elitism creeping back in here again? Are people with leg injuries or who have to sit in traffic 10 times a week less deserving of a performance car? Does Subaru not sell manumatics on Legacies and Imprezas in other markets? Bringing that transmission option to the North American markets should settle that issue once and for all.
I felt the same about the Auto-WRX when I first took it out. But have you driven a well "broken-in" Auto-WRX ? Try it, and you may be surprised.
As far as the "compromise" with regard to acceleration, I agree. But "acceleration" in this case may be a second or so off the manual car. So what ! It is still a car that goes 0-60 in 6.5 - 6.8 seconds. The Auto gets the same 227hp and 217lbs/ft of torque, albeit with a slight disadvantage of the torque converter !!!
But to be quite frank, I am certainly not a drag racer and prefer the handling prowess of the car to its accelerative potential! Again, I reiterate, that everything else remaining the same, I would definitely rate the Manual WRX above the Automatic WRX, due to the control the 5-speed offers to the driver. But in this particular case, everything is NOT the same. And hence it is a wash, due to the exponentially better (NOT slightly better!!) pro-active torque transfer characteristics of the Auto VTD-AWD system over the "simple" VC system in the manual WRX. Rapid re-positioning of the torque/power of the vehicle (front to back, back to front, side to side) is super-essential for handling, in addition to having control over the gears, as you may be aware !! Handling is not solely dependent on control of the gears, as some of you seem to imply. By the same token, why do you think a powerful FWD car with a stick shift can never approach the handling balance of a 45/55 split vehicle like the WRX-Auto ? You certainly have full control of the gears right ?
I have been driving my Wagon for the past 1900 miles with very careful "break-in" (kept the rpms below 3500 and constantly varied it during the entire period), and after 1500 miles, I have been slowly raising the car gradually to higher rpms, and now, the car has become super-smooth. I went back to the dealership and drove an Auto Sedan (new with 16 miles) after this, and found the non-broken-in Auto Sedan at the dealership a lot more sluggish. So I guess you were a bit premature in judging the accelerative prowess of the car !
OK, light duty, gotcha. Let's just not use the word "exactly".
The only reason I agree that VTD is (slightly) better is because it sends most of the power to the rear axle.
The other auto AWD, with a 90/10 power split, feels like FWD, proactive or not, doesn't matter, I don't like the way it feels as much. This is subjective, yes, but I'll take the system on my Forester over my dad's auto Outback any day, and his even has the rear LSD! This is after real-world drives in broken-in cars back-to-back, not text book theory.
My Forester (L, 5 speed) has never been wanting for traction. Beach, farm, sand, dirt, gravel, snow, rain, doesn't matter. So the "exponentially better" comment is an overstatement, I'd accept "slightly better".
Now, give us a 5 speed auto with manual shifting control and no sacrifice in acceleration or gas mileage, all at the same cost as a manual, and then I'd consider one.
But the spread between each is relatively small, so the very best has a small edge over the worst.
On the other hand, a 5 speed manual tranny offers a rather huge advantage over the 4 speed automatic, in terms of cost ($770 or so), gas mileage (2mpg or so in real world mileage), closer ratios, acceleration, drive train control, etc.
IMO, at least to me, the manual easily overcomes the trade-offs.
Um, no. It may be a sophisticated system, but it's not VTD. I would like to see this if that's what you think.
In real world driving, an LSD is not the be all and end all. I doubt very seriously that you would ever get yourself in a situation where an LSD will help you 100% over non-LSD.
I was recently talking with the President of my dealership about the Outback VDC. He said in over 16 years of driving Subaru's, he's never been stuck and never felt he's needed a better AWD system than the manual's VC. He live in the hills of Western NJ and sees good amount of snow.
There are differences in the Rally cars' AWD system from the VTD-AWD, some of which were enumerated earlier. The rally cars offer driver-adjustable torque splits (upto a certain limit), in addition to having much heavier duty components. The basic set-up is the same. I doubt anyone can successfully subject any road-going car to the true rigors of rallying, with the factory equipped components.
I agree, that for pretty much all driving conditions, the VC AWD should be sufficient. No question about that. I doubt any of these cars (VC, VTD-AWD, Auto-AWD etc) would ever get stuck in the conditions that one encounters on the road and/or adverse weather conditions.
"The only reason I agree that VTD is (slightly) better is because it sends most of the power to the rear axle."
The VTD in normal driving is "slightly better" than the VC equipped manual WRX, due to its slight RWD bias. The VTD-AWD might as well have been set at 50/50 and in normal driving would have driven with the same "feel" as the VC equipped manual subarus.
But the advantage of the VTD-AWD over the VC-AWD does not lie there at all. It is the rapid reactivity of the torque transfer characteristics (front to back/ back to front / side to side) that make it exponentially better than the VC equipped manual WRX. I am not talking of the 45/55 split in power in normal driving at all !!!! For rapid reaction, it has a true planetary gear center differential, which as we know is incredibly sturdy, along with the electronically controlled multi-plate torque transfer clutches. It is the speed of the torque-transfer characteristic that distinguishes this system from the VC of the manual WRX. I am not talking of the 45/55 power split at all !!!! It is this characteristic that enhances handling and not the power split itself !!
aspect of a manual WRX vs automatic. After the fun run I took in Oct to Mt St Helens, there is no way that an auto WRX would have outhandled a manual WRX (driver ability being equal). The manual tranny gives you more control and easily offsets the "textbook" advantage of the auto versions AWD. You can also exit a turn at a faster clip than the auto WRX and brake with the engine easier. All things are not a wash between the manual and auto versions. Actually it's the handling aspect of the manual that I most like over the automatic, w/the acceleration advantage being secondary.
I just still don't see the VTD's advantage adding up to anything quite "exponentially" better. For that possibility to even exist you would have to start with an absolutely lousy AWD systems that basically was ineffective.
But we're not talking about Volvos! ;-)
BTW, I've seen video were a XC was not able to climb a simple muddy hill, with no power getting to the rear axle at all. An Outback drove right up, even with a trailer.
We don't have data on how quickly the VTD can adjust the torque split. Inputs can be processed in real-time, but the adjustment still occurs mechanically. It is not instantaneous.
Without that data, it's pointless to debate this any further.
Be my guest! We can speculate for all eternity! ;-)
In practice, I go out on a snowy day and can get my AWD to cycle back and forth every second or so (this is pushing it for fun, mind you, not losing traction in normal driving). So I figure it takes about 1 second for the fluid to thicken and react, maybe a little less.
So, I guess it would be of interest to find out exactly how long it takes for the VTD to send the signal and physically move those clutch plates. It may indeed be faster, but because it requires mechanical motion of those plates it is still not instantaneous.
I still can't understand the concept of buying the WRX in automatic. If I wanted a slush box point A to point B car, I'd get a Ford Taurus. Roomier, more comfortable and cheaper.
Someone posted "I don't care if the automatic is slower, I am not a drag racer"... or something to that effect. Okay, then why spend the extra money for the WRX when you can get an OBS which also handles well. Since you don't race, you won't care when impatient SUV drivers try to run you off the road for driving too slowly
In my pre-Subaru days, I was a "moparette". I'm sure you'll enjoy your OB. But the "old lady thing" cupholder????? Come on - I prefer a manual, but I wouldn't cut on someone who wants to enjoy a manual!
Comments
I don't have experience with a WRX in the snow, but I do have experience with an OB Sport (BF Goodrich OEM tires) and OB (Michelin OEM tires). We got a total of over 30" of snow last winter and both cars performed beautifully. At the time my wife drove an hour to work in NW NJ in a couple of snow storms.
Try to go for a test drive. I sound like a Subaru commercial. :-p
Good luck on your decision,
Dennis
Generally if there is more than a few inches of snow on the road she won't be driving but we have occasionally got four or five inches very quickly and have to drive home in it. I would not be opposed to putting a more all season oriented tire on the car if need be,she isn't a canyon carver,more of a drag racer. But she always did fine with her 300M and her Talon in the winter so I'm not that concerned.
The luxury of the Jeep isn't really an issue,she never really cared that much about it but due to her injuries she needed power seats to get in and out of it. That is the beauty of the Impreza for her,the seat adjuster is on the right hand side of the seat so she can work it therefore we don't have to buy the most expensive model in the lineup for a change.
Off-boost the WRX is perfect for just cruising around town.
I was at the dealer last weekend and my wife and I both took an Auto Rex for a test drive. She had a huge grin on her face. I had to calmly say, "Uh, honey. You're doing 85".
Dennis
WRX has adequate clearance and is a lot of fun. If you don't get tons of snow, go with that.
-juice
http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=108976
How much more road & tire noise intrudes into the wagon's cabin compared to the sedan's because the wagon dosen't have a covered trunk? This is supposed to be one of the disadvantages of the Golf vs. the Jetta, for example.
If the wagon is much noisier, can some sort of soundproofing be added?
The WRX did not "feel" anywhere near as fast as
the figures would indicate. A major concern was that the a/c was nowhere near as good as my Outback. Maybe there was something wrong with the test car's a/c, as I am sure they must be similar units. While the seats had very good lateral support, the lower back part seemed too concave. This could be because any change takes getting used to.
In spite of these concerns I am still seriously considering the car, but will try to sell mine privately. I would be interested in hearing from others who have gone from an OB to a WRX. Does
the turbocharged engine lose as much power at the higher altitudes as does the OB. I am also disappointed with the handling of the OB on typical Forest gravel roads as it slides around all over the place. It is even worse on larger sized gravel. Also the WRX seems to facilitate "heel and toeing" a lot easier than the OB. Comments please?
about 4 hours before a scheduled departure on a 1200 mile trip
from northern New Mexico to Wyoming and back. I had only has a
couple of brief test drives before making my buying decision.
I was a Jeep Grand Cherokee driver for the past 6 years.
Anyway, the trip was a real joy, even being restricted by the break
in limits. The most noticeable pleasant suprise was how quiet and
smooth the car is at highway (75-95mph) speeds. I expected great
handling and speed but the smoothness wasn't expected. As for
performance at altitude, it's great. Between Albuquerque and
Santa Fe is a hill about a mile long and 7% grade. I can put the
car in fifth gear with cruise control on and maintain 85 mph
without a whimper at 7000ft. Bottom line is the wagon is quiet
and performance in the mountains is a lot of fun. I can't wait
till I start chasing the snow this ski season.
The turbo will likely deal with high altitudes far better than the 2.5l engine would, because it can compensate for the thin air.
-juice
Dennis
Stephen
TWRX
-juice
Here's a link to a thread on the i-club where I posed the specific rubbing question :
http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=108377
Another link w/helpful info
http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=107313
Stephen
Patti
BTW, what options (if any) did you get on your new pride and joy? :-)
Check out the link to my WRX photo album over in the Photo Gallery.
Stephen
Stephen
BTW: I have the armrest extension (like a place to rest my arm when I'm on the freeway and the extra storage is appreciated), upgr sec system (this works well enough for me and saves me the hassle of going aftermarket), and the auto dimming mirror w/compass (I had this on my OB and I really came to appreciate for the auto dimming feature...the compass is more of a novelty). I've since replaced the 17mm rear sway w/the sedan's 20mm, upgraded to a Whiteline 22mm front sway, replaced the black side sills w/factory painted silver, and debadged the rear tailgate. I have rear cupholders on order from the UK. I will be changing the stock crappy RE92s w/a performance winter tire (still handles better than the RE92s in the dry/wet) and upgrade to 17"wheel/tire combo in the spring. If my funds hold out, I will be going w/the COBB Stage1 kit. It's includes many items to improve the breathing of the engine but mostly it's a chip upgrade to the ECU. Reliability w/mods is COBB's big thing. The pkg is good for 280hp w/acceleration times for about 4.8secs to 60 for the wagon w/an under 14 sec 1/4 mile. Most importantly it improves the low-end torque (read below 3000 rpm). I'll probably need a "mod intervention" by then! :-)
When I first upgraded the rear to 20mm I experienced less understeer and found it was easy to go into oversteer and that the crappy tires wanted to rollover on themselves a bit. Once I got use to it, it wasn't too bad but I decided I wanted better balance. I upgraded the front to 22mm since it's supporting more weight than the rear. The front now turns crisper and sharper w/less roll. Emergency manuevers are much better than stock or w/just the rear upgrade. The tires still need to be upgraded. If anything, the sway bar mods illustrate the tires lack of ability to match the mods. You're absolutely correct that an upgrade in tire is in order, whether or not it's 16" or 17".
One sure way to help w/better throttle response in lower rpms is to open up the breathing of the motor. An intake and exhaust mod would help toward this goal.
Stephen
I guess until they get that PT Cruiser-based AWD wagon from Dodge, Mopar doesn't really offer you an alternative. Tell her congrats for me, and invite her to join the Subaru Crew weekly chat, which is tomorrow night.
-juice
Stephen
Since I am lazy to write it again, I will copy the post in the i-club about the auto/manual WRX:
===========================
Subaru has 2 quite distinct AWD systems used in its Automatic Transmissioned cars. The most advanced among all Subaru AWD systems, is the VTD-AWD system. This is comparable to the best among all AWD systems currently available on the market, among all road-going vehicles.
VTD = Variable Torque Distribution.
Unlike the regular Automatic equipped Subarus, only the Subaru WRX Automatic and the VDC Outback (both of which costs 1000s more than the model immediately below them), gets this sophisticated system. Also, unlike the regular Automatic equipped Subarus, where the power split is 90/10 in normal driving, with most of the power going to the front wheels and a slight dribble of power going to the back, the Torque split in the Auto-equipped WRX equipped with the VTD-AWD system, is 45/55 front/back, with a slight RWD bias - all the time - unless more is needed front or back.
This system, as stated earlier, employs Electronically controlled hydraulic multi-plate clutch packs, working in association with a true planetary gear center differential , that pro-actively re-distributes torque, according to the needs. Along with the rear LSD, the torque is redistributed front to back, back to front and side to side, with un-believably fast immediacy of response, BEFORE slip occurs. This is the basic AWD system, found in the World Rally Conquering Subaru Racecars, of course in a much lighter duty form.
The manual WRX on the other hand, soldiers on with the simple viscous center differential - tractor technology - that gets the job done, but is nowhere close to the effectiveness of the VTD-AWD system of the Auto WRX. It does not/cannot react as fast, nor does it have the breadth or the broad range of operation, of the VTD-AWD system. Also, since the differential, locks on the basis of the shearing of the viscous fluid, the manual Subaru system needs slippage before it can react, and begin to transfer power front or back. Thus, this is a reactive system, as opposed to the proactive nature of the VTD-AWD system.
Unfortunately, Subaru will not win many Rallys with the kind of AWD system that is available in the Manual equipped Subarus, including the manual WRX !!! The Auto-WRX has an AWD that is something special, unlike the manual WRX.
=======================
So if you want the Rally-proven AWD system, you will have to spring for the Auto-equipped WRX. By buying the manual WRX, you are just buying a car with a good suspension (also available in the Auto-WRX) with a turbo-charged engine (also available in the Auto-WRX). The AWD system itself, is what is available in all the lower-end Manual equipped Subarus.
Also, in addition to that, the Outback Sport does not have a rear Limited Slip Differential. Due to this short-coming, there is no side-to-side power transfer. In other words, if both the wheels on the left or both the wheels on the right is on a surface that does not have traction, the Outback Sport is like a helpless baby - will not go anywhere - while the WRX Auto would smoothly power out of this situation (due to the side to side power transfer. The cars that do not have the rear LSD would only transfer power front/back or vice-versa
Later...AH
The manual starts at 50/50, so in a way that is proactive. There is torque to both axles before any slip occurs. The adjustment of that split is reactive, yes, but each axle is already getting at least some power, proactively.
-juice
Careful there Arthur, you're starting to sound like a BMW elitist ;-)
The manual trans AWD system may not be the most sophisticated but it's a proven system that is still one of the better ones going. It's also a maintenance free system that benefits from simplicity since there are far fewer things that can break or go wrong.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking the auto equipped WRX's excellent AWD system, just pointing out that the manual version isn't all that bad.
-Frank P.
Basically, what it boils down to is that everything else remaining the same, the manual WRX would be preferable to the Auto-equipped WRX. But in this particular case, everything is NOT the same. Far, far from it.....
Later...AH
The design concept is the same, yes, but the actual parts and components are certaily not exactly the same. I'm sure the rally components are much heavier duty. The manual adjustments takes even the concept a bit further.
I do think the VTD is a benefit over the VC because of the slight rear bias, but the 4 ratios vs. 5 and the presence of a torque converter are more significant trade-offs, IMO.
-juice
"This is the basic AWD system, found in the World Rally Conquering Subaru Racecars, of course in a much lighter duty form."
So, I did say that it is a "much lighter duty form"....
Also, as far as the "pro-activeness" of the Viscous coupling is concerned, consider this:
Say in a FWD car, if the rear wheels slip, the car will not even know it, in-spite of it being FWD. Reason: All the power is in the front wheels. Of course, if the slip in the FWD vehicle happens in the front wheels, then the FWD vehicle is totally "lost".
But in a normally fixed 50:50 split (like with the manual equipped Subaru), the slipping wheels in this case are always powered regardless of whether it happens in the front or the back. Then and only then, does the Viscous fluid in the VC, "react" (thus locking the differential) and transfers the power in the reverse direction. Thus in the above mentioned instance, a FWD car is "better" than the AWD equipped manual Subaru.
Later...AH
No offense to manual owners...I was just reacting to an earlier post from "cupholder1", where he stated something along the lines of "WRX is a waste of money if equipped with the Auto.....".
Just wanted to convey an opposing thought....
Later...AH
Stephen
/end rant
Ed
As far as the "compromise" with regard to acceleration, I agree. But "acceleration" in this case may be a second or so off the manual car. So what ! It is still a car that goes 0-60 in 6.5 - 6.8 seconds. The Auto gets the same 227hp and 217lbs/ft of torque, albeit with a slight disadvantage of the torque converter !!!
But to be quite frank, I am certainly not a drag racer and prefer the handling prowess of the car to its accelerative potential! Again, I reiterate, that everything else remaining the same, I would definitely rate the Manual WRX above the Automatic WRX, due to the control the 5-speed offers to the driver. But in this particular case, everything is NOT the same. And hence it is a wash, due to the exponentially better (NOT slightly better!!) pro-active torque transfer characteristics of the Auto VTD-AWD system over the "simple" VC system in the manual WRX. Rapid re-positioning of the torque/power of the vehicle (front to back, back to front, side to side) is super-essential for handling, in addition to having control over the gears, as you may be aware !! Handling is not solely dependent on control of the gears, as some of you seem to imply. By the same token, why do you think a powerful FWD car with a stick shift can never approach the handling balance of a 45/55 split vehicle like the WRX-Auto ? You certainly have full control of the gears right ?
I have been driving my Wagon for the past 1900 miles with very careful "break-in" (kept the rpms below 3500 and constantly varied it during the entire period), and after 1500 miles, I have been slowly raising the car gradually to higher rpms, and now, the car has become super-smooth. I went back to the dealership and drove an Auto Sedan (new with 16 miles) after this, and found the non-broken-in Auto Sedan at the dealership a lot more sluggish. So I guess you were a bit premature in judging the accelerative prowess of the car !
Later...AH
The only reason I agree that VTD is (slightly) better is because it sends most of the power to the rear axle.
The other auto AWD, with a 90/10 power split, feels like FWD, proactive or not, doesn't matter, I don't like the way it feels as much. This is subjective, yes, but I'll take the system on my Forester over my dad's auto Outback any day, and his even has the rear LSD! This is after real-world drives in broken-in cars back-to-back, not text book theory.
My Forester (L, 5 speed) has never been wanting for traction. Beach, farm, sand, dirt, gravel, snow, rain, doesn't matter. So the "exponentially better" comment is an overstatement, I'd accept "slightly better".
Now, give us a 5 speed auto with manual shifting control and no sacrifice in acceleration or gas mileage, all at the same cost as a manual, and then I'd consider one.
I personally rank the AWD systems like this:
VTD + VDC (55% rear, 2 managed axles)
VTD + LSD (55% rear, 1 managed axle)
VC + LSD (50% rear, 1 managed axle)
VC (50% rear)
auto AWD + LSD (only 10% rear, 1 managed axle)
auto AWD (only 10% rear)
But the spread between each is relatively small, so the very best has a small edge over the worst.
On the other hand, a 5 speed manual tranny offers a rather huge advantage over the 4 speed automatic, in terms of cost ($770 or so), gas mileage (2mpg or so in real world mileage), closer ratios, acceleration, drive train control, etc.
IMO, at least to me, the manual easily overcomes the trade-offs.
-juice
In real world driving, an LSD is not the be all and end all. I doubt very seriously that you would ever get yourself in a situation where an LSD will help you 100% over non-LSD.
I was recently talking with the President of my dealership about the Outback VDC. He said in over 16 years of driving Subaru's, he's never been stuck and never felt he's needed a better AWD system than the manual's VC. He live in the hills of Western NJ and sees good amount of snow.
-Dennis
I agree, that for pretty much all driving conditions, the VC AWD should be sufficient. No question about that. I doubt any of these cars (VC, VTD-AWD, Auto-AWD etc) would ever get stuck in the conditions that one encounters on the road and/or adverse weather conditions.
Later...AH
Dennis
The VTD in normal driving is "slightly better" than the VC equipped manual WRX, due to its slight RWD bias. The VTD-AWD might as well have been set at 50/50 and in normal driving would have driven with the same "feel" as the VC equipped manual subarus.
But the advantage of the VTD-AWD over the VC-AWD does not lie there at all. It is the rapid reactivity of the torque transfer characteristics (front to back/ back to front / side to side) that make it exponentially better than the VC equipped manual WRX. I am not talking of the 45/55 split in power in normal driving at all !!!! For rapid reaction, it has a true planetary gear center differential, which as we know is incredibly sturdy, along with the electronically controlled multi-plate torque transfer clutches. It is the speed of the torque-transfer characteristic that distinguishes this system from the VC of the manual WRX. I am not talking of the 45/55 power split at all !!!! It is this characteristic that enhances handling and not the power split itself !!
Later...AH
:-))
Stephen
But we're not talking about Volvos! ;-)
BTW, I've seen video were a XC was not able to climb a simple muddy hill, with no power getting to the rear axle at all. An Outback drove right up, even with a trailer.
We don't have data on how quickly the VTD can adjust the torque split. Inputs can be processed in real-time, but the adjustment still occurs mechanically. It is not instantaneous.
Without that data, it's pointless to debate this any further.
-juice
In practice, I go out on a snowy day and can get my AWD to cycle back and forth every second or so (this is pushing it for fun, mind you, not losing traction in normal driving). So I figure it takes about 1 second for the fluid to thicken and react, maybe a little less.
So, I guess it would be of interest to find out exactly how long it takes for the VTD to send the signal and physically move those clutch plates. It may indeed be faster, but because it requires mechanical motion of those plates it is still not instantaneous.
-juice
Someone posted "I don't care if the automatic is slower, I am not a drag racer"... or something to that effect. Okay, then why spend the extra money for the WRX when you can get an OBS which also handles well. Since you don't race, you won't care when impatient SUV drivers try to run you off the road for driving too slowly
Patti