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
-juice
I've had this problem on other cars too, but it seems much worse on the WRX. It's been there since I got the car but I haven't seen much on it on this board.
The engine seems to be the strong point in the car. I've used Mobil 1 since 8K miles, change it every 3K, and it doesn't use a drop. It pulls strong over 2500 RPM. From some comments on this thread, some people aren't used to turbo lag. The little 2.0 liter doesn't have a lot of torque on the low end. The AC compressor is a major drag around town.
Overall, great car but I am worried about the transmission.
Most likely the reason you can't easily get the tranny to shift into reverse is that reverse is not a sychornized gear. This is the case with most cars and I assume it is the same with the WRX. The cold might exaggerate the problem if the shifter boot is stiff or the gear lube is really thick due to the cold. Rolling the car forward in first turns the tranny shaft a little bit and enables the reverse gear to engage more easily.
I've felt the clutch shudder a few times since I've had the car, but I feel it was more the result of sloppy clutching than any problem with the car. 31K miles so far and no troubles.
Dave: congrats on the allroad quattro. The 2.7T is actually a twin turbo so it spools up quickly. A V8 is a new option for that car this year, pretty cool, if pricey.
Did you consider an LL Bean Outback or VDC? Guess you wanted the 250 horses, eh?
-juice
You're right about the V8. VERY PRICEY... and with a chipped 2.7t you can probably do better than a stock V8. I only wish I could have experienced my Subie in the snow. I still think that it is superior to the Audi quattro system (especially in the WRX auto).
Out of curiosity, do you honestly feel the power in the Audi Allroad ? I am surprised, since I felt it was pretty lethargic, when I drove it. Not even close to the nimbleness or feeling of power in my Auto-WRX, which is not surprising, considering the amount of weight the 2.7T engine is forced to tote around (4500lbs or so, right ??). 4500lbs = 1.5 times the weight of the WRX, with just an additional 23hp more than the WRX. Also, did you buy the manual version or the Automatic ? Either way, I would have been more impressed if they fitted their regular 4.2L V8 in that vehicle, since it desperately needs it.
It is a great looking car. So is every other Audi product. I just would not buy it for its power, however.
Later...AH
Later...AH
I'd say that for an automatic, the 2.7T is better suited, because of the smaller turbo and because of the extra displacement.
The allroad weighs more, sure, it's bigger also.
-juice
That was a LONG time ago! The similarity of ratio is a factor, too.
Whatever the case, 1st->Rev is far easier than just bashing reverse on a very cold gearbox.
-Colin
That was my impression too - Until I drove it. The smaller turbo is supposed to spool up quicker, before the larger turbo takes over at a higher rpm.
But when you actually drive it, there is a noticeable amount of bad turbo lag....maybe it is inertia in moving that huge bulk ahead from a standstill or whatever....the drive certainly was not pleasant....then BOOM the car takes off. That was in a 6M. The Automatic may be even worse. You simply cannot modulate the speed well. The same effect was not that noticeably present in the S4 (equipped with the same engine), which leads me to think that even the 2.7T is underwhelming in such a heavy vehicle, regardless of whether the torque peaks at <2K rpm or whatever. Again, the Allroad NEEDS the V8...the 2.7T is out-gunned when it comes to lugging that bulk around. Of course, if that vehicle was equipped with the WRX 2.0L Turbo, it may not even have moved at all !!!
The WRX will run circles around it, at pretty much all over the powerband....can't say that when it comes to the S4, where the engine is mated well to the car.
Looks, interior design, quality of materials used etc., is excellent, however.
Later...AH
Sure, if you fit the 2.7T onto the WRX, it would fly - Automatic or manual or whatever. But in the Allroad, it strains to do anything at all. I think turbos mate well with lighter cars not something that needs to lug around a lot of bulk.
Later...AH
A mechanic once asked me what I would rather pay for - transmission work or brake pads? I have lived by this wise piece of advice for more than 18 years and have yet to have any tranny problems - except my wife's 00 Odyssey tranny replaced at 28k (not related to this issue).
Engine breaking might make sense driving down a steep grade in mountain country where the slope might take an extended amount of time to travel down, but going down a residential street should not necessitate shifting into 1st for engine breaking IMHO.
John
Helping the car breathe easier (even with just a different muffler) would've helped the turbo spool quicker.
-Dennis
It'll be interesting to see if the Forester gets the 2l turbo engine from the JDM model, that one is tuned for 217hp but supposedly spools up quicker. Forester weighs a bit more so that is a concern to me.
John: OT, I know, but did Honda pay for that tranny? I saw an article in AN that said they were paying and extended the warranty on those. They had something like 24,000 failures (not just on Odyssey).
0-60 I think an auto WRX will easily beat an allroad, but the allroad may have better driveability (i.e. below 4000 rpm). Why don't you guys meet up and let us know! :-)
Either way, they are very different cars. The allroad is more closely matched to an Outback VDC.
-juice
Also, I had to do the '1st then reverse' trick with my RX7.TC
Auto WRXs are in the high 6 second range, well ahead of that.
Maybe your allroad was already chipped or modded in some way? Just a thought.
-juice
STi should be spring/summer '03. The rumor is that they will announce it at the Detroit auto show in January. The Japan/UK versions get an LSD in the front and driver controlled center diff.
You can count on the VDC not being on the STi.
-Dennis
From a standing start, the automatic amplifies the engine's sluggish low-end response. Step on the throttle after coming off the brake, and the WRX dribbles forward. In our first acceleration run, we recorded an unimpressive 0-to-30-mph time of 4.0 seconds on the way to an 8.7-second 0-to-60. Better results can be obtained by using a brake torque launch technique. This technique (for an automatic transmission only) is done by placing the transmission in drive, firmly applying the brakes with the left foot and applying ever-more throttle with the right. The brakes keep the car immobile while the engine spools up until it reaches the transmission's stall speed. Results vary depending on the type of powertrain, but the WRX responds quite well. Done this way, the WRX winds up to about 3,000 rpm and then shoots forward vigorously once the brakes are released. Our best acceleration run gave us a 0-to-60 time of 6.7 seconds with the quarter-mile occurring in 15.1 seconds at 89.0 mph
Ed
You can't start out with the first gear partially engaged. The WRX shifter is a bit stiff and notchy with 8000 miles. Unlike most of the manual transmission cars I've owned the WRX requires deliberate shifting. Getting into reverse on the first attempt is rare even using the first to neutral to reverse method. I think the transmission shifts best when accelerating aggressively in the higher rpms.
Luk
Also, did you honestly think that Edmunds employed the brake-torquing technique with the Auto-WRX but forgot to use it with the Allroad on the way to its record smashing run 0-60 of around 7.7secs ?? A full second slower than the Auto-WRX ? 0-30 is what the WRX is weak in..but anything above that need not even be debated....that is when the WRX is readying for the take-off with the big Turbo in its sweet zone. By the time the WRX crosses the 50mph mark (with its Full Turbo Boost), it would not even leave its dust for the Allroad to choke on, since the dust would have settled by the time the Allroad reaches the way the WRX passed by. :-)) Of course, I am exaggerating but you get the point, right ?
When I drove the Allroad, it felt too sluggish off-the-line, inspite of its Torque peaking at around 1900 rpm or so. When it got going, it was fast. I am sure you are also aware that when the WRX gets going, it is also FAST. :-))
When you talk of acceleration etc., please don't bring extra-large porkers like the Allroad to compare with the Auto-WRX, at least get the S4 (Automatic) to compare it against...it would be more of a match.
Enjoy your car...it is a beauty....but it ain't no earth-scorcher in the acceleration department. ;-)
I really like a car to handle well, more than its ability to accelerate in a straight line. For handling, the Allroad need not even be compared with the WRX. If the WRX is equipped with the STi Suspension (like mine is), then it can out-handle the S4.
Later...AH
-mike
djasonw - It's interesting that you keep commenting on chipping an Audi, yet I suppose you didn't look at chipping the WRX. There are a few good ones out there, including Link, Unichip, Ecutek, etc.
-Dennis
0-30 => SVX
0-50 => Even
0-60 => WRX
0-100 => WRX
That is how I would place my money. :-)
Later...AH
Later...AH
WRXAT 60-70
SVX 70-155
Auto-x? 3500lbs is not good at auto-x, On the track yesterday I was hanging with the WRXs yesterday @ the track, although the MT one did pull on some of the places where an MT would help. An AT WRX though would not be any competition IMHO. Heck I have much less body roll stock to stock than a WRX either way. Now if you want to talk on a dirt road or rally-x? No contest WRX all the way even an AT one.
-mike
Bob
-mike
0-155 => No problemo ! Where would you place your money ?
Later...AH
As long as we are going all out, my buddy's Fighter Jet has darn good 0-155 speeds! Hee Hee.
-mike
I have no idea about the SVX actually. I have not seen its power/torque curve either. So I would not be able to really comment on it vis-a-vis the Auto-WRX. I based the 0-50 in favor of the SVX on the assumption that the SVX (being a torquey NA engine) would definitely have more off-the-line punch that a Turbo engine.
But the M5 ? No question at all ! :-)) J/K
Later...AH
-mike
Yeah, those are almost identical! LOL
BTW, Car said the Forester was far more comfortable off road vs. the XC and the allroad.
Any how, let's be nice towards Audi, it's the only other company to realize AWD is essential and to offer it on every model. The allroad would make an excellent, versatile, family car. Personally I'd love to have one.
-juice
Carlos "le cost cutter" Ghosn cut some quality out of the Altima, so maybe it affected the G35 too? Sound deadening materials, for instance.
The interiors feel cheap. Even Infiniti's aren't a match for VW's. Nissan's need work too.
Have not driven it, though.
But the Impreza is very refined and quiet at low revs, plus the suspension has lots of travel, so those two don't surprise me.
-juice
One guy from Mid-A i Club put on a straight pipe and it was obnoxious. After he installed his turbo it actually mellowed out a lot and was tolerable.
We are hoping for a 2.5l turbo Forester. I think with the extra weight it'll need the low end grunt from the extra displacement. I'd prefer it even if it meant less peak HP.
BTW, one guy on i Club turbo'd his Forester and is running about 14.5 in the 1/4 mile.
-juice
The Miata seemed slower than my 99. (I know it's heavier.) The clutch release is less abrupt and the steering with the 16 inch tires is nice. I have to say I prefer my 99 though.
You can feel the weight of the WRX compared to the Miata, but it definitely feels (and is) a lot faster. This was my second test drive of the WRX and the transition to boost seemed less abrupt this time. The car has more of a solid glued to the road feel than our Outback. The clutch seems a little more abrupt than the Miata.
Now...I just need to wait until the redesigned WRX is available (not a fan of the round headlights) and sunny weather is here so I can sell my Miata.
Any idea when the redesign will hit our shores?
Eric
Rainy Oregon
I heard that about '99 clutches in Miatas, apparently even chatter is common. Is that right? I may trade my '93 up for a '99 in a year or two.
They are very different cars, though. One excels in mild, warm weather and is a totally impractical pure sports car, the other is an all-season practical sports sedan.
In Oregon I'd get a WRX if I had to choose one. But do what I did - get a Subie and a Miata. :-)
-juice
I think the clutch chatter was a problem on 01-02 Miata....a different design I think. The newer clutches feel lighter. 99 & 00 had the #4 and fuel filling problem, but otherwise pretty much bulletproof. On the plus side, the 01+ seats are more comfortable than the 99/00.
The Miata defitely has more style than the WRX, but as fast as the WRX is....who cares.
-juice