Uh Ok, thanks for sharing http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/rolleyes.gif

auto or 5 spd?

5 spd..

Dude, prepare for flame mail. These are my EXACT thoughts on my WRX test drive. I posted my review on my site, and I'm getting up to 5 very nasty emails per day. The funny thing is that the majority of them tell me how horrible a 2.5 RS is compared to a WRX...even though they've never driven one. What a surprise huh?

It's just like something else I've noticed: EVERY person I've ever met in my life that has had really horrible things to say about Subaru has NEVER driven or owned a Subaru. Big shocker.

[This message has been edited by bryanw (edited April 26, 2001).]

Oh well, I guess that's one more person that won't be looking for a Rex when I will be http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gifhttp://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/biggrin.gif.

-Brian

Whoa, they had Legacy turbo wagons? I didn't know that. I thought the turbos could only be had in sedan. Cool.

I didn't drive it, but I rode in TimSteven's WRX last week, and oh my god, what a power that thing has!

I liked it a lot. I still can't seem to get used to the front end, but besides that, I want one.

Maybe I'll be lucky enough to save enough $$$ to buy a STi in a few years without selling my 01RS.

yes, they imported the wagons and it has been a great car. The only problem is that it's auto. I first heard that they didn't import any wagons with a manual tranny but some people have said otherwise, I myself have never seen one. But other than that, I love the car and have worked a few RS's, especially up here at 5,000 ft. hehehe.

-Brian

I think people should put they're pride on hold... The 2.5 RS is a cool car.. two of my closest friends drive them.. one a '99 Rally Blue coupe, the other a '00 sedona sedan (my housemate) I've driven them both. They are sweet cars. I've driven my WRX, it is a sweet car... to each his own. Long live Suby fans and let's not get catty!

Oh, and BTW. The look of the car actually started to grow on me.

Stav

lets not forget that it was thanx to the RS that I-club became what it is. impreza is impreza , i love em all

I too was unimpressed after driving the WRX. But to each his / her own.

-wop

Ok, I have both a RS and a wrx right now. I dont want to talk bad about my rs cuz I like it, but its not much when compared to my wrx. maybe the one you drove needed to be brokin in, because when I drive my rs I want more power. Down low..the RS is king, but once that is passed (when the turbo spools up..around 2500- 3k rpms),the wrx takes over the king's throne. So from 2500 - 7k rpms the wrx kicks the crap out of my rs. No question...so do you do most of ur driving around 0-2500 rpms? I dont. . Yes, my rs is fun, but I really like my wrx better.
I dont think the handeling is a bit more loose at all, is it possible that you have better tires on your rs than the wrx does? we all know that the wrx (and rs ) stock tires sucK!. I havent had a chance to auto-x my wrx yet (read: tires suck) so when I get my new rims and tires I'll let you know the differences.
Wind/road noise is for girlshttp://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif I dont care much about that and dont notice it...so I'm not gonna comment about that.
neways, the WRX is what the rs should have been from the start. I just wish the wrx looked as nice as my rs, but I'm likin ithttp://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif
Keith

I wish I could drive a WRX, but no dealers around here have any to drive! I bought my 2.5 knowing full well that the WRX was going to come out and probably cause my car to lose it's value pretty rapidly. You know what? I really don't care. I'm not too proud to say that the WRX might be better, but you know, it's all subjective, there's allot of guys/gals who drive 2.5's who insist that the WRX is the ugly car, and they're probably never going to like the WRX. I don't personally think that the WRX looks as good as my 2.5, but I think that in 4 more years when it's time to trade my car in, I will probably buy a WRX. They're all Subies folks, we're all one big happy family here!http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif

Yeah, I felt the same way about my test drive of the WRX. I was expecting to be blown away by the car, and simply put...I wasn't. It's a great car, and if I didn't already have a RS, I'd consider getting one. But I wouldn't trade mine in for one. Just my observations... Remember, not everyone has to like what you like. Don't flame someone for giving their opinion.

-Bill

Aww its such a cute car. Here girl, aww look at your pretty eyes, they are so nice and round, awww you are so cute and your body so curvey.

Who castrated my RS,let it bloat up and look girly?

>>>so do you do most of ur driving around 0-2500 rpms

Of course. Over 3000 RPM's, the 2.5 sounds like it's being wound tight, and I get all kind of funny looks like I don't know how to drive. You let off the gas and you hit a brick wall. The car drives MUCH better if you keep it around 2200-2300.

I didn't get to test drive the WRX yet, dealers around here wouldn't let me, but I almost made the switch to a WRX wagon. But after going over budgets and such, it just wasn't worth the 1-2 sec 0-60 times over the RS. So, I think I started to not like it bc I really couldn't afford it(wedding coming up, money goes to that, yea)
But now, after all the hype, I'm glad they brought it over, I'm glad people are buying it, but I'm glad I kept my RS, I just think it's too beautiful to give away. But, I will be swapping in a WRX engine hopefully in the summer, so that should solve all the problems...
just my 2 cents

Jeff

don't be mad at people who don't like the wrx after test driving it, we still love our imprezas http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif

I can't believe this hasn't been said already, but you did four things wrong:

<ol>
You drove a car that wasn't broken in.
You drove a car that most likely was not properly warmed up.
You drove a car that still had the crappy stock RE92's on the wheels.
You expected, under these terrible conditions, to get a good indication of how the car drives.
[/list=a]

When I test-drove my first WRX, I thought the same things you did. Laggy, kinda loose, not that fast. But I bought one anyway, knowing that it would most likely improve after break-in. And boy was I ever right. After babying the car through the break-in period, I've now got 1640 miles on it and it just keeps getting faster and faster. Properly warmed-up, there is almost no noticable turbo lag and this thing literally takes off like a rocket. Only thing left for me to do is replace the RE92's.

Now, I don't normally road-race, but just to give you an indication of how fast this thing is....I drive an automatic WRX. Yesterday, I stopped at a red light and a modded-up Nissan Maxima (5-speed, either 222 or 227hp) pulled up next to me. The driver looked at my Rex and revved. I turned to look at him, and as I did so, the light turned green and he launched. I wasn't planning on racing, but when I saw him fly off I figured, "Eh, what the hell."

I punched it and, within about six seconds, I was rocketing past the Nissan. As I passed, I raised my eyebrows and winked, and the look on the guy's face was priceless. Now, you tell me....if a 4-speed auto WRX can beat a 5-speed Maxima when the Maxima has a three-second head start and a V-6.....well, doesn't that just kinda make you suspect that the WRX might be one fast car?

Edit: typo

[This message has been edited by wonko (edited April 26, 2001).]

No doubt in my mind that the WRX is fast, I just can't afford one right now! So for now, I'm going to enjoy the time I'm spending with my 2.5.

Owner of a WRX who also has a Type R
Check out what he says

http://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=34489

I drove two Rexs at the local Subaru dealer. The had a black 5 speed. It arrived, my inside man at the dealership called me, (ok he's a salesman that is friend of mine) I arrived the next morning at 7:00am to drive it. It had 50 miles on it. Wasn't broken in. It was fast, but not as fast as I'd hoped. I didn't rape the thing, after all it wasn't broken in. But one a two dips towards redline and I got a feel for it. I could feel the extra weight compared to the RS and the L model in the twisties, the suspension wallowed more than either MY L or a stock RS.

Two weeks later they got another Rex in, this one was a blue 5 speed. It was transfered from a dealer in VA. It was driven up here and as a result had nearly 400 miles on it. It made noticeably more power, yet was still dead below 3 grand, and took about half a second to come up on boost above that. The suspension pitched even more on acceleration and decelaration than the black Rex I drove. It's supended a little soft for my tastes. Engine and brakes were excellent, a bit more torque would be nice through the mid range, but I wouldn't complain.

Both Rexs felt a bit on the heavy side. Not bad on the street, or strip. But I like to blast through the twisties, and get loose in the gravel and ice. I like lite. If I had the extra cash I'd buy one. But for now, I'll just fix up the older Subarus. 400 lbs is a lot of weight to make up for.

Just my humble observations. http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/lildevil.gif

[This message has been edited by pottsie350 (edited April 26, 2001).]

I drove the JDM WRX and wasn't too impressed with it. Especially after driving last years model. The WRX may be going over well in the US but the dealerships around me can't seem to get rid of them. There are a couple used ones already sitting at some wholesale lots in Sendai. When or actually if I ever start my project car again I will either be adding a turbo to the EJ25 or using a STI Version3 motor that I have been given. I'd bore the STI3 out first to get the displacement up to 2.2L with that kit from HKS.

Give the WRX leather, two doors, and maybe a sunroof, and I'd buy one. I hesitated on purchasing the Rex over my RS. I couldn't, and still can't, justify the price difference of the two cars. Also, the WRX is a first year car, and they are having slight issues. Two model years from now, maybe the car will have more horsepower and even BETTER handling.


Skylab

That honduh board has some funny members.

I actually like the ITR, it would be the only honda I would even consider buying. But.......

Most of the people in that thread are morons!

"The WRX on street tirz can't beat my modded ITR on race tirz" NO CRAP!!

Maybe the guys driving the WRX can't drive very well and the ones driving the ITR can.

I just had an auto x last weekend. The first time in the WRX so I still have some learning to do about racing a turbo and learning the car but there was a ITR there also. His best time was 43.xxx with Yoko A032 (pretty much race tires) and my best was 40.8 with Yoko AVS intermediates. He did run in the rain and when I was out it pretty much dried out.

Then they go on about how the STI will be better compared to the ITR. haha but NO. http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif

Hey, to each their own. I personally plunked down my deposit after test-driving one, and after riding in and driving in a friend's WRX sedan, June can't come quickly enough.

Then again, I admit to not expecting neck-snapping acceleration, nor did I expect the WRX to be a supercar. I think that hype can establish unreasonable expectations from a car.

I also presumed a suspension mod, like some DMS coilovers, and 17" OZs with better rubber, swapped over from my Legacy GT wagon.

The WRX improves upon the RS in body stiffness, tightness, and rigidity. It's faster, and handles better out of the box (in sedan variant). It's lavishly equipped, and the MSRP is rather a fair number, I'd say.

Everyone's entitled to their opinions, and those who don't like the WRX are just as valid as those who find it wonderful, and all points in between.

Were I going to leave the car bone stock, I would have gotten a sedan, but my lifestyle calls for a wagon, which is another reason I'm not waiting for the rumored STi version.

But with a few mods, my wagon will handle with the best of them, and sound fabulous with the Stromung cat-back setup. Sure, there are faster cars, and bully for them. But there are many faster cars than my Legacy GT wagon, which ameliorates my fun in it not one iota.

Peace, y'all.

Kevin

Well considering I've driven both extensively I can see very little about the WRX that is not superior to the 2.5RS (2001). I'd say the only downside is that it is trickier to launch but other than that, it is a refined performance car with plenty of potential and much more fun to drive. The 2.5RS is just an Impreza with a big wing and the Legacy GT motor. I don't think too many people would consider both. You are either a 2.5RS person or a WRX person. No offense to anyone but the choice for me was not really a choice. I'd never consider a 2.5RS.

Wow. I didn't think this post would be that popular. We are an opinionated bunch here.

Anyways I didn't mean to offend anyone, as mentioned above, you're choice in ride is a very subjective, personal, thing. Whatever one's choice, play safe and enjoy.

Stav

If I had a car that I liked a lot (like a modded RS), I probably wouldn't get a WRX now either. However, I needed a car at the time and I thought the WRX was a good choice. If there were another AWD car that was faster, quieter, and cheaper than the WRX I would have bought it. If I had less to spend, I would have considered an RS.

There seems to be a) quite an increase in performance after the car is broken in, b) some variation in power between some of the WRXs.

Of course I can't quantify that, just my impressions across different cars.

You also need to remember boost is probably limited in 1st gear too. I notice 2nd and 3rd are fun gears.

I think ultimately the WRX is a better car, but that doesn't mean the old Impreza isn't good either. They are cut from the same cloth.

Glenn

I had a '99 RS, and I have a '02 WRX now. The RS was no slouch. That car kicked ass at autocrosses and on the street. My WRX is harder to launch than my RS was, and although it is definitely faster, it doesn't give you the instantaneous power on feeling that the RS did. The extra weight is definitely noticable on my rex. Overall, I really miss my RS, but the WRX is a STEAL at it's current price. It is a great car...The best that you can buy for this money, IMO. I am tired of people putting down the RS. That car is why the WRX is here, and now, all of the sudden, that car's performance is not getting respected, and it's even getting criticized by the newbies. And if the WRX is the only Subaru that interests you, well your heart ain't in it, and you'll prolly buy the next hot car when it comes out if you can afford it. Flame suit on: Subie posers don't understand.

Jeremy

I smoked a maxima SE with my 2.2l OBS too. On a twisty of course. So what... http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/rolleyes.gif I even let him have the better driving line.
I wasn't blown away by this new WRX as I was whenI test drove it. It's fast yes. But not that Wheeee!!! type of fast feeling. But my buddy's STi sure did gave me that 'whee' factor. It's still a fast car the WRX that is. No doubt about that.

If someone doesn't like the WRX then FINE. I'm not gonna diss you for buying a 2.5 and saving a few grand.

I think you're looking at the wrong style of car if you want power right off the throttle. If you want power, go save $40,000 and buy a John Coletti/John Moss SVT SS Superstallion Camaro Z06 Firebird Trans Am with the WS6 Ram-Air Package. Then you can go to the F-body forums and talk about torque, superchargers, and raw V8 firebreathing horsepower.........

I love my WRX. My license plate# is 4RRX***.
I plan on collecting all the WRX's that make it to the states. I'm a die-hard rally car fan. Maybe some of you guys aren't but that's the main reason I bought it.

When it comes to rally, I don't use logic to make financially stable decisions. It's about rally everytime, all the time. I could care less about jap import yadda yadda, how fast can my car can go in a straight line, NASCAR, Indy mumbo jumbo....If I could I would get a Focus and rally it out too!

It's about the passion of the WRC, Mobil 1 RC, drifting, electronic gearshifts, going full speed out of a corner, bell hemets, OMP driving gloves, "40 right, careful rock inside", RALLY IS LIFE!!!

sorry. carry on
-rg


[This message has been edited by galevelasco (edited April 27, 2001).]

Dude, it's okay. There is no single car that *EVERYONE* likes. The WRX has it's problems (which ones, I DON'T KNOW) but apparently
some people feel that it does. Hypothetically if the WRX came standard with moonroof, leather seats people will STILL dislike it. The bottom line is the majority of people think that its a wonderful car for its price.
What else can you get that is better overall for a MSRP of 24k?

First, can anyone tell me *exactly* why a car performs better as it is broken in?

Second, I have never driven an RS, but I'm 100% sure they are great cars, and there are definite advantages to low end torque and power. I would have bought one years ago, but I couldn't swing it. So, I have no WRX vs. RS thing happening here - I am just a big Subaru fan. With that in mind, let us remember the "enemies." My goal is to watch the odometer of my WRX Wagon hit 1k (I have 800 miles on it now) and then take out the first Lexus IS 300 I see. After that it is my punk neighbors MR2 Spyder and his poseur friend's Celica GTS - talk about a lousy torque curve! If I see an RS, I will think of him (or her) as my Subie brother.

P.S. One great thing about the WRX wagon is NOBODY (except males under 25) knows what it is.

I was at my dealer getting some repairs today, and while waiting I test drove a WRX.

He was nice enough to let me push it a bit, and I think I got a good feeling for the car.

I must say I really liked the interior, and the suspension felt really tight pulling out.

But alas it was downhill from there. I felt it had a bit too much turbo lag for my liking (I am assuming that's what it was, as this was the second turbo-charged car I've ever driven). No neck-snapping acceleration here. It seemed very weak in the low end. Made me appreciate my car a bit more.

I also found actually high-speed handling to be comparable to my 2000rs. Actually is seemeed a bit more loose, when I tried a few sharp lane changes at about 120kph.

As for wind/road noise (the only beef I have with my car now), I thought it would be better insulated, it didn't seem so.

I guess after all the hype I might have expected too much, or maybe it was the price tag that raised the bar. Nice car, but too much money for me.

Anyway I walked outta there with a 20mm sway bar, strut bar, and whiteline end-links (I love my dealer for the after market stuff they stocks).

Stav

I've got a WRX Wagon, my housemate has last years 2.5 coupe. They're both good cars, with their benefits and weaknesses. He was a little annoyed at first that the WRX came out so soon after he got his car, but really, his car is still a very good car.

I know, some people have traded in '00 and '01s for the WRX, but they're both good - I don't think, unless you're a fanatic, either is worth trading in for the other...

(Heck, the 2.5 probably has more mod potential, since it's a larger engine) His car has better low end, mine needs to be pushed until the engine's at 2.5k rpms, and then it kicks me in the ass. ;-)

I have a Civic, and used to have a Festiva. The rex is *fun* ;-)

I can't blame anyone for not buying the WRX. Not everyone likes the feel of Turbos. Not everyone likes the new body, and many are very eager to slam it.

I chose the WRX because:

1) I needed a car. No trade-ins here.
2) I love Turbocharged cars, and don't especially like the prospect of adding aftermarket turbo to a NA engine.
3) I love AWD. I hate FWD Torque-steer, and I hate having to leave a RWD car cooped up in bad weather. I used to own an AWD Stealth, and I really missed it.
4) I wanted a new car, not a used car. This ruled out buying another Stealth/3000GT, or an Eclipse/Talon Turbo.

I was basically left with an Audi A4 and WRX. The WRX's pricetag ended the comparison for me. Not to mention the added HP. Based on what I wanted, this was THE car for me. It's not for everyone. I probably wouldn't have bought one if I wasn't in a "need a car NOW" situation.

Well, since this post is everyone with 01 and early RS's dissing WRX's, im wondering what you guys thing of the new RS after test driving one? Minus the looks, is the new RS a better car to you even though you dont like the rex? (BTW, the WRX 20mm sway bar is a paltry $81 on Subaruparts.com for the new RS)

When someone puts a turbo in their new 2002 RS that'll be one awesome car - I've seen some of the posts from guys with turbos on their pre-2002 cars and those cars seem pretty hot. Whoever first turbocharges their 2002 RS ought to post it immediately. It would be even more amazing if Subaru were to make a 2.5L turbo engine from the factory.

[This message has been edited by Horde (edited April 27, 2001).]

Hey fellas,
This car isn't for everyone. If he likes the RS better, good. Think of it this way, there will be more WRXs for those of us that want them. So does it actually matter to you if he likes it better? As long as he is happy, it really doesn't matter.

JR

I drove the new RS at the same time I drove the second Rex. It felt slightly slower and softer to me than the previous RS. Not bad just different. Also, it wasn't broken in, so power will pick up a bit.

Don't anybody get me wrong. I'd buy all the subies I can get my hands on... It's just cash thing. I thought long and hard about spending 8 grand to turbo and beef up my 2.2 L model vs. plunking down 25 grand to buy a new Rex. If I had the resources I'd do both. I've already grown attached to my L model, and I've already got it tweaked to my liking.

Engines gain more power as they break due to the parts wearing in to match each other, thus creating less friction. If you take a brand spanking new piston and stick it in your oven for example, crank it up to as hot as it will go for a bit. When you pull the piston out it will be warped. When your engine fires up and warms up the pistons warp, sounds nasty, but in a new engine it's true. The skirts push hard against the cylinder bore. They warp a little bit less each time they heat up and cool down. Eventually the metal gets tempered such that it will not warp any longer. This happens with all the parts in your engine. The crank, cams, everything. They all warp and push against their bearing surfaces. This warping and pushing causes extra pressure that wears the parts smooth. That's why they recommend a lower redline during break in. Crank an engine too fast during the break in period for too long of a time, and you are going to burn/overheat the sruface of the metal bearings and ruin the temper of the metal, leaving it susceptible to increased wear.

Personally, I wasn't overwealmed either. I have a Ganzflow and Amsoil filter on my '01 RS so it's not 100% stock, but it's certainly not one of the Modded monsters on this board. The WRX IS faster, it's just not 'religious experience' fast. If I needed a car right now, I'd probably get a WRX even though I hate the front end. If the STI comes I'll consider it (assuming I don't take my car to Rallispec before then). However, there ARE people on this board who have turbo'd RS's that would make even the STI look like an electric pram. I'm just not sure if I have the intestinal fortitude necessary to make that kind of commitment to a car...

I share your thoughts on the WRX.

But here is something to think about.. I have taken off all the aftermarket stuff for my talon so I can sell it.

Your comments on your ever so brief test drive of a WRX would be a perfect description of how my Talon drives in stock form.

I am positive that when you let the WRX breath a bit more with a less restrictive exhaust, and a general "optimization" of the air flow throught the intake and intercooler, the car gonna fly!

You know, , i was a "little" disappointed when i bought it. I was comparing it to my slightlymodded L wagon. My L wagon handled better, was more neutral, and was much more intuitive. with thte WRX, you can fewel the weight. It feels quite slow below turbo, but if i want to go fast, i just down shift. I have NO problem with the turbo lag. Also, when it wasnt broken in, I never drove it hard, so i didnt get a good feel for it. Now that i have 3000 miles on it, The WRX feels SOOOOO much faster. Its a great car. I liked the way the old RS handled a little better, but that is the weight difference i think. I am not disappointed anymore. I love my WRX. I can hang with Mustang GT's and other cars flat out. Thats what i wanted, a fast wagon. all i need to do is put my car on a diet and ill be happy. Then get some 17's and coilovers, and a larger rear sway bar, and then disable ABS, and this car should be better. Then upgrade the IC and Turbo and other power mods, and ill be happy. when i can beat anycar on the road, (including Brucelee's RS; which i can do right now http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/wink.gif) then my car will be happy. and I in turn will be happy. I want a good track car, and i hope that in a few months, i will have it with my wagon.
--Adam

You just need to eat lots of Indian and Korean food. guaranteed to upgrade your intestinal fortitude in a hurry. http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif

I drove my turbocharged 2.5RS to a Subaru dealership a few weeks ago to get a test drive in a WRX just so I could form my own honest opinion. After I gave the salesman a ride in my own car, he basically admitted that there was very little he could do to convince me to buy a new WRX. The 2002 WRX feels like an electric golf cart in comparison, to be honest. The new car is quick and refined, but simply not as exciting to drive, nor as fast, as my present car. I don't regret what I've done at all.

Yeah, I'm comparing a turbocharged 2.5RS to a stock WRX, so before people start nitpicking, I'll come right out and make it clear that I like both cars. In fact, I am seriously considering purchasing a 2002 TS wagon for daily driver use in the city (I could never leave my RS-T parked on the street with a clear conscience). And I am positive the aftermarket will come out with all sorts of go-fast goodies for the US WRX very soon.

But I've got (a) a body style that I like,(b) 280-300 hp with gobs of low-end torque, and most importantly, it is (c) already sitting in my driveway! And (c) really takes the cake for me. http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/biggrin.gif

-Edwin

I think you're looking at the wrong style of car if you want power right off the throttle. If you want power, go save $40,000 and buy a John Coletti/John Moss SVT SS Superstallion Camaro Z06 Firebird Trans Am with the WS6 Ram-Air Package. Then you can go to the F-body forums and talk about torque, superchargers, and raw V8 firebreathing horsepower.........



Or just go buy a new Camaro Z28. Costs less than a WRX and puts out 310 HP. Not too shabby if you like to drag. I got my butt handed to me by one the other day. (I knew I was gonna lose, I just wanted to see it go.)

It's amazing.. for years we beg the Japanese companies to bring over their cars, "the cool ones", then when they do, we shift right into our USA demographic of v6 loving folk who value torquey-feel over actual performance, are afraid to rev engines into a powerband, and judge handling by how harsh the ride feels and how flat the body stays. That is not what the WRX is about. The WRX is by far the most capable auto that Subaru has ever brought over here. perhaps what's needed is a little driver modification. Trust me, in the hands of a professional driver, the WRX would run circles around the RS, hands down.

I'm SERIOUSLY considering taking my RS to Rallispec. It's just... I admit it, I'm warranty wuss. I'm afraid that I'm going to get the work done in NJ. Have a problem up here in NH and NOONE is going to want to touch it. I can't exactly tow the car to NJ to get the turbo fixed...

I don't think anyone here is suggesting that a stock RS is faster than a stock WRX. What many of us ARE saying is that it wasn't damn the consequences, here's my checkbook fast. It IS a fast car. It just wasn't fast enough to make me want to trade in my 4 month old car and eat the depreciation fast. For the amount of the depreciation + the higher price tag for the WRX, Rallispec could turn my car into something that eats STI's for breakfast. And as an added bonus, it wouldn't have the WRX's front end, and I'd still have a sunroof. Now, if it had been the STI that I'd test driven I'd probably have just been like "Screw it! My wife probably won't divorce me..." http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/wink.gif

[This message has been edited by Retsyn (edited April 27, 2001).]

Alright. you got 24 G's. Where you gonna put it?
I'm not listing the BEST examples for which class but you *KNOW* what I mean.

Speed = Ford Mustang GT
Luxury = Audi A4

I'm sure someone can expand on this greatly. I'll say one thing about the Type-R though. It's a marvelous feat of engineering.
HOWEVER - try fitting a car seat back there.

I mean damn, this isn't the GOD car. It's 24k - UNDISPUTED king of bargains. It's got great speed, yet great practicality. Thats why I fell in love with it. I think you get your cake, eat it, then get seconds.

Now the AM Hummer would just plain SPANK the WRX but its bout 3 times as expensive. =)

If almost sounds like if you cannot afford a WRX, it sucks.

I cannot afford a Lamborghini, but I'm pretty sure they don't suck.

For all of you who would only want a WRX coupe. I was just explaining to a coworker, who has seen it for a couple weeks and riden in it almost every other day since I got it, how I loved that I could roll down the back windows to get some cool air into the car without messing up my hair. I said you couldn't do that in a coupe, only a sedan. He says "This is a sedan?".

Perhaps there is some advantages to 4 doors after all?

[This message has been edited by Zahnster (edited April 27, 2001).]

I could afford a BMW if I wanted one. I don't consider the performance that they offer to be worth what they charge. I don't think a WRX is WORTH 24,000.00 + 4K-6K in depreciation on my RS. I don't think that a car that is 1.8 sec faster than mine is worth 30K do you? If my car were paid off, or it was over the depreciation hump I might. Then again, maybe I'll spend 6K at Rallispec and spank the first WRX I see. The WRX is a fast car. Make no mistake about it. It's just the economy of scale that we're talking about here. It's nice. Just not 30K nice. For around 30K (Price of WRX + Depreciation on RS) I would expect STI performance from a Subaru. That's all...

heh, zahnster, that's pretty funny. http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif

I am not in that situation though, and i still like my RS-T better than a WRX. I would probably spend about the same amount of money modifying both to my taste. So if I start from a $19K RS versus a $25K WRX, I come out ahead. Anyways, it's very much a matter of personal preference, so I don't see what the brouhaha is all about.

-Edwin

Retsyn,

I don't dispute that the WRX is not a $30k car. But no one paid that. Your unique situation would dictate a huge loss selling a 4 month old car. That would be true with most any car, however.

I think it's a value at $24k. http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif

Ed

Retsyn,
Your situation is very unique. You can't judge the depreciaition of your RS as part of the WRX price. It's a 24k car, and its worth that much. If you were to apply the same logic, would the STi be worth 36k?

All you RS people that claim to spank the WRX after a few mods are in denial. Who cares if you can mod an RS to go faster than the WRX, the WRX is still a better platform. Its bigger inside, its more solid, it will probably do better in crash tests, the interior is nicer, but only compared to the RS, and get this, its got a turbo engine that is warrantied for 3 years. Can any after market guys touch that? Yea I thought so. This is my first Subaru, and it was the only one I considered, so I may not be a full member of this cult. Ask yourself, if the RS was so great, why did the WRX cause such a big stir when it came out?

Its bigger inside, its more solid, it will probably do better in crash tests, the interior is nicer

So's a Mercedes S-class, but none of those criteria factored into my choice of Impreza.

Ok people. After seeing some of the posts. Let's put this in perspective. These are apples and oranges. But I will elaborate in my statements.

Is the interior superior. Yes.

Will a WRX beat a RS in speed.. Hell yes.. Just look at time slips out there allready, SCC got what? 14.6. These are numbers. but did it feel fast. Only when it was moving.

Does it out handle the RS, I would have a assumed so, hands down, until I drove one. This point is argueable.

Looks, well that's subjective, I like them both. Although I think the wagon is pretty cool.

But here is my point.

Would I spend the extra $10K cdn to own one. No. Did I leave the test drive with the WOW, I got when I test drove my RS, No. This is a personal opinion, and will vary based on the individual. That's why I made the decision, I did.

Furthermore, we let the car warm up for a about 10min before I pushed it. And I broke in my RS, so I saw the difference the break in makes. Guess what? 9000 ponies didn't appear out of no-where, neither did 9000lbs or torque. Oh, and my was RS is stock (RE92's and all) so I am not comparing a modded to ***** car, with a bone stock WRX. I hope this better defines where my opinions came from. I am trying to be very objective.

Kudos to subaru for bringing it over. It expands the consumer base and make our club stronger. Too bad not everyone seems to get along

Stav

Even without the 6K penalty, I still feel that the WRX is incrementally better, not exponentially better. More to the point if I had my choice right now between a 2001 RS and a 2002 RS I'd take the 2001. I happen to like sunroofs and am not a fan of the new styling. The STI however IS an exponential improvement over the RS in every respect. The performance of an STI would very likely overwealm my practicality. I'm NOT saying that the WRX sucks. I AM saying that it's still COMPERABLE to the RS. The STI on the other hand is in a class with only the EVO.

BTW: On the handling front. I agree that the WRX sorta feels like it doesn't handle as crisply, I have come to the conclusion that it's just that the WRX's body rolls more. It Feels like it's wallowing, but I think it's just the body trying to catch up with the suspension. http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif In other words, while it seems that my RS handles better I think it's just an illusion. If I could drive both cars simultaneously I'd bet the WRX would REALLY be faster through the twisties.

[This message has been edited by Retsyn (edited April 27, 2001).]

Greetings All

Just a couple of Points.

1.Driving a Boosted car is very differnt than Driving a n/a car. It takes people a while to adjust thier driving style to take advantage of the additional power. Some people just don't like the characteristics of a boosted car and would never own one. I have a feeling that some of the discussions we see have more to do with N/A vs Forced Induction than RS vs WRX.


2.I do find it interesting that the rs drivers complain about torque when both the RS and WRX have peak torque at 4000 rpm with the Rex having 41 more foot lbs..

Wrxtacy, you're probably right. I think it's primarily the displacement that we RS drivers are used to and miss when it's gone. Driving it wasn't a problem. It's fast. It's not Corvette fast, but it's definitely fast. As I said before, it wasn't 2x as fast as my RS or 3X as fast as my RS. It was like 18-20% faster than my RS. It was pretty miserable in traffic though. For my PERSONAL tastes, I can now definitively say that I'd prefer a turbo'd RS to a WRX.

Coupla brief points on the WRX (STi incl):

To get rid of a good part of the lag: get a better tail if you can stand the warranty issue. If the muffler has a good balance of back pressure and freedom, the fun pedal really gets FUN!http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/lildevil.gif

To make it feel more tied down and roll less w/out changing alot of stuff: change the links between the ARBs and the suspension. A cheap mod that really makes a difference.http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/wink.gif

Enjoy! As a newbie to the site it's great to see real talk by real owners. More power to everyone!!http://www.i-club.com/ubb-files/smilies/smile.gif

The RS and Rex have basically the same supsension geometry and components for that matter. The stiffer chasis may make the Rex handle better. But the Rex has 300~400 more lbs to haul around with it. I don't think the handling between the two is that much different. It's not a radically new car. It just has basically the same suspension handling a bit more weight. Which makes it feel softer. Not a bad thing. Just different. And easily tuned to match each drivers expecations as well, since the struts from the older cars fit the new Rex.

The power delivery is different. That doesn't bother me a bit though. I don't mind keeping an engine all spooled up, in fact It's more fun that way. I just can't afford a Rex now. I'll be getting one.. one of these days. And I won't be getting rid of my L though. It's a keeper.

You know, I was a big fan of engine swaps previously, but now I think I'd enjoy a trip to rallispec with me EJ25 more.

Stav

Best part about rallispec seems to be that they beef up the whole system simultaneously, clutch fuel system etc. It's expensive, but you only have to do it once. I've been thinking about checking out Vermont Sportscars too. They do rally prep work and they're closer. I'm just not sure how expensive it is. Rallispec has that nice package pricing...

Some of the posts in this thread are makin' me think "RS" stands for <u>R</u>edheaded <u>S</u>tepchild.

-MY00 RS Coupe STM



[This message has been edited by Reflex-Arc (edited April 27, 2001).]

Although the peak torque is at 212lbs@4000, what's the curve like? I liked driving a golf better than a civic SI because I prefer the lower end torque of car, even though it's way slower. Sensory feedback is an important thing to me. I enjoy driving, not just looking at timeslips. Why those VW's are very popular with many of my friends.

Another thing, I think one reason the WRX caused such a stir is... Oh my god it's not an SUV or a Minivan! Yes a manufacturuer decided there is a market for a performance passenger car. Just like I am sure the new Sentra Type R, Focus RS, Toyota Matrix, etc, will liven things up, also. Hell I hear the Altima will have a 240hp ver. The WRX, I think is the first in a long line of really cool fun cars.

Stav

Sorry but where I am it comes down to would I buy a new WRX for a bit more then $24K or would I buy a 1992 Nissan Pulsar GTI-R for less then $4K? That or spend the other $3K for an Evo7. Then again there's always a RSK B4.
I'm not going to talk crap about the EJ20 since its a good motor but I will say I am not impressed with the tranny in the WRX. If the dealerships in the US just offered the EJ20 engine upgrade they would probably be doing alot of engine swaps.

I still believe that hype has contributed a lot to the "I'm not impressed," that we see.

Heck, if I had a MY2000 or 2001 RS, I wouldn't trade up, either. A Rex isn't worth taking that kind of hit, especially when the car isn't going anywhere. It's not a limited edition, or anything, like the STi promises to be, if it comes over.

I couldn't get a definitive answer on whether or not a turbocharged 2.5 would be smog legal, especially in light of the looming, tougher emissions standards, either. This, coupled with the fact that it would have taken $7-9K to do right (which means Rallispec...bulletproof), and who was going to service my car after I returned from New Jersey, led me to the WRX. Oh, and I would still have my flexy body. The WRX is so stiff. The doors shut with a positively Teutonic "thunk." Cool.

It's a really cool car. It isn't a world-beater, except in the snow and rain, perhaps. Yes, there is turbo lag, but there's more lag in a Lotus Esprit turbo, so what the heck?

But there are plenty of cars to go around and I don't think that, in this family of Scoobynuts, anyone needs to, or should be trying to feel superior to anyone else. Yes, there are fast as heck turbo RSes out there, just as there will be fast as heck WRXes when the mods start happening hot and heavy.

But I feel the same way about the "WRX vs. XYZ car" threads...so what? Drive the heck out of what you have, and represent the Subaru magic. I'm just as proud of my Legacy GT wagon as I will be of my WRX wagon. Both are Subarus, and both rock.

What else is there?

Kevin

Kevin,
Well said. I love my '98 Forester. And while it has instantaneous throttle response compared to my WRX, that just means I have to drive it differently to get the most out of it. I love my Forester because it got me out of 15" of snow without having to shovel and I love my WRX because it handles like a racecar compared to all the other cars I've had and it's just plain fun.
Wilkey

subie gal says...
enough...

jamie says...
wrx... rs...
forester.. GT.. svx...

stop bitchin and enjoy the ride YOU have...
if you cant handle criticism in a constructive manner... factual or fictional... then the threads fast become a flame war...

and flame wars suck.

j. www.subiegal.com (http://www.subiegal.com)

Bogert, find me a Mercedes S class that costs $25K new, and I'll buy one. And throw in AWD.

>>>You can't judge the depreciaition of your RS as part of the WRX price. It's a 24k car, and its worth that much. If you were to apply the same logic, would the STi be worth 36k?

Is this a joke? I'm in the EXACT same situation. If I bought a WRX, I'd lose almost $3000 on trade-in. The WRX is not worth $28,000. It's that simple.

The second part of your sentence makes no since. IF the STi were offered now, then yea, that would make it $36,000. But IT'S NOT. When it DOES get here, those of us with 1st-gen RS's who'd lose on a trade-in for a WRX would have caught up to depreciation with our payments and we would GAIN by trading in our cars at that point. So, in fact, the STi would probably cost the EXACT SAME as getting a WRX now. If you could a WRX or an STi VII for the same price, is it really that difficult a decision?

I don't want a Mercedes S-class, or any of it's features--I want a light, sharp handling, small, edgy, fun car with a great chassis and power to spare. Got one already, as a matter of fact. I think what a lot of people are saying is that the sharp-edged spirit of the old body fulfills their desires better than the new one.

Perhaps the new Impreza is more luxurious, more Mercedes-like, and if that's what you want from your Subaru, go for it.

>>>Ask yourself, if the RS was so great, why did the WRX cause such a big stir when it came out?

Well, let's see...because of people just like YOU who had no clue what Subaru even offered before?

>>>2.I do find it interesting that the rs drivers complain about torque when both the RS and WRX have peak torque at 4000 rpm with the Rex having 41 more foot lbs..

This statement is misleading. What the RS drivers are saying has nothing to do with the peak toruqe. We're saying that in the low RPM range, where normal people drive their cars everyday on real streets in the real world, the RS has MORE TORQUE than the WRX. Yes, MORE TORQUE.

It's very similar to the VTEC vs Boxer engine thing. The small-displacement VTEC have terrible low-end torque and get demolished by Subaru's boxer engine. But the VTECs are very high-revving, which allows them to generate exceptional high-end hp. This makes them ideal candidates for track races, but most of us, LIKE ME, NEVER take our cars to the track. So I DON'T GIVE A RIP about all that high-revving horsepower. It would never use it, so what's the point. I LOVE having all the hp/torque in the low RPM's on my N/A boxer engine. It kicks butt. It makes everyday driving a whole lot of fun.

On the handling comparison, I've driven my RS and WRX back to back, and my RS had adjustable AGXs and I considered it handled pretty well (and I've also driven RS's with P1, STi V, etc).

But the WRX is another level. You can throw it into corners at insane speeds (even on stock tires) and it just sits flat and soaks up any bumps (unlike the RS) and you can steer it with either throttle or wheel.

Again, I'm not saying that the RS was bad (far from it) - but the WRX is a much much better handling car (sedan of course).

How good is it? It looks like Prodrive may not even release a suspension kit for that very reason (though we'll see, they were talking about perhaps a spring kit).

The power of the WRX is nice to have - of course not as fast as a turbo RS, but the handling and the seats are the nicest features.

I can't wait to get it on the track.

Glenn