since I'm planning on paying off another big bill and getting a car around 08/01. Trying to get in touch with Patti M. to see if that conquest money is still available...
This dealership has 9 2005 STis...small town (Allentown, PA), but the largest Subaru dealer on the East Coast, if I'm correct in what I'm reading.
and handshake....it's actually something that came up a couple of years ago, probably not still in effect.
I mean no offense to ANY dealer (having been a service manager), but I do my own maintenance using synthetics and kid gloves. I don't want some 18 year old wrenching on my ride....
being in a dealership, and getting to fix the mistakes from quickie lube places.
I've also seen our own guys make mistakes - bear in mind, even at a dealership, the guy working the lube rack isn't a 20 year master tech...he's a 19 year old kid getting started, albiet with a much brighter future than the Jiffy Lube kid, but getting started nonetheless..
I had no idea that a radio was an option in this car - there's nothing but a plate in the dash! It has power windows and locks and speed control (certainly not a race car mandate) - that's weird...
2005s have a stereo standard, plus interior upgrades. The rim is 1/2" wider, and the rear fender flares out a bit more to cover it. Finally the exhaust now has one oval tip.
A 6 year old Corvette w/ manual trans could beat the STi AND hang with it in the curves. It would fall in the price range of the STi.
But if you're talking strictly new cars, I would say a 2002 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am w/ the WS6 perf. package. I know, they don't sell it anymore, but it would have been in the price range as new (32- 34K).
Ok, the only real competitor to the STi (that's not the Evo) that I can think of is a 350Z with some sort of Nismo performance treatment (chip programming, open up the intake and exhaust, perf. injectors, etc.). A base Z (29k) plus the Nismo (3 to 6K?) would keep it in the price realm of the STi. And it would be "stock" considering it's Nissan official performance arm.
and if I still lived in South Texas, a good idea. I live near Philadelphia and hate the idea of leaving my daily driver in the garage for three months out of the year, buying a third vehicle, and all those associated costs, just because I wasn't smart enough to buy an AWD car.
It is heavy, RWD only, with large normally aspirated engine -- this is the Japanese muscle car. It can compete with Mustang (and it has independent rear suspension, cool), but not with STi or Evo. Well, maybe with nitros and stuff, on dry pavement, it can pull ahead... until the first turn (and below 1000ft.) Yuck. I'd prefer RX8 over Z350 anytime.
BTW, The 350Z isn't any heavier than the Evo or the STi.
Per Edmunds -
STi - 3263 lbs. Evo - 3263 lbs. 350Z Track - 3225 lbs.
I will give you that the RX8 is a better daily driver than the 350Z. It has a far superior ride and interior. The 350Z is faster gets better gas mileage, but less practical.
I do not do drags. Even if Evo and STi may weigh about the same, they have all wheel drive mechanics, which itself about 200 lbs. And these cars can turn.
"It is heavy, RWD only, with large normally aspirated engine -- this is the Japanese muscle car. It can compete with Mustang (and it has independent rear suspension, cool), but not with STi or Evo. Well, maybe with nitros and stuff, on dry pavement, it can pull ahead... until the first turn (and below 1000ft.) Yuck."
- Though the Evo and STi are considered at the top of performance in the $30K and below, the 350Z is not far behind. Yes, the 350Z tends to plow in turns, but still is a very solid handler.
Regardless of the awd weight penalty, the fact is they weigh more than the 350Z.
Considering we are strictly talking performance capabilities, I was not factoring in practicality.
I wonder if one of the car mags will compare/contrast the 2005 STi to the 2004. Here is a list of confirmed changes for 2005 (this info is a little old, so sorry if it's already been posted):
- helical Front limited slip differential (replaces suretrac) - added yaw-sensor for center differential (lateral-g sensor remains, too) - power steering oil cooler - steering wheel changed (ratio changed slightly, too) - wider 8" wheel (replaces 7.5") with dual opposed STi logos (different bolt pattern, too) - rear wheel arch flares, body colored - Immobilizer key, 3 supplied. Needed to start car - changed climate control - added air filtration - smoked headlight lens - re-designed keyless remote fob - extra seat cushion side bolster material - center console cupholders, replaces the one by the center vent - AM/FM/CD changer w/ bass, mid, treble adjustments, 6 spkrs - door armrest redesigned, now cloth, includes mirror controls - new colors - rear cup holders added
Hopefully, some of the mechanical changes have improved the 2005's handling. I have a 2005, but I can't compare it to the 2004, because I never drove one. People have described it as different, though.
It really depends. I'd look at the maximum torque also, better yet the full torque curve.
But let's assume HP and torque are the same. Each would then show some advantages.
Throttle response would typically be better in a V6 engine. It would likely have more displacement to match the power of the turbo. There'd be no "turbo lag", as they call it.
Turbos require an engine load to build boost, so they require time to spool up. That time is referred to as turbo lag. Modern turbos have reduced lag significantly, but still they need time to build boost and obtain maximum power and torque.
So V6 wins for throttle reponse, i.e. immediate thrust.
However, turbos have an advantage at altitude. Most are capable of producing excess boost, so they use the BOV (blow-off valve) between shifts to bleed that off.
At altitude, the air is thinner, a turbo can use that excess boost to compensate for the thinner air. So basically it's not wheezing like a normally aspirated engine would at altitude.
So, back to your question, what would be better going uphill?
On a long uphill, especially at altitude, I'd pick the turbo. You see the hill coming so you can add throttle before you even begin to climb. As you do climb, the turbo will not lose power.
The V6 will do fine until you get to much higher altitudes, then it'll start losing power as the air thins out. At very high elevations, it'll be producing less than the stated 200 HP.
If you asked which is better for point-and-shoot city traffic, especially at sea level (not Denver), I'd have said the V6, for the better throttle response and more linear power delivery.
O.K I still debating on a purchase of an STI, but I would like to know from all you present owners, How is the interior holding up on your cars and how many miles are on the car. I have seen a couple of STI's and the interior was looking shotty already
Seems like some of you STi drivers need some driving lessons. I know for sure that this was a bone stock Honda Element. The driver was persuaded into entering it in the SS 4wd class and ended up beating a handful of WRX’s, imprezas and two STi’s in the same class, plus one STi in the SM 4wd class. Pretty sweet.
It’s still a nice car, I just know someone who owns one and races it and he is definitely a terrible driver.
I'm not surprised at all, Rally Cross can be pretty brutal to a low stock suspension. Element has more clearance and suspension travel.
A local group of buddies went to an Orange County, VA, event and the quickest vehicle overall in the first run was a Ford Explorer. Outran several EVOs and WRXs that just could not get traction.
At the same event a few cars were literally beaten to death, headlights hanging out and one foot in the grave.
To be honest a Forester XT would be much, much better suited to an event like that. What would be fun would be to see the same driver in an Element and Forester, and then to compare the times.
In the Rally 4WD class, note that the winner and the last place are both the same model car. Driver skill plays a huge factor.
Now that Mitsubishi has offered (though only abroad) 200 hp per litre in the EVO FQ400, will Subaru follow suit? A 500 HP Impreza STi and a 600 HP Legacy STi would be sweet revenge indeed.
I do, but not on an STi. I've used the PS A/S in a plus-one fitment first on a 2000 Forester S and now on an '05 Forester XT.
Pros: outstanding wet traction; above-average dry traction (I'd go so far as to say better dry traction than a lot of dedicated dry tires); long treadlife; improved road feel and handling (subjective impressions). They are fine in moderate snow as well; I've driven in up to 7-8" with them but swapped them out after that as I didn't want to risk damaging the wheels on which I've got them mounted (weak excuse, I know).
Cons: somewhat noisy; expensive; occasionally experience tramlining when on grooved pavement; did I mention expensive?
How long is long treadlife? On the price issue, I can get them installed for $140 each, w/ lifetime balancing and flat repair. If they last a good long time, that might not be too expensive.
Wow! $140/per is a fantastic price. The pros heavily outweigh the cons for $140!
Treadwear rating on the Pilot Sport A/S is 400, traction AA, temperature resistance A. I've put about 10,000 miles on them total between the two Foresters, with very little shown wear except on the outside shoulders where I drove, um, a little aggressively.
I'm an old-ish hand at Subarus but a brand-new hand at STi. I have a 2 week old 2005 in Crystal Gray, still below 1200 miles so I am still in 'baby it' mode. Options include day/night mirror, security system, wheel locks, short throw shifter, fog lights.
I looked at '04's but would not have bought one; not enough luxe for my tastes. In my opinion the increase in interior appointments and features such as cruise control for '05 is well worth the extra price; for me, they turn the car from a pure go-fast piece into something that can be lived with on a daily basis. Add the notable performance improvements such as the helical front differential, wider wheels & track, aluminum rear suspension bits, and so on, and I'm happy I waited.
Likes (remember, after only two weeks): - all that power! - engine, mechanical and exhaust sounds - clink, grind, whine, rumble, roar, this car gets right up in your face about its purpose and potential - and I like that - crispness, immedidacy and 'tossability' of the handling, in particular the default rear bias of the AWD setup - nifty gauge cluster, combining significant gee-whiz factor with many genuinely useful functions and good visibility in all lighting conditions - set-and-forget climate control - *great* headlights - silky smooth cruise control
Dislikes: - small steering wheel cuts off top of nifty gauge cluster - NVH can be a bit much on certain (read: crappy) roads - smallish trunk with no passthrough - wing is not my style and attracts too much of the wrong kind of attention - doesn't come in a wagon
Speaking of wings, I took mine off and took some pictures. I put it back on for now, but it is definitely going to go. I'll post here when I get the pictures online.
The half wing doesn't look too bad to my eye either, and from what I've seen/heard from others it looks better in the flesh than it does in pictures. I believe I may spend a bit of time and energy figuring out how to make caps for the ends.
As for the car being a tribute to WRC, I couldn't agree more. That's one of the primary reasons I intend to retain the ability to restore the car fully to its original look; in my mind, that's the way it is *supposed* to look, even if my personal and practical tastes run a bit differently.
If only Subaru would offer an STi wagon. Then they could offer a more mature/less screaming boy racer look with out appearing as though they were "selling out".
I agree, but I think a Forester STi may be more likely. There have been several recent rumors we may see that in the not distant future. Subaru has sold that model in Japan.
Im in love with every inch and every aspect of the sti's. I think the wing plays an important part, it openly states the obvious. This car isnt a joke, though some may think the wing makes it look that way. All you need is for some ricer fool to come up in whatever crap they are driving see you, and try to play around. Thats the best part, people with their gt mustangs and all that haven't got a chance. I think the wing goes great with the car, but i do admit it is very loud.
My apologies, i did not mean to offend anyone, its just a common term alot of people around philly use to describe a honda civic with a loud pointless and obnoxious exhaust, 3 foot aluminum spoiler and a cheap set of rims or any other other cars that im sure you have all seen out there.
Is there and aftermarket rear wing that is less Boy Racer looking that also compliments the STI aerodynamics vs just bolting on something that looks different?
Heh, my question too. All of the solutions I've seen so far are either more boy racer or else involve complete elimination of the wing. I'm looking for something in between, but not a standard WRX spoiler -- which apparently is also a popular swap.
If I find something satisfactory I will post here. Please do the same!
Last night I went over to my Friendly Local Subaru dealer for their get-to-know-you get-together for new Subie owners. It was a very pleasant experience. Among other things they took us out into the shop and let us gawk underneath a few Subies. Fun stuff. I got to chatting with a mechanic who works in the shop; he told me it was air conditioned in the summer, and in the winter the *floor* was heated (by waste oil, no less). Wowie, what a sweet setup for the mechanics. It was almost enough to get me to roll out my wrenches again
Ah yes, the "air" thing. On my way home I took the back way (as I tend to do ever since I bought my first Subie 5 years ago). Perhaps I let my mind wander a bit, which is definitely not advisable in a car with the potential of the STi. As I approached one of the whoop-de-dos on this particular road I happened to remember having shifted into 6th gear a few seconds earlier; 6th gear, on this road? Uh-oh. A glance at the speedo confirmed that I was going a good 5 to 10 mph faster than I intended.
Too late now! I was on top of it. I hit the riser and launched my STi into space. It got eerily quiet for a second or two as the tires lost contact with the pavement; I cringed inwardly, waiting for the car to crash back down to earth. Instead, to my surprise and delight the suspension handled the matter without even bottoming out! The car touched down on all four wheels at once, did its equivalent of a very well controlled deep knee bend, and continued on down the road nice as you please. Here's your hat sir, thank you very much! In any other car I have ever owned there would have been a much, much heavier landing, replete with suspension travel stops being given a rigorous testing, loud bangs and crashes, and who knows what-all else.
This little hot rod continues to amaze and please.
Comments
This dealership has 9 2005 STis...small town (Allentown, PA), but the largest Subaru dealer on the East Coast, if I'm correct in what I'm reading.
There are coupons floating around for 3 years' free service on 2005 Legacys and Outbacks.
-juice
I mean no offense to ANY dealer (having been a service manager), but I do my own maintenance using synthetics and kid gloves. I don't want some 18 year old wrenching on my ride....
One guy went to Jiffy Lube and they drained his tranny oil instead of the motor oil, then proceeded to overfill the engine oil. OOPS!
I think the covered the repairs, at least.
-juice
I've also seen our own guys make mistakes - bear in mind, even at a dealership, the guy working the lube rack isn't a 20 year master tech...he's a 19 year old kid getting started, albiet with a much brighter future than the Jiffy Lube kid, but getting started nonetheless..
-juice
I'll make my decision today - I drove the '05 this morning...
But if you're talking strictly new cars, I would say a 2002 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am w/ the WS6 perf. package. I know, they don't sell it anymore, but it would have been in the price range as new (32- 34K).
Sure, and a 9 year old Supra or RX7 could take the 6 year old Corvette in both, as well as a 9-10 year old Porche 911 Turbo.
Elise can take either of those two cars in both handling and 0-60, though cost and driveability would be an issue.
A base Z (29k) plus the Nismo (3 to 6K?) would keep it in the price realm of the STi. And it would be "stock" considering it's Nissan official performance arm.
STi - 5.2 secs.
Evo - 5.3 secs.
350Z - 5.4 secs.
Pretty damn close!
BTW, The 350Z isn't any heavier than the Evo or the STi.
Per Edmunds -
STi - 3263 lbs.
Evo - 3263 lbs.
350Z Track - 3225 lbs.
I will give you that the RX8 is a better daily driver than the 350Z. It has a far superior ride and interior. The 350Z is faster gets better gas mileage, but less practical.
The Evo/STi can hold 5 people!
A G35 coupe would by my choice from Nissan/Infiniti for that reason.
-juice
- Though the Evo and STi are considered at the top of performance in the $30K and below, the 350Z is not far behind. Yes, the 350Z tends to plow in turns, but still is a very solid handler.
Regardless of the awd weight penalty, the fact is they weigh more than the 350Z.
Considering we are strictly talking performance capabilities, I was not factoring in practicality.
- helical Front limited slip differential (replaces suretrac)
- added yaw-sensor for center differential (lateral-g sensor remains, too)
- power steering oil cooler
- steering wheel changed (ratio changed slightly, too)
- wider 8" wheel (replaces 7.5") with dual opposed STi logos (different bolt pattern, too)
- rear wheel arch flares, body colored
- Immobilizer key, 3 supplied. Needed to start car
- changed climate control
- added air filtration
- smoked headlight lens
- re-designed keyless remote fob
- extra seat cushion side bolster material
- center console cupholders, replaces the one by the center vent
- AM/FM/CD changer w/ bass, mid, treble adjustments, 6 spkrs
- door armrest redesigned, now cloth, includes mirror controls
- new colors
- rear cup holders added
Hopefully, some of the mechanical changes have improved the 2005's handling. I have a 2005, but I can't compare it to the 2004, because I never drove one. People have described it as different, though.
-juice
But let's assume HP and torque are the same. Each would then show some advantages.
Throttle response would typically be better in a V6 engine. It would likely have more displacement to match the power of the turbo. There'd be no "turbo lag", as they call it.
Turbos require an engine load to build boost, so they require time to spool up. That time is referred to as turbo lag. Modern turbos have reduced lag significantly, but still they need time to build boost and obtain maximum power and torque.
So V6 wins for throttle reponse, i.e. immediate thrust.
However, turbos have an advantage at altitude. Most are capable of producing excess boost, so they use the BOV (blow-off valve) between shifts to bleed that off.
At altitude, the air is thinner, a turbo can use that excess boost to compensate for the thinner air. So basically it's not wheezing like a normally aspirated engine would at altitude.
So, back to your question, what would be better going uphill?
On a long uphill, especially at altitude, I'd pick the turbo. You see the hill coming so you can add throttle before you even begin to climb. As you do climb, the turbo will not lose power.
The V6 will do fine until you get to much higher altitudes, then it'll start losing power as the air thins out. At very high elevations, it'll be producing less than the stated 200 HP.
If you asked which is better for point-and-shoot city traffic, especially at sea level (not Denver), I'd have said the V6, for the better throttle response and more linear power delivery.
-juice
-juice
Seems like some of you STi drivers need some driving lessons. I know for sure that this was a bone stock Honda Element. The driver was persuaded into entering it in the SS 4wd class and ended up beating a handful of WRX’s, imprezas and two STi’s in the same class, plus one STi in the SM 4wd class. Pretty sweet.
It’s still a nice car, I just know someone who owns one and races it and he is definitely a terrible driver.
A local group of buddies went to an Orange County, VA, event and the quickest vehicle overall in the first run was a Ford Explorer. Outran several EVOs and WRXs that just could not get traction.
At the same event a few cars were literally beaten to death, headlights hanging out and one foot in the grave.
To be honest a Forester XT would be much, much better suited to an event like that. What would be fun would be to see the same driver in an Element and Forester, and then to compare the times.
In the Rally 4WD class, note that the winner and the last place are both the same model car. Driver skill plays a huge factor.
-juice
Thanks for any advice.
Pros: outstanding wet traction; above-average dry traction (I'd go so far as to say better dry traction than a lot of dedicated dry tires); long treadlife; improved road feel and handling (subjective impressions). They are fine in moderate snow as well; I've driven in up to 7-8" with them but swapped them out after that as I didn't want to risk damaging the wheels on which I've got them mounted (weak excuse, I know).
Cons: somewhat noisy; expensive; occasionally experience tramlining when on grooved pavement; did I mention expensive?
Hope this helps.
Ed
;-)
-juice
Treadwear rating on the Pilot Sport A/S is 400, traction AA, temperature resistance A. I've put about 10,000 miles on them total between the two Foresters, with very little shown wear except on the outside shoulders where I drove, um, a little aggressively.
I'd say go for it.
Ed
I looked at '04's but would not have bought one; not enough luxe for my tastes. In my opinion the increase in interior appointments and features such as cruise control for '05 is well worth the extra price; for me, they turn the car from a pure go-fast piece into something that can be lived with on a daily basis. Add the notable performance improvements such as the helical front differential, wider wheels & track, aluminum rear suspension bits, and so on, and I'm happy I waited.
Likes (remember, after only two weeks):
- all that power!
- engine, mechanical and exhaust sounds - clink, grind, whine, rumble, roar, this car gets right up in your face about its purpose and potential - and I like that
- crispness, immedidacy and 'tossability' of the handling, in particular the default rear bias of the AWD setup
- nifty gauge cluster, combining significant gee-whiz factor with many genuinely useful functions and good visibility in all lighting conditions
- set-and-forget climate control
- *great* headlights
- silky smooth cruise control
Dislikes:
- small steering wheel cuts off top of nifty gauge cluster
- NVH can be a bit much on certain (read: crappy) roads
- smallish trunk with no passthrough
- wing is not my style and attracts too much of the wrong kind of attention
- doesn't come in a wagon
Speaking of wings, I took mine off and took some pictures. I put it back on for now, but it is definitely going to go. I'll post here when I get the pictures online.
Cheers,
-wdb
-juice
http://wbaseley.photosite.com/sti/
Let me know what you think!
Cheers,
-wdb
To me the STi is a Tribute to WRC and so the wing is fine.
-juice
The half wing doesn't look too bad to my eye either, and from what I've seen/heard from others it looks better in the flesh than it does in pictures. I believe I may spend a bit of time and energy figuring out how to make caps for the ends.
As for the car being a tribute to WRC, I couldn't agree more. That's one of the primary reasons I intend to retain the ability to restore the car fully to its original look; in my mind, that's the way it is *supposed* to look, even if my personal and practical tastes run a bit differently.
Cheers,
-wdb
Bob
Let's just move on.
If I find something satisfactory I will post here. Please do the same!
Cheers,
-wdb
Ah yes, the "air" thing. On my way home I took the back way (as I tend to do ever since I bought my first Subie 5 years ago). Perhaps I let my mind wander a bit, which is definitely not advisable in a car with the potential of the STi. As I approached one of the whoop-de-dos on this particular road I happened to remember having shifted into 6th gear a few seconds earlier; 6th gear, on this road? Uh-oh. A glance at the speedo confirmed that I was going a good 5 to 10 mph faster than I intended.
Too late now! I was on top of it. I hit the riser and launched my STi into space. It got eerily quiet for a second or two as the tires lost contact with the pavement; I cringed inwardly, waiting for the car to crash back down to earth. Instead, to my surprise and delight the suspension handled the matter without even bottoming out! The car touched down on all four wheels at once, did its equivalent of a very well controlled deep knee bend, and continued on down the road nice as you please. Here's your hat sir, thank you very much! In any other car I have ever owned there would have been a much, much heavier landing, replete with suspension travel stops being given a rigorous testing, loud bangs and crashes, and who knows what-all else.
This little hot rod continues to amaze and please.
Cheers,
-wdb