Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Subaru Impreza WRX Wagon
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
narrower: by a wholly insignificant amount-- less than 2" at the wheels. the chassis is the same except for minor differences in the control arms and the sedan's slightly blistered fenders. this is not a relevant safety item.
smaller rear swaybar: this actually makes the wagon SAFER, because it understeers more. an OVERWHELMING majority of cars on the road today are tuned for understeer because when people make mistakes understeer just slides wide. oversteer can easily spin the vehicle, which is in nearly all cases worse than sliding wide of your intended path.
rear drums: yes, probably give up some braking effectiveness after the first stop. still not a significant safety difference and even if so, you're talking about the TS which is a lot less expensive-- apples to oranges.
-Colin
-mike
Several times in the mountains the WRX owners asked me how much h.p. I had. They were amazed that the little 137 hp OBS could keep up with them in the twisties. :-)
-Dennis
But everything else he stated, certainly has a grain of truth.
Specifically referring to the lack of a Front differential in the STi wagon. Folks, we are talking of a limited production, supposedly extreme performance Subaru that can supposedly hang with the best sportscars in the world. We are not talking of an Impreza TS or Impreza Outback Sport or even the regular WRX. So denying the front diff to such a vehicle (when the sedan version has it) was definitely not something that has much of a logical basis. Some people attach a great deal of importance to larger wheels/larger swaybars etc., but I personally would attach a much more higher importance to a Torsen or mechanical clutch-type diff in the front (as opposed to an open diff) since as we know, the lack of it takes the capability of the vehicle several notches down in terms of its ability to put the power effectively to the ground. Not something that is observable by the common joes on the street, but the STi is not a "common joe" vehicle.
Same logic applies to the weaker brakes in the STi wagon when compared to the equivalent Sedan's larger and more capable Brembo brakes.
Basically all of these stemmed from basing the wagon with a narrower track and the concurrent inability to comfortably accomodate 17x7.5 wheels (unlike the sedan), that in turn led to the inability to accomodate the larger (and better) Brembos. But that did not prevent Subaru from naming that vehicle an "STi" for marketing reasons. I believe quite a few of the STi Wagon parts (including most of the suspension) are interchangeable with the earlier generation STi wagon (unlike the Sedan), which means they did not spent as much time in redesigning the wagon, as they spent over the sedan.
JMHO.
Later...AH
Note: I am not considering the weakass rear Viscous LSD that the current WRX is equipped with. I am talking of real differentials (mechanical clutch-type) like what the STi is equipped with.
Yes, I too wish that the wagon and sedan shared the same track. I said so when the cars were first introduced, and several times since. I've driven both the sedan and wagon (WRX sedan & wagon, RS, & Outback Sport) a number of times, and no way can you suggest that the wagon's handling is not excellent. To insert the word "safe" is totally misleading.
BTW, according to a PDF (from SOC) I have on the '04 Canadian Imprezas, all models will get rear disk brakes. I would assume that to be true for US-spec models too.
Bob
WRX sedan vs wagon: there are no safety compromises going from sedan to wagon, besides the extra weight, which is a given.
RS sedan vs TS wagon: there's a significant price difference here which explains the lack of discs, etc. apples to oranges.
Sorry, this is a performance issue, not a safety issue. Well, maybe a "Track Safety" issue
Go get an insurance quote for a WRX sedan and then a TS wagon, I bet the TS is 30% cheaper, maybe more. Even compared to an RS I bet it's 10-20% cheaper.
I got quotes for a Legacy L and GT, and the L was $100 cheaper per year. Same engine, and the L is actually lighter. I guess the "safer" 16" wheels and bigger roll bars cost more to insure?
-juice
STILL not a relevant safety thing. merry-- I'm not rationalizing faults in the Subaru. I'm responding to your *completely* irrational fears.
-Colin
Why not go to a driving school and learn how to drive your car faster??????
-mike
Later...AH
You could get a Vishnu Stage O kit for the price break and end up quicker than a stock sedan for about the same money.
But let me reverse this and ask you a question: would you have paid $1300 for the sway bar, fender blisters, and wider track? Honestly?
-juice
-mike
paisan - Agreed. The minor difference isn't something that someone would notice anyway.
merrycynic - Upgrade to a bigger rear sway bar, then report back to us. ;-)
Yeah, what does that guy Colin know. He's a Noob! :-D
-Dennis
Colin, I'm devoid of "completely irrational fears". As I said previously, I posted this not out of fear but as a complaint hoping to sway Subaru from doing it again in the future. I bought the car knowing full well what I was getting into. I say Subaru's decision was "irrational". Only Juice has offered anything close to a legitimate defense for Subaru's decision.
Paisan, I'm up to the challenge, you set it up.
One thing I've learned these past couple of days, is that Subaru sure has the knack when it comes to developing customer loyalty!
Colin, I'm devoid of "completely irrational fears". As I said previously, I posted this not out of fear but as a complaint hoping to sway Subaru from doing it again in the future. I bought the car knowing full well what I was getting into. I say Subaru's decision was "irrational". Only Juice has offered anything close to a legitimate defense for Subaru's decision.
Paisan, I'm up to the challenge, you set it up.
One thing I've learned these past couple of days, is that Subaru sure has the knack when it comes to developing customer loyalty!
All Subaru's are very 'able'. Could you elaborate more on your definition of 'able' as referred to in post #3101 - /direct/view/.eec8f4a.eec8e1b/3100
-Brian
on the track I could tell the difference between the two if the sedan had the max tires it could clear and the wagon the same-- I could use the extra 20mm or so of tire.
with the same tires on each, no way.
switching gears---
quote: I never said that the Wagon wasn't safe, if it wasn't I wouldn't have bought it. It's just not as safe as it could be.
You may have the SLIGHTEST of technical points here, but what we are all trying to tell is you that you are worrying (or debating) about the absurd. The *difference* in safety between the vehicles is utterly insignificant. The real safety features used in a crash are the same.
quote: I based my assertion on the premise that a better designed/equipped car can provide better handling performance and a car with better handling performance is safer.
Again, you could possibly have a valid technical point but we're talking about that last few percentages of performance. If the wagon is 97% as capable as the sedan, but the average driver can only harness 50% (or less!) of the car's capability, have you lost any safety? I will point out just once more than understeer is safer. The wagon IS safer.
Find a friend with a sedan and take both cars to a large empty parking lot. Start at 40MPH and make a very sharp turn, and initially keep your foot steady on the gas. After starting the turn, lift abruptly off the gas.
Betcha the sedan wags its tail FAR more than the wagon. That's the oversteer, or reduced understeer, that the larger rear bar is providing. Do this right, at a higher speed and higher cornering effort, and the sedan will spin. You might be able to get the wagon to spin-- but the sedan's rear end will always come around far faster.
Stock vs. stock of course.
-Colin
People who live in the theoretical world, where their little #s and technical figures that they get from websites rule their lives. In the off-road world we call em Web-wheelers, people who love to talk about theoretical aspects of their 4x4s but rarely if ever go out to the REAL world!
Same goes for web-racers, theory theory theory, track width, sway bars, etc. etc. Rather than actually getting out there and auto-xing or tracking their cars and seeing how LITTLE difference the minor technical details make!
-mike
on the track I could tell the difference between the two if the sedan had the max tires it could clear and the wagon the same-- I could use the extra 20mm or so of tire.
with the same tires on each, no way.
I agree.
-mike
-mike
That was a real low-blow !! :-))
Later...AH
The only difference I can tell between the two is when I'm in a Wagon, I know it isn't a Sedan.
-Dave
So more claims for the one with 16" with 55 series tires and big sway bars, vs. the vanilla L. And the GT costs more, so I doubt buyers on that car are younger than the L, probably older actually.
-juice
The wagon is less safe because you have your tool box in the cargo area and forget to use the cover. Then you have projectiles in case of any collision. There are also 2 more windows and more flying glass if you wreck. And people you beat off the line are so shocked that they have to get close to see what just smoked them off the line...
-juice
believe me juice, I was thinking 'bout the 3 ton hyrdraulic jack that was back there when I rolled.
-Dave
and, the disc and drum thing is not relevant on the WRX or STi. Subaru gave us the RS at a higher spec and higher price point than the TS wagon...they're not direct competitors. Would I rather have the discs? sure. Is there a real world difference? maybe a couple of feet from 60mph. primarily fade resistance.
I honestly can't believe you're still clinging to the saftey complaint. The WRX and STi wagon have narrower tracks than the sedans because they share body work with the outback sport and TS wagons. The rear sway bar was balanced to be acceptable both unloaded and with cargo in the back.
There is no real world safety difference between the WRX wagon and sedan, besides the extra weight incurred by adding the extra glass and metal. period.
Again, if you're driving to the point where you could notice the differences in track and swaybar on public roads, you're doing a disservice to other drivers on the road.
true and a good point, but I was describing the handling of each because during emergency manuevers you are testing the limits of the vehicle's handling. (you'll encounter your own limits first of course.)
-Colin
If I paraphrase you correctly, it's your opinion that the wagon would be _safer_ in emergency manuvers. It's my opinion that there's no difference in normal street driving. Therefore, any negative differences are limited to track performance, which is out of the realm of safety concerns, in my opinion.
-Colin
-Colin
So so true.
-Dave
-juice
Robmarch, an excellent point regarding loaded and unloaded weight and one I hadn't previously considered. Then again the wider track of the sedan might make the bigger bar more appropriate.
Colin, thank you for understanding my point regarding emergency maneuvers. As for your suggestions on how to induce over steer, I am well acquainted with it and I'm going to assume that it was intended with sincerity.
Paisan, with out "all the little #'s and figures" you probably wouldn't have a car to talk about or a place to do it. By the way, not that it's any of your business but, been there, done that and now I have more pressing things to do in life.
I think that the sedan even with the bigger bar is still biased towards under steer, perhaps not as much as most cars but biased towards under steer none the less. I believe skid pad tests will confirm my point regarding sedan vs. wagon. Then again the differences could be attributed to the extra weight.
Perhaps the word "reprehensible" in my original post was over the top. But we are talking about potential performance in a car marketed as a performance car and it's safety implications. I still think it a "silly" decision on Subaru's part to have two sets of designs and parts. If they had to have two sets of designs and parts (I can't imagine why) considering the the extra weight and hight of the wagon vs. the sedan perhaps they should have reversed the idea? I think that those who made suggestions regarding my driving skills (or lack there of) and instructions may have been a bit presumptuous. I was all set to buy an STi wagon if it becomes available, now I'm not so sure. It's obvious that most of you think the the differences are too insignificant to worry about. I stand by my original opinion. I think AH's post shows where one bad decision has further consequences. At this point I am tired of my own redundancy. Unless someone has a new perspective, I'm prepared to let it go and move on.
I'd like to see Subaru standardize in other ways - make 4 disc brakes standard on every model. They already offer AWD and ABS, so discs would fall in line with that thinking.
It's amazing that such a tiny car company, with 1% overall market share, offers so many variants in the US, and even more in Japan.
-juice
-Colin
There are 2 models of Impressa Sedans and 3 for the Wagons. To make the TS have the same options and price-point as the RS would infringe more on sales of the OBS. By making the TS a lower costing and accessorized vehicle, it sorts out nicely - TS, OBS, and WRX for the Wagon.
In terms of the track of the wagon compared with the Sedan for the Impressa, have no idea. The only thing I can think of is that Subaru wanted to carry over some of the designs of the older model to the newer one, thus saving significantly on design costs by making it slightly narrower in the back.
Even though the Sedans and Wagons do have different dimensions in the back, they have virtually identical interiors, and they share most components. I am assuming there were other reasons besides sharing components for the reason for the narrower track, such as what I mentioned above, or else Subaru would have given both models the same track length, like in the IS300. I am sure there was a cost issue involved in another manner besides sharing components (might have been a structural rigidty item, due to the open box platform in the back)
Still a great performance wagon at a great price.
TIA