As a matter of fact, my daily driver is a 95' Toyota pickup, and it will hopefully become my 'beater' this Summer when I buy my WRX. We have owned our house for about seven years now and one thing I'm sure of is that I always want to have a pickup truck for the occasional furniture move, landscaping project, etc. It probably depends on where you're from, but my concept of a beater truck would be something that costs less than about $3k, has its share of miles and cosmetic problems, but will haul stuff all day when asked to. I don't think the strong suit of the Brat . . er, Baja, is payload capacity, and it sure won't cost less than $3k three years from now.
The VW doesn't even compare with the WRX. You should compare the Impreza RS with the VW 1.8T. Even then, I'd still pick the RS, because I'd rather drive the car than wait for it to get out of the shop. And please don't put neon under the car! that's for civic dx's. There are some good body kits out there, but like others have said, a good set of 17 in wheels and tires will boost performance the most. But if your first intent is to add a body kit and under car neon, the WRX probably is overkill for what you want in a car. You really present some conflicting arguments for both cars. You want leather etc in the WRX, but then talk about it's body roll (or lack thereof), and then you're comparing it to a 1.8T automatic... You need to test drive more cars and see what you really want. You might be happy with a Civic EX, you never know.
The topic you guys have going right now is kinda funny because i have a WRX wagon and my wife wanted a pickup for general purpose stuff. I want a Baja but have 2 years left on the loan for the WRX. So guess what we afford with cash instead? Yes, an older (1992) Toyota pickup. Actually not quite a beater, no rust and it looks and drives almost new.
Saw the Baja in person at NY. The cladding is overdone, but the yellow looks better in person, and I generally had a positive impression. Fix the cladding (or get a monotone silver one) and give it an H6, then they would sell well. The midgate is bigger than I thought.
Those interested check the Baja board for more of my comments.
It's funny that you say both compare the 1.8T to the RS as well as the RS would come out on top, because that's exactly what car and driver did and that was also their conclusion.
(search for "budget banditos" on Car and Driver's website, the link is too big for here)
They did a Neon R/T, Jetta 1.8T, Sentra R Spec V, Impreza RS, and Protege MP3.
They tried to include all aspects of the car in their comparison. The Impreza RS got second behind the Protege MP3.
The RS was one of the slowest of the group, but they liked it better overall. This is basically their summation:
"For the guy who needs to get his ya-yas every once in a great while, this car is probably perfect—very easy to drive at its limits and very hard to make a big mistake in. For the guy who demands more, though, we recommend the five-grand stretch to a WRX."
Read the whole article riley, it may help you decide what you want to do (and what you want from a car).
IMO, if you want a car to keep for a long haul, either the WRX or the RS is going to outlast the Jetta. It's a tough little car.
My XT6 which is a predecessor to the imprezas took a direct hit of a curb at 55mph and all it did was bend the a-arm and stabalizer and pushed the tire back against the fender. I doubt that the jett could hit a 9" curb at 55mph and not do some more serious damage than that. Also Zephyr has had his bone-stock RS OFFROAD and the only damage has been a slightly dented oil-pan. See pics at http://isuzu-suvs.com/events
I am noticing a few intercooler fin stone hits after this winter. Has anyone seen anything out there to protect the intercooler fins? I saw a picture on a website of a WRX that had been used a lot on gravel roads and the fins were in really bad shape. I would prefer that mine don't look like this in a few years. Thanks, Pete
as of last night. Went to the dealership thinking I would just test drive it, but after that it was all but over for me. WRX Sedan, Plat Silver finish, spoiler, sound pkg upgrade. Gawd, I love driving this car, and very hard to keep it under the 4000rpm mark . I think I have had it in the 4100-4200rpm range just a couple times.
I am a former Subaru GL 4WD Wagon owner so I was familiar with Subaru's rep.
This group is a great resource for care and product info, but I was curious about one thing. What do you folks use for the interior? I can't say that I have been a big fan of the high gloss Armor-All finish. Can you suggest some alternative products?
Have we come to any conclusion on the synthetic oil debate? Mobil or Castrol? Full syn or 50/50?
Armor-All is actually very bad for your interior, it actually removes the moisture in the plastic in favor of it's own formula. Over time you have to keep feeding it armor all or it will crack. Not to mention that armor all will actually magnify the effect of the sun on the interior.
I ran across Vinylex as I was doing research for this very same topic. It has an SPF 60 sunscreen in it to filter out the UV and complements the plastic's natural moisture instead of removing it. Not to mention that it really doesn't smell or leave a greezy finish. It's not shiny like armor all, it leaves more of a satin finish. I use it on all plastic interior and exterior pieces (side skirt, pillar between doors, rails on the roof, plastic on the grill and around the foglights, all the rubber moldings, and of course the tires)
It seems to be what professional detailers use. You can buy it at Pep Boys, the bottle is actually pretty plain. It's made by Lexol which also makes kickass leather products.
(no, I don't work for them, I just really like their products)
I see we're all trying to convince Riley to buy the WRX. Personally, I don't think that this is a hard decision. I currently have 22 more months to pay on a Mercedes C320 lease (luckily I was able to sub-lease it for a few bucks less). I like the WRX MUCH better than my Benz. I am very impressed with the build quality of this car. Granted the Subie may be a few decibels louder on the highway, but the overall driving experience is incredible. This is truly the best car I've owned. FWIW... I also have owned a '96 A4 and though it was a GREAT car, this car is better.
One more thing to add to the mix is the recent offset crash tests which show the Impreza to be a BEST BUY... better than the S40 Volvo! Also, look at Consumer Reports regarding the reliability of Subarus compared to Volkswagons. I'm a SUBIE convert!! Hmmm... can't wait till it snows again.
Down to the wire, here is my deciding factors for each car:
You've convinced me that I must drive both cars, even if both will be in automatic. If I can get a good deal (low apr or rebate) on the Jetta 1.8T and the handling of the sports luxury package is good enough, I will get that because even when loaded, it will be cheaper. Basically, I'm taking a chance on the Jetta's reliability since Consumer Reports has reinstated 'Recommended' status to the 2002 Jetta because the 2001 Jetta's reliability improved. But it is still only average reliability.
If there is no special deal where I'll be getting it pretty loaded for about $22000, then I will consider the WRX with leather, 17" wheels and turbo gauge. If the price difference is less than $2000, then I will get the WRX. I want something enjoyable to drive (which both seem to be) that I can enjoy for a long time on long drives. I'm still leaning towards the WRX but am more open to the Jetta 1.8T after what you guys have said about comfort vs. performance.
If you think there are better criteria than this to decide between the two, please suggest. Thanks.
I'd NEVER get leather in a WRX. That defeats the entire purpose of the vehicle. Leather is COLD in the winter and HOT in the summer. It also require MORE TLC than the standard seats. The best feature I like in the WRX is the AWD system. You will NOT be able to get that in a Jetta. Add to the mix that there are lots less WRX's on the road than Jettas. Talk about ubiquitous!! I'd HATE to see myself coming and going all the time.
Like I said in my previous post, if you're still hesitating, then go with the Jetta. Just remember, when you're driving down a twisty snowy road, you'll WISH you had the WRX. 'Nuf said.
I can literally not count on my two hands the number of silver Jettas I pass every in my 8 mile commute to work. I think they have replaced the civic as the car I would never buy since they are everywhere.
I've only passed myself twice in the 5 months I've owned my car. You don't see too many blue WRX's around.
I agree with Dave--the stock WRX seats are very grippy for a reason...they hold you as you go thru the twisties. With leather, you'll be sliding around, not necessarily in the same direction as the car. If you want luxury(?), go with the Jetta
you would be happier w/the Jetta. From the reasoning you listed, I can tell you are not meant for the WRX. No offense, but the WRX is not about leather, cruising, yadda, yadda, yadda. It's a driver's car that happens to be comfortable enough, pure and simple. Save the WRX purchase for someone else who seemingly could appreciate in the fashion for what's it desiged for.
My g/f and I have this arguem...err..discussion all the time. She's still a student, but when she's done, she'll be making great money. She wants to buy an Audi A4 Quattro but I point out that the WRX is about $15 000 (CDN) cheaper and it drives a hella lot better. But she insists that she wants her leather and "status car" and there's no way she'd buy a WRX, no matter how well it drives. Oh well...maybe I can still convince her
To me, the A4 (and Jetta) are about luxury items whereas the WRX is a pure driving machine.
If people buy the WRX for luxury they are going to end up like the SUV buyers who really want Mini-vans. They complain about step-in height, "soft" suspension, handling, cornering, DVD players, leather, 0-60 times, etc. When an SUV is made for off-roading and towing. Same goes for WRX buyers they are going to say: The suspension is too hard, the seats aren't leather, there isn't any auto-climate control, it's noisy. When in reality those are all the characteristics that make it a great sports car.
Great cars like the WRX and the Trooper end up dieing because the wrong people buy them for the wrong reasons and then poo-poo them because they haven't lived up to their own expectations, when in fact the vehicles are doing exactly as they were designed to do... < /rant >
Hi. Since I'm still not decided on whether I want a manual or automatic, I thought this would be of great help. I don't think I'd have any problems with manual driving and even in stop and go traffic, I think it'd be bearable, but how about getting out or going into a tight spot for parallel parking? Even with an automatic, it would consist of a lot of forward, reverse movements, but I'm wondering how it would be accomplished with a manual car. I imagine it to be something like the following:
press and hold clutch in neutral, start car, turn steering wheel, release emergency brake, shift into 2nd while accelerating slowly and getting off the clutch but immediately braking once the gear engages to keep from hitting the car a couple of inches in front of you, come to a full stop with the brake and press clutch and engage reverse, turn steering wheel, release brake and accelerate just enough to engage the gear and then quickly brake to keep from hitting the car behind you, come to a stop and repeat until you are out of the tight spot.
Does that sound realistic? I would have no problem driving stick, especially in VA, but for those occasions when I have to parallel park (especially on a hill), I think it would be a pain in the butt. But please don't get defensive about how great manual is over automatic because I already know that. I just want objective views on whether parallel parking is a big annoyance with manual cars.
You get so used to it, it becomes second nature to drive stick. I swear, every time I drive an auto I find my left foot reaching for a clutch as I stop at an intersection.
Parallel parking is more difficult for a novice, so you may want to avoid that until you have a bit more experience.
Actually parallel parking on a hill isn't too bad. It actually is simpler for a lazy guy like me because you can let gravity take care of one direction. e.g. when parking downhill, you would leave the car in reverse to back into the spot; to move forward you just push the clutch in (release the brake too) to let gravity pull the car forward.
I find parking downhill is tougher than uphill because reverse gear is trickier than 1st.
The main downside? The steeper the hill, the more clutch you burn.
Also, once you're used to the clutch you won't need or use the e-brake. Practice, practice, practice...
I wouldn't go into second for parking, you'll probably lug the engine or stall it.
Clutches aren't simply engaged or disengaged, there are an infinte number of positions in between.
I don't know if you are familar with how a clutch works, but this is the simple lowdown. Picture two round friction plates that spin. One is attached to the transmission, the other is coming off the driveshaft of the engine. When the clutch is fully disengaged, this two plates are pressed together by very strong springs so all the power is transferred from the engine to the transmission. When the clutch is engaged, they are apart (letting no power though to the transmission).
Now, in low speed driving where you don't want to jerk the car, you don't have the clutch disengaged fully. This allows the two plates to slip. Some power gets transferred, but some is lost due to the slip. This is how you can go slow smoothly with bogging the engine down or jerking. It takes practice, but it becomes natural after some time. The main tricky part is backing up smoothly and slowly.
Sure, parallel parking on a hill with a manual requires more skill than with an automatic, but it's something that you learn how to do. Working the clutch is one part of it, but the other is simple parallel parking technique. I don't know about VA, but to get your lisence in NYC, you need to nail parallel parking in just two moves or you can fail the test. Back into the spot, pull forward to adjust and you need to be within 6" of the curb but not touching it.
Honestly, your choice of auto vs. stick shouldn't be dictated by whether or not you need to parallel park.
You do need to nail it but it's usually in front of a parked car with no other cars so you don't need to sandwich into a spot. So far after driving stick for about 3 days and parking in manhattan I find the lack of a working PS pump on the XT6 to be a lot more of a disadvantage to parrallel parking than the MT.
To echo what everyone else has stated, parallel parking is not really affected by MT/AT. Just like the ability to drive a MT car smoothly, it's about the ability to modulate the clutch/gas so as not to jerk the car. Once you've mastered that, tou should be able to move the car as slowly as you need to in order to park in a tight spot. First gear is probably better than second for this.
Also agree with others about the seat - leather tends to be more slippery. Unless the seat is a perfect fit with your rear end, you're bound to slide around a bit.
As a prospective buyer of the WRX, I enjoy reading the wealth of useful information posted on this board. Can some of the long-term owners (6 months or longer) provide their feedback on the how the WRX is holding up?
I'd be interested to hear your comments about build quality, necessity of repairs, and overall enjoyment of the WRX experience. If you were to rate your experience from 1-10, w/ 1 being a major disappointment and 10 being complete ecstasy, how would you rate your decision to take the WRX plunge? Thanks!
I've only had my REX for 5 months, only 4500 miles on it so far. No problems whatsoever! I'm not a person to "love" material things, but this is really close! I really do like it though. I traded a '98 Dodge Durango for it. A MAJOR difference! Hehe! It drives like nothing I have ever owned before. Although It kinda reminds me of my '65 Chevy Malibu SS I had years ago. The '65 now ranks a distant 2nd on my list of favorite cars/trucks I have owned. Being in a small midwest town I have yet to "see myself" driving down the road. It really turns a lot of heads, especially from the younger crowd. I doubt most even know what it is. It's really funny to watch someone going past at an intersection and they practically turn around in their seat to get a better look.
What little snow we had this year, I couldn't even tell it from dry pavement.
I would rate my WRX experience as a 10, after about 6 months now. Excellent in pretty much all respects and a lot more enjoyable and fun than my other car - Acura 3.2TL (with Navigation). I had assumed that the WRX would be tiresome on long drives but I am happy to report that it is absolutely fine, after a continuous round trip of a little over 400 miles.
The WRX (Auto) was supposed to be for my wife while I was supposed to drive around in my Acura. Nowadays, the Acura is my wife's car full-time, while I have monopolised the WRX, which is almost like a drug. Can't wait to get back into the WRX after a drive in any other car.
Thanks for your taking the time to respond. It's apparent that you're both more than satisfied w/ your purchase.
I had some initial questions w/ the long-term viability of the vehicle after reading a review (it may have been from Motor Trend, but I can't recall w/ any certainty) that suggested their initial excitement over the WRX waned when, after several months they experienced problems with some of the interior materials.
Satisfaction & enjoyment of a vehicle are obviously subjective, & that's what prompted me to solicit opinions on your overall experience. Thanks again for relating your specific reasons for your "Rex fever".
I have had my 5 speed wrx wagon since June, 12,000 miles so far. No problems. 20 mpg city. 27 mpg @ 55-60 hwy. 24 mpg @ 70-75 hwy. Cant take it anywhere without people asking what it is (unless they say "nice Outback" thinking that all Subaru wagons are Outbacks). Can't wait to drive it to work each morning. TWRX
Hehe Just this evening, on the way home after dropping off my GF, this Audi S4 Sport Wagon (too short to be an A6) was trying to incite a race me... My Outback? He must had thought all Subaru wagons are WRX'es
Hey, I noticed you have an automatic WRX. How is that? While I would probably get a manual for the WRX to save $1000, I just wanted to know how it feels in comparison to your Acura TL.
Well folks, despite all the pros and cons, I believe I will most likely be getting a WRX. What has influenced me so much? I went to the IIHS site and looked at the crash tests for the Jetta and the Impreza. The Impreza has the best crash tests for all small cars. The Jetta is pretty good too, and they have side curtain airbags, which have been shown to work very well to protect one's head, but the Impreza has the least cabin intrusions. The only bad thing about the Impreza is that it costs way more to fix the car in low speed crashes (5mph). The average cost to fix a low speed crash for the 1999 Jetta was $289 while the 2002 Impreza was $629. I wonder how the insurance will play out. It is a powerful car so the price should be higher, but then it is a safer car so the price should be lower, but then again, it is more expensive in a collision so the price would be higher.
All in all, I have come to conclude that Subaru does indeed make good cars. I can't believe I never considered Subaru to be a good car until the WRX came out. They need to advertise more on their merits rather than just having Crocodile Dundee talking. =oP
AH: at the NY show, I noticed the Legacy 2.5 GT gets a shiftronic and VTD. Since those are now coupled together, it bodes well for the future WRX - I bet it'll get shiftronic controls too.
Hi guys. I just wanted to know what you guys thought about the WRX in auto or manual. Except for the difference between auto and manual in all other cars, are there any specific differences for the WRX? I know that the WRX in auto comes with a different (i think better) AWD than the manual. I'm wondering how the auto will shift, will it shift for turbo boost or for gas efficiency? Thanks.
is a big rumor on iClub that the 2003 "normal" WRX may well in fact get a bump in horsepower. I keep hearing 250'ish. Most doubt it, most claim they'll be pi$$ed if it's true, etc., etc. But, yes, Paisan is correct that the WRX STi will have something in that neighborhood.
Yes, the AWD is different between the two. And yes, IMO, the auto has a better AWD, because it has a slightly rearward power bias (45/55 vs. 50/50). The manual's AWD is controlled by a viscous coupling, and the automatic's AWD is controlled by an electronic clutch pack. The automatic WRX also has VTD (Variable Torque Distribution), whereas the the manual doesn't.
Having said all that, I still would prefer the 5-speed manual to the 4-speed automatic.
Comments
TWRX
Those interested check the Baja board for more of my comments.
-juice
(search for "budget banditos" on Car and Driver's website, the link is too big for here)
They did a Neon R/T, Jetta 1.8T, Sentra R Spec V, Impreza RS, and Protege MP3.
They tried to include all aspects of the car in their comparison. The Impreza RS got second behind the Protege MP3.
The RS was one of the slowest of the group, but they liked it better overall. This is basically their summation:
"For the guy who needs to get his ya-yas every once in a great while, this car is probably perfect—very easy to drive at its limits and very hard to make a big mistake in. For the guy who demands more, though, we recommend the five-grand stretch to a WRX."
Read the whole article riley, it may help you decide what you want to do (and what you want from a car).
IMO, if you want a car to keep for a long haul, either the WRX or the RS is going to outlast the Jetta. It's a tough little car.
-mike
-juice
-juice
-mike
I am a former Subaru GL 4WD Wagon owner so I was familiar with Subaru's rep.
This group is a great resource for care and product info, but I was curious about one thing. What do you folks use for the interior? I can't say that I have been a big fan of the high gloss Armor-All finish. Can you suggest some alternative products?
Have we come to any conclusion on the synthetic oil debate? Mobil or Castrol? Full syn or 50/50?
Paul
I ran across Vinylex as I was doing research for this very same topic. It has an SPF 60 sunscreen in it to filter out the UV and complements the plastic's natural moisture instead of removing it. Not to mention that it really doesn't smell or leave a greezy finish. It's not shiny like armor all, it leaves more of a satin finish. I use it on all plastic interior and exterior pieces (side skirt, pillar between doors, rails on the roof, plastic on the grill and around the foglights, all the rubber moldings, and of course the tires)
It seems to be what professional detailers use. You can buy it at Pep Boys, the bottle is actually pretty plain. It's made by Lexol which also makes kickass leather products.
(no, I don't work for them, I just really like their products)
One more thing to add to the mix is the recent offset crash tests which show the Impreza to be a BEST BUY... better than the S40 Volvo! Also, look at Consumer Reports regarding the reliability of Subarus compared to Volkswagons. I'm a SUBIE convert!! Hmmm... can't wait till it snows again.
You've convinced me that I must drive both cars, even if both will be in automatic. If I can get a good deal (low apr or rebate) on the Jetta 1.8T and the handling of the sports luxury package is good enough, I will get that because even when loaded, it will be cheaper. Basically, I'm taking a chance on the Jetta's reliability since Consumer Reports has reinstated 'Recommended' status to the 2002 Jetta because the 2001 Jetta's reliability improved. But it is still only average reliability.
If there is no special deal where I'll be getting it pretty loaded for about $22000, then I will consider the WRX with leather, 17" wheels and turbo gauge. If the price difference is less than $2000, then I will get the WRX. I want something enjoyable to drive (which both seem to be) that I can enjoy for a long time on long drives. I'm still leaning towards the WRX but am more open to the Jetta 1.8T after what you guys have said about comfort vs. performance.
If you think there are better criteria than this to decide between the two, please suggest. Thanks.
riley
Like I said in my previous post, if you're still hesitating, then go with the Jetta. Just remember, when you're driving down a twisty snowy road, you'll WISH you had the WRX. 'Nuf said.
I've only passed myself twice in the 5 months I've owned my car. You don't see too many blue WRX's around.
-juice
Stephen
To me, the A4 (and Jetta) are about luxury items whereas the WRX is a pure driving machine.
-mike
Stephen
-mike
-juice
press and hold clutch in neutral, start car, turn steering wheel, release emergency brake, shift into 2nd while accelerating slowly and getting off the clutch but immediately braking once the gear engages to keep from hitting the car a couple of inches in front of you, come to a full stop with the brake and press clutch and engage reverse, turn steering wheel, release brake and accelerate just enough to engage the gear and then quickly brake to keep from hitting the car behind you, come to a stop and repeat until you are out of the tight spot.
Does that sound realistic? I would have no problem driving stick, especially in VA, but for those occasions when I have to parallel park (especially on a hill), I think it would be a pain in the butt. But please don't get defensive about how great manual is over automatic because I already know that. I just want objective views on whether parallel parking is a big annoyance with manual cars.
riley
Parallel parking is more difficult for a novice, so you may want to avoid that until you have a bit more experience.
-juice
I find parking downhill is tougher than uphill because reverse gear is trickier than 1st.
The main downside? The steeper the hill, the more clutch you burn.
Also, once you're used to the clutch you won't need or use the e-brake. Practice, practice, practice...
Jim
Clutches aren't simply engaged or disengaged, there are an infinte number of positions in between.
I don't know if you are familar with how a clutch works, but this is the simple lowdown. Picture two round friction plates that spin. One is attached to the transmission, the other is coming off the driveshaft of the engine. When the clutch is fully disengaged, this two plates are pressed together by very strong springs so all the power is transferred from the engine to the transmission. When the clutch is engaged, they are apart (letting no power though to the transmission).
Now, in low speed driving where you don't want to jerk the car, you don't have the clutch disengaged fully. This allows the two plates to slip. Some power gets transferred, but some is lost due to the slip. This is how you can go slow smoothly with bogging the engine down or jerking. It takes practice, but it becomes natural after some time. The main tricky part is backing up smoothly and slowly.
-mike
Honestly, your choice of auto vs. stick shouldn't be dictated by whether or not you need to parallel park.
Ken
-mike
Also agree with others about the seat - leather tends to be more slippery. Unless the seat is a perfect fit with your rear end, you're bound to slide around a bit.
good luck in your decision,
Phil
I'd be interested to hear your comments about build quality, necessity of repairs, and overall enjoyment of the WRX experience. If you were to rate your experience from 1-10, w/ 1 being a major disappointment and 10 being complete ecstasy, how would you rate your decision to take the WRX plunge? Thanks!
What little snow we had this year, I couldn't even tell it from dry pavement.
This car "ROCKS"!!!
Ken
The WRX (Auto) was supposed to be for my wife while I was supposed to drive around in my Acura. Nowadays, the Acura is my wife's car full-time, while I have monopolised the WRX, which is almost like a drug. Can't wait to get back into the WRX after a drive in any other car.
Later...AH
Later...AH
-mike
Thanks for your taking the time to respond. It's apparent that you're both more than satisfied w/ your purchase.
I had some initial questions w/ the long-term viability of the vehicle after reading a review (it may have been from Motor Trend, but I can't recall w/ any certainty) that suggested their initial excitement over the WRX waned when, after several months they experienced problems with some of the interior materials.
Satisfaction & enjoyment of a vehicle are obviously subjective, & that's what prompted me to solicit opinions on your overall experience. Thanks again for relating your specific reasons for your "Rex fever".
JH
TWRX
Just this evening, on the way home after dropping off my GF, this Audi S4 Sport Wagon (too short to be an A6) was trying to incite a race me... My Outback? He must had thought all Subaru wagons are WRX'es
-Dave
Well folks, despite all the pros and cons, I believe I will most likely be getting a WRX. What has influenced me so much? I went to the IIHS site and looked at the crash tests for the Jetta and the Impreza. The Impreza has the best crash tests for all small cars. The Jetta is pretty good too, and they have side curtain airbags, which have been shown to work very well to protect one's head, but the Impreza has the least cabin intrusions. The only bad thing about the Impreza is that it costs way more to fix the car in low speed crashes (5mph). The average cost to fix a low speed crash for the 1999 Jetta was $289 while the 2002 Impreza was $629. I wonder how the insurance will play out. It is a powerful car so the price should be higher, but then it is a safer car so the price should be lower, but then again, it is more expensive in a collision so the price would be higher.
All in all, I have come to conclude that Subaru does indeed make good cars. I can't believe I never considered Subaru to be a good car until the WRX came out. They need to advertise more on their merits rather than just having Crocodile Dundee talking. =oP
riley
-mike
-juice
-mike
riley
Jim
Having said all that, I still would prefer the 5-speed manual to the 4-speed automatic.
Bob