By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
What year is your WRX Sportwagon? I've been looking for mudflaps for my 2002 but haven't had any success finding a supplier and didn't see them for my car on the Prodrive website. Your Prodrive flaps look great. Where did you purchase them?
try www.subietech.com
Gonna cost quite a bit though. The burnt marks on my wallet says "$190".
-Dave
My wagon is a 2003 and I purchased the mudflaps via Subietech.com. The guy who runs the site (Arne) is a WRX owner who imports the mudflaps (and other accessories not available in the US) from the UK. He was very good to deal with. One of the regulars on the WRX boards (c_hunter) also purchased his mudflaps via SubieTech and he gave me the link (he has a picture on the WRX sedans board, message #10134).
-Chris
From www.tirerack.com:
Continental ContiExtremeContact
As its name implies, the Continental ContiExtremeContact was designed for the extremes of all seasons. It features a unique multi-element, silica-based compound designed to respond to the conditions being driven in. A firm element provides stable dry traction while a flexible element provides wet weather grip. A third element remains flexible in extreme cold for snow and slush traction. This unique homogeneous Tri-Net tread compound is molded into an aggressive, directional pattern (the most aggressive of this evaluation) featuring high-angle, lateral grooves to assist hydroplaning resistance, along with large notches in the shoulders and aggressive siping in each tread block to offer more biting edges for snow grip. While we did not have an opportunity to evaluate these tires in the snow, all indicators, as well as Continental’s testing, indicate this tire should excel (relative to other tires in this category) in winter weather.
Internally, twin steel belts are reinforced with spirally wound, jointless nylon cap plies to provide long term integrity under high speed conditions, reduce weight and help provide more uniform ride quality.
On the road, the ContiExtremeContact offered a level of ride comfort and handling appropriate for the category, but couldn’t always absorb sharp bumps or expansion joints. Road noise was moderate on smoother asphalt roads, but became the loudest of the test group when driven over course concrete roads.
On the track in the dry, the ContiExtremeContact offered a reasonable level of steering response and overall handling, and felt very sure-footed under hard braking. However, it could not match the lap times or crisp handling of the Pirelli P Zero Nero M+S or Yokohama AVS dB S2 tires.
On the track in the wet, overall traction was good, making the car feel predictable and fairly easy to drive, posting the second-best average wet lap time, falling a scant 0.011 second behind this test’s first-place P Zero Nero M+S.
Michelin Pilot Sport A/S
On the outside, the Pilot Sport A/S features a “three compound tread” (a high dry grip tread compound in the shoulders; a balanced dry, wet, snow and cold tread compound between the shoulders and the tire’s center rib; and a wet traction compound in the center rib). These compounds are molded into a directional tread design with a continuous circumferential center rib flanked by high angle directional tread blocks. The continuous center rib sharpens steering response and provides road feel while reducing tire noise on dry roads. The high angle lateral tread blocks enhance responsiveness and handling while the tire’s circumferential and high angle lateral grooves efficiently evacuate water from under the contact patch to resist hydroplaning and enhance wet traction.
On the inside, two high-tensile, steel cord belts are angled to blend progressive handling with ride quality. The steel belts are reinforced with Michelin’s “Filament At Zero” (FAZ) technology to further support the tread area by spiral wrapping an individual strand of hybrid Kevlar/nylon cable across the entire tread area under the steel belts, and then above the steel belt’s outer edges. FAZ technology enhances tire wear and ride comfort along with predictable handling and high speed durability.
On The Tire Rack’s test track in the dry, the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S provided good traction and responsive handling. While the Pilot Sport A/S provided a level of performance that maintained its “best in class” status in the Ultra High Performance All-Season category, it couldn’t match the traction level or the handling stability of the other two tires in the test and, as expected, turned the slowest lap times. However, the Pilot Sport A/S came closer to its Max Performance brother, Pilot Sport, than we had expected going into the test.
Thanks for the info. They sound a little pricey but if they save me some paint wear and chips they'll be worth it.
-Dave
The brand that truly trades on their name and sells ho-hum tires at exhorbitant prices is Goodyear. Besides their supercar tires, which are stupendously priced and sized only for exotica beginning with the likes of Corvettes, Goodyear has nothing that anyone should buy at any price. There's always a better tire for your dollar-- but with some Michelins, that's simply not the case.
The only Michelins I own right now are on my Honda CBR 929, Pilot Race H2s.
YMMV.
-Colin
-Ian
According to tirerack,
"Additionally, load ranges are used to separate tires that share the same physical size, but differ in strength due to their internal construction. "Higher" load ranges are used to identify tires that have a stronger internal construction, and therefore can hold more air pressure and carry more weight."
The Pilot Sport A/S also has a higher treadwear rating at 400. Typically Michelin tires with a treadwear rating of 400, can comfortably go for 60K+ miles.
In addition to that, the tire is rated with a "Y" speed rating (186+ mph), which is a special category of the "Z" rating (149+ mph), and thus is rated for speeds that comparable tires from the competitors don't match. Essentially meaning that the tire has enough reserve capacity to be well nigh indestructible, even under extreme high speeds over long durations.
Even reading about the construction of the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S is an eye-opener. It wraps individual Kevlar (bullet-proof material) strands throughout the tread area under the twin high-tensile steel cord belts and also above the steel belts' edges and are bound together using Michelin's FAZ (Filament at Zero) technology. This is one of very few Michelin tires that are manufactured using their secretive C3M manufacturing process.
This tire was supposedly a breakthrough in being able to perform like a ultra-high performance summer tire in wet and dry handling, while being uncompromising in the performance in snow, mainly through the innovative way in which the tire tread compounds are placed. Of course extremely deep snow will still require the tread design of a true snow tire. Michelin achieved contradictory objectives that no other tire ever was able to achieve before it, and this tire was lauded in a lot of Tire publications, for its breakthrough achievements.
Michelin charges a high price for this tire but in my estimation, it is well worth it, if you got the dough. One word of caution is that this tire will also ride like a Max Performance summer tire and thus might prove to be a bit harsh for folks used to riding on touring tires.
Later...AH
Thanks for the info. I expect to be buying new rubber this spring for my WRX wagon. I really don't want two sets of rubber, so it's going to have to be all seasons. My thinking (and correct if you think I'm wrong) is that while I may drive less in snow and rain, its in inclement weather that either myself or fellow motorist or more likely to drive into trouble. As such I think that an emphasis should be put on the capability to negotiate bad weather driving and to maximize the all wheel drive capability that was the primary reson I bought the car in the first place. I'm curious about the weight of different tires that would fit my needs. How does the weight of the Michelin Pilot Sport AS compare to the stock rubber and the Conti' and Perrelli' options, (any other?)? Lastly, are the Michelins really worth the nearly twice the price cost? I might be willing to pay the price, but, don't want to do it foolishly.
Later...AH
My Pilots are plus-ones, 225/50-17, and are on my car ('00 Forester S) April-October. The SP Sport 5000s are OEM sized, 215/60-16, and are on the car November-March. In theory, if not in practice, I could leave the Pilots on year 'round; however, I have them mounted a nice set of aftermarket wheels (OZ Superleggera) that I would rather not subject to winter conditions. Having said that I have driven on them during an early snowfall and found them capable on 2-3" of fresh powder and, later, slush.
The SP 5000s are at least a step up from the OEM Yoko Geolandars (not sure how those compare to the infamous Bridgestone RE92s) in terms of wet, dry and snow handling. Stiffer sidewalls but not a significant loss in ride quality. They are equally as quiet as the Geolandars if not more so. I can't say I've experienced any hydroplaning with them.
The Pilots really turn the Forester into a much, much better handler. They are better than the SP 5000s in both wet and dry and, without question, have the best wet handling characteristics of any tire I've ever driven. I definitely have never hydroplaned using them. Their tradeoffs are ride and noise, much like any 50-series performance tire. The ride on the Pilots isn't punishing (Forester suspension settings help) but significantly harder than either 60-series tire due to both aspect ratio and a very firm sidewall. They are a bit noisier than I'd hoped for, though, and as already noted, they ain't cheap.
I've noticed a couple Forester XT owners on another board have followed my lead with the plus-one Pilot Sport A/S setup. The Falken Ziex (sp?) is another less costly alternative in 225/50-17 which a couple of Forester folks have explored.
Anyhow, I recognize comparing Forester to WRX tire setups is sort of apples to oranges - well, maybe tangerines to oranges - but I thought sharing my experiences might be useful to you.
Hope this helps,
Ed
of 90, in the 205/55ZR16 size."
That difference is a quirk in the 2 sizing standards - US vs Europe. For practical purposes they are the same.
""Higher" load ranges are used to identify tires that have a
stronger internal construction, and therefore can hold more air pressure and carry more weight."
This generally applies to tires used on trucks, and the differences between Load Ranges is on the order of 20%.
Hope this helps.
For instance, the Michelin XGT-V4 has a load rating of 89 (1279 lbs), while the Pilot Sport A/S is at 90 (1323 lbs).
All others in the Ultra-high Perf A/S category including the Dunlop SP 5000, the Continental ContiExtremes etc are at 89 (1279 lbs).
Max Performance Summer version of the Michelin Pilot Sport is at 91 in the 205/55ZR16 size and is identical to the load rating of competitors like the Bridgestone Potenza S03 Pole positions.
Later...AH
The size and load index are supposed to correspond. Why these tires don't follow this is a mystery. I've looked at several websites and it appears consistent between websites. I suspect there may be a typo error, however there is more than one size that doesn't work.
But in the big scheme of things, I would be cautious making too much out of the differences. These are on the order to 10%, which is well within the range of differences in load capacity due to inflation pressure.
Hope this helps.
-c
-mike
-mike
There are several tire standardizing bodies throughout the world and the one thing they agree on is that tire size should determine load carrying capacity. This allows vehicle manufacturers to select appropriate tires without the fear that someone will put on a tire with a smaller load carrying capacity.
I should point out there are some quirks in this sizing system and those can lead to confusion.
For example: Most P metric tires (Size starts with P) are Standard Load (SL). But there are some P metric Extra Load (XL) tires that allow increased load capacity by using increased inflation. pressure. Hard metric tires (no P in front of the size) have a similar concept called Reinforced (R).
Be careful drawing the conclusion that increased inflation pressure ALWAYS means increased load capacity. Sometime increased inflation pressure is to allow increased speed capacity WITHOUT increased load capacity. This is especially true for V and higher speed ratings.
I'm not quite sure why any tire manufacturer would put a higher load index than the standardizing bodies indicate for the tire size. Vehicle manufacturers will have selected tires based on this standardizing system, so there is no need to rate the tires differently. The only possible explanation is for marketing purposes - the idea being to make people think they are getting something extra (and they just might be), while knowing the tire is never going to be asked to perform at that level.
Hope this helps.
thus why should they all be the same for a given size?
the load values you refer to are for light truck tires and larger. we're talking about normal passenger car tires.
-c
As I pointed out, if tire size and load capacity are linked, then a vehicle manufacture can select a tire size and be assured that replacement tires have a minimal load capacity to accommodate the vehicle. This is obviously extremely important and the vehicle manufacturer is under the legal obligation to assure that this is the case.
One little tidbit: Every tire manufacturer wants to make sure their tires meet the government standards, so they overdesign the tires and the tires can pass testing at higher loads. However, the government standards are the same as the standardizing body, SOOO, theoretically, every tire manufacturer could use a higher load index. The risk would be extremely low as there are no vehicles that are designed to exceed the lower values. I know of one case where the value could be even higher than what is being discussed here.
"the load values you refer to are for light truck tires and larger."
Uh..., not exactly.... XL tires are usually used found on large tires which means Pickups, SUV's, and Vans. But there are several low profile sizes that also have XL options. These were probably put in to accommodate a vehicle manufacturer who needed a certain load carrying capacity, but didn't have the space for a larger tire. At the beginning of this thread, I thought that this was at least one of the reasons for the differences in load index, but it turned out not to be the case (one of the quirks I mentioned).
Hope this helps
Wind noise - anyone else have noticeable wind noise around the driver's side window? Passenger side is okay, so maybe it's the antenna mount. Any suggestions for reducing the noise or is it something I just need to get used to?
LL Bean WRX clothing - never bought LL Bean (or any online clothing) before, so was wondering how accurate their descriptions are for sizing. Also, is the 'royal blue' similar to the WR Blue?
-Chris
-juice
It's a function of the frameless windows. Same thing happens in my '04 wagon. To fix it, I just roll the window down a crack then roll it back up. It creates a "vertical" seal (coming up from below, not swinging in from the side) and usually takes care of the wind noise. Same think you do in a convertible.
And it's not just the driver's door. It's whatever door has been recently used. When my wife and my son are in the car I have to do three windows - one for each door used. My wife thinks I'm nuts.
I tend to agree! ;-)
Happy New Year to all.
Jim
Anyone know of good curvy road near Jersey City NJ where I could take her for a good run? I'm new to the area and haven't found a place with out a mass of people and/or patrolmen on duty.
Thanks in advance.
Jeff
Thanks for the feedback on both the roads and mods.
Sounds like Vishnu might be the way to go. What about installation? Any good shops in the area that know our cars? I probably won't make the upgrade until this summer, but that gives me some time to take a close look at my alternatives.
Any local Subaru activities around this part of NJ a guy could get involved with? It would be fun to swap notes and see other cars.
Thanks again for the tips.
paisan led a crew of over a dozen Scooby's on a fund raising drive. They started in Long Island and went through NY, to Canada, back down through PA, through Delaware, across to Cape May and back up to Woodbridge.
I was in Cape May for the weekend and followed them back to Woodbridge. I think the highlight was a WAY lifted turbo Loyale wagon.
-Dennis
Thanks for the kind words nschulman3
-mike
In a previous post, I mentioned the first couple of shifts being fairly stiff after the car had been sat outside all day with temps in the 20's and 30's. Well this week with the afternoon temps not much above zero, I failed both days to make the first shift from 1st to 2nd - ended up driving a couple hundred yards through the parking lot in 1st. Managed to get it into 2nd once I was on the street (just as well, with cars coming up behind me!!).
Looking forward to some nice warm 20's later this week ;-)
-Chris
Don
225/45/17 on 48mm offset...any rubbing on stock height wagon? I have only changed rear swaybar.
Don
Got a question about the stage 1. I'm thinking of getting one once the do it yourself kit arrives on the scene. How does this upgrade make itself know during your daily driving? Better low end, faster spin up, more boost without mashing the accelerator or what? Basically, what does your butt-dino tell you? And would you recommend it as a well spent $500 (for the access port version).
Thanks,
Ladnek
03 WRX Wagon with 8,900 miles and no mods other than a clear bra (recommended by the way).
I felt the improvement with the stage 1. The biggest change is in the upper rpm range where the stage 1 keeps pulling while the stock tapers off. Low end boost improves to the point where I am taking coners a gear higher than usual. The boost seems to come on lower the more I drive it.
Downside...It is not easy to drive smoothly at crawling speeds (just slightly open throttle )...the power band can be slightly jerky in stop and go situations in 1st and 2nd. If you mostly drive in stop and go style traffic I'm not sure but otherwise it is 400 (or 550 with the port) well spent. I hear the handheld will come with some nice extras (ability to change programs (eg. 93, 91 & 87 octane, anti theft, economy, and valet etc. modes) without using up reflashes). I am getting it for the $166 diff. from my reflash. The turbo noise gets a little louder...the car gets more raw, slightly.
Go for it.
Don
I was seriously considering a WRX wagon for a while and did some digging on them. A 225/45-17 is kind of risky on them depending on the tires and wheels on the stock suspension. I'd personally use a 215/45-17 and live with a little bit of speedometer error, but no rubbing even when heavily loaded or cornering hard.
-Colin
but it is plenty of performance for the average weekend auto crosser, and then you still can take it on long trips with bike rack on top and luggage in the back, it truly is a sport wagon with awd to boot, and a turbo charger to help you accelerate past all of those Honda racers out there. Wagon was my choice and I'm quite happy. If I went total performance I would have ponied up for the STI sedan.
Maybe I should sell the Rotas and get the 16s".
Don
Performance difference is minimal (basically, they are the same) so this should not be a deciding factor.
If you could care less about the versatility, and like the looks of the sedan better, get the sedan.
The sedan has a very slightly wider track, which allows 225/45/17s with no rubbing. Also, the older wrx sedans (and it might be true now too) had a slightly stiffer suspension and bigger rear sway bar.
The wagon is $500 cheaper though.
Hey, either way, can not go wrong.
Some down sides to the wagon? It's about 200 pounds heavier - so expect it to be slightly slower than the sedan - slightly. Also, I don't think some options are available on the wagon, though I could be wrong (sunroof, heated seats, etc).
-c