http://thingsthatrhymewithcars.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/review-2010-subaru-impreza-2-5i/
There. I'm going to try to do more of these in the future. But here's a car review, largely comparing it to the first generation model I owned.
If you think it sucks, let me know why/how, and I'll do better next time. Thanks for reading. And thanks, Ifcar, for the pic.
Good review. I'd be interested to hear some of your similarly in depth takes on new Bimmers
All things considered, it?s one of the better cars in its class, as well as the best Impreza made yet.
Headline news: Subaru fan likes Subaru
With a line like that, you'll lack credibility with anyone who has driven an Impreza and likes to drive.
Quote from: Raza on July 25, 2010, 08:59:49 PM
All things considered, it?s one of the better cars in its class, as well as the best Impreza made yet.
Headline news: Subaru fan likes Subaru
With a line like that, you'll lack credibility with anyone who has driven an Impreza and likes to drive.
It'll be fixed then. Thank you.
Typo of "straightforward" as two words. Otherwise, I think you cleanly carried across the idea that many Subaru loyalists will be right at home in the soft new Impreza, which will spark spirited debate.
Way too many comas for me. It felt like you were trying to be all artsy and descriptive about a car that is, in all honesty, pretty boring. It just didn't mesh with me.
Quote from: Xer0 on July 26, 2010, 03:18:22 PM
Way too many comas for me. It felt like you were trying to be all artsy and descriptive about a car that is, in all honesty, pretty boring. It just didn't mesh with me.
If you think the review had too many comas, try driving the car.
Quote from: Xer0 on July 26, 2010, 03:18:22 PM
Way too many comas for me. It felt like you were trying to be all artsy and descriptive about a car that is, in all honesty, pretty boring. It just didn't mesh with me.
That's a fair criticism. It doesn't suck as a car at all...it just isn't what you're looking for probably.
Quote from: Raza on July 26, 2010, 03:19:07 PM
If you think the review had too many comas, try driving the car.
It'd be a tough decision versus a Mazda3, but without much thought at all, I'd take an Impreza over a new Elantra or Jetta. It may lag in certain aspects, but it's an easier car to live with than either of them.
Quote from: the Teuton on July 26, 2010, 03:37:14 PM
It'd be a tough decision versus a Mazda3, but without much thought at all, I'd take an Impreza over a new Elantra or Jetta. It may lag in certain aspects, but it's an easier car to live with than either of them.
Yeah, you would, being a diehard Subaru fan, take a Subaru over a Volkswagen, since you have an irrational hatred of Volkswagen.
Though, I've got to say, if it were an Impreza against the 2.5 Jetta I drove last time, it would be a hard decision, but the one I've got today is much better. Still not as good as my car, but I'd go for it over the WRX I drove, which was a damn Camry to drive. But then again, the Golf would probably be a more natural competitor to the Impreza than the Jetta, which I would also take over the Impreza.
Best sedan in class? Honestly, I think it's probably the Civic, long in the tooth it may be. Unlike some, I feel no love towards AWD in underpowered cars because I know how to drive and 2WD doesn't frighten me, and the forcefully bland exterior is offensive to me after the properly quirky cars that came before it. If Subaru wants to sell AWD Toyotas, they're welcome to, and will likely gain marketshare (if they haven't already), but they won't get my dollars with that half assed bullshit.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=22589.msg1367709#msg1367709 date=1280179147
If you think the review had too many comas, try driving the car.
I just got that. Thank you spelling.
Quote from: Raza on July 26, 2010, 03:42:18 PM
Yeah, you would, being a diehard Subaru fan, take a Subaru over a Volkswagen, since you have an irrational hatred of Volkswagen.
Though, I've got to say, if it were an Impreza against the 2.5 Jetta I drove last time, it would be a hard decision, but the one I've got today is much better. Still not as good as my car, but I'd go for it over the WRX I drove, which was a damn Camry to drive. But then again, the Golf would probably be a more natural competitor to the Impreza than the Jetta, which I would also take over the Impreza.
Best sedan in class? Honestly, I think it's probably the Civic, long in the tooth it may be. Unlike some, I feel no love towards AWD in underpowered cars because I know how to drive and 2WD doesn't frighten me, and the forcefully bland exterior is offensive to me after the properly quirky cars that came before it. If Subaru wants to sell AWD Toyotas, they're welcome to, and will likely gain marketshare (if they haven't already), but they won't get my dollars with that half assed bullshit.
The rental-spec Jetta 2.5 (which is actually fairly well optioned) is a nice car as a package, but that steering and those brakes ruin it for me.
What makes your current loaner that much better?
Quote from: the Teuton on July 26, 2010, 03:56:05 PM
The rental-spec Jetta 2.5 (which is actually fairly well optioned) is a nice car as a package, but that steering and those brakes ruin it for me.
What makes your current loaner that much better?
Steering, brakes, and throttle all feel better than on the top spec car I drove last time, and the ride seems more controlled. The brakes feel more mechanical, and while the steering still feels pretty boosted at low speeds, it's much better than on the other 2.5. The throttle is less jumpy as well. They're both 2010 cars, the main difference being trim level. I posted a few more details (but not much) in my thread in the Garage. This car is a base model; cloth seats, steel wheels, et al. I'm pretty sure my last car was pretty well optioned, with leather and an iPod kit, as well as the uprated head unit.
Quote from: the Teuton on July 26, 2010, 03:37:14 PM
but it's an easier car to live with than either of them.
:wtf:
Dude, they're all fucking economy cars. I doubt one would be any more livable than the other. And if there is a difference, I doubt it would be THAT huge.
Quote from: CALL_911 on July 26, 2010, 05:08:45 PM
:wtf:
Dude, they're all fucking economy cars. I doubt one would be any more livable than the other. And if there is a difference, I doubt it would be THAT huge.
The Elantra is a terrible long-distance driver, and it's just wickedly uncomfortable for long distances. The arm rests are exactly in the wrong places. The Jetta has that whole overly sensitivity thing going on with little in the way of driving feedback. The Subaru isn't an ergonomic nightmare, nor is is unnerving. I never said it was perfect, but I did say that hitting consistent line drive base hits for this car puts it ahead of cars that swing .225 with a few 500-foot homeruns.
I bet the differences between the BMW 5er and the MB E-Class aren't that big, either.
The Impreza isn't consistently competitive though. It's expensive and gets lousy gas mileage (both thanks to AWD) and is arguably in the bottom tier of its class for quietness and interior quality. I'd sooner call it "mostly okay" for someone who doesn't need the all-wheel-drive.
Quote from: ifcar on July 26, 2010, 07:39:45 PM
The Impreza isn't consistently competitive though. It's expensive and gets lousy gas mileage (both thanks to AWD) and is arguably in the bottom tier of its class for quietness and interior quality. I'd sooner call it "mostly okay" for someone who doesn't need the all-wheel-drive.
I'd rank it 3rd or 4th behind the 3, Civic, and maybe the VW even though I wouldn't own one. Only the Civic gets good gas mileage out of those three.
IMO the only reason to go Impreza is AWD. The Civic is a much better car otherwise.
Fortunately, the piece I wrote wasn't a comparo, but it's interesting to see why you all hate this car.
Quote from: the Teuton on July 26, 2010, 08:37:45 PM
Fortunately, the piece I wrote wasn't a comparo, but it's interesting to see why you all hate this car.
I don't hate it. For people who want a small car with all-wheel-drive, it's better than it's ever been -- more comfortable, roomier, safer. For people who just want a small car, there are better ways to spend your money.
Quote from: the Teuton on July 26, 2010, 08:37:45 PM
Fortunately, the piece I wrote wasn't a comparo, but it's interesting to see why you all hate this car.
Nah, not really - I think it pretty much known Subaru cheaps out a bit elsewhere on the car in order to be able to provide AWD at this price point.
Quote from: GoCougs on July 26, 2010, 08:49:40 PM
Nah, not really - I think it pretty much known Subaru cheaps out a bit elsewhere on the car in order to be able to provide AWD at this price point.
Where do you come up with this shit
I was just thinking the other day how smart the current Civics look - I've thrown out my initial objections to the British Type-R, and the sedan (particularly in Sport guise) is very handsome indeed. I still don't like the Nullarbor-Plain-meets-Ginza dashboard, but if the basic driving position is sound and it drives well, I could easily live with that.
(http://liveimages.carsales.com.au/dealer/carpoint/25700091.jpg)
(http://liveimages.carsales.com.au/dealer/carpoint/27480455.jpg)
Quote from: sportyaccordy on July 27, 2010, 07:45:38 AM
Where do you come up with this shit
You been inside an Impreza? It's rather cheap.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on July 27, 2010, 07:45:38 AM
Where do you come up with this shit
That's been the case for some time. Subarus are fairly reliable, and they have good mechanical underpinnings, but like anything, their priorities involve a trade-off. Generally they lag behind the competition in terms of interior appointment.
Quote from: Tave on July 27, 2010, 09:35:26 AM
That's been the case for some time. Subarus are fairly reliable, and they have good mechanical underpinnings, but like anything, their priorities involve a trade-off. Generally they lag behind the competition in terms of interior appointment.
I'd say Subarus' durability is in question however, especially engines. Even today the 2.5L boxer, the core engine of the brand (at least in the US), still isn't all that well sorted, with a virtually guaranteed $3,500 head job needed at the 100k - 150k mark. I think they need to dump the boxer layout and do it like everyone else. There are no benefits and the detriments are major.
Quote from: GoCougs on July 27, 2010, 09:01:10 PM
I'd say Subarus' durability is in question however, especially engines. Even today the 2.5L boxer, the core engine of the brand (at least in the US), still isn't all that well sorted, with a virtually guaranteed $3,500 head job needed at the 100k - 150k mark. I think they need to dump the boxer layout and do it like everyone else. There are no benefits and the detriments are major.
*waits for Teuton to come in and tell Cougs how he is wrong even though Teuton already had a Scoob engine blow up on him* :lol:
Quote from: thecarnut on July 27, 2010, 09:03:00 PM
*waits for Teuton to come in and tell Cougs how he is wrong even though Teuton already had a Scoob engine blow up on him* :lol:
Ha - well see!
Most any Subaru owner/devotee I know in real life readily admits to Subaru's well-earned reputation for premature (and expensive) head work on the boxer-4.
Quote from: GoCougs on July 27, 2010, 09:05:16 PM
Ha - well see!
Most any Subaru owner/devotee I know in real life readily admits to Subaru's well-earned reputation for premature (and expensive) head work on the boxer-4.
I must be in the minority, then. We've owned this Legacy since it was new, it's got 145k on it now (EJ22), no such problems.
To set the record straight:
The EJ22, both E (NA) and T (turbo) were the most reliable EJs ever sold. The EJ18 I had died because of oil starvation because my brother is/was a 'tard.
The EJ25D DOHC engine was a mess when it came to head gaskets. Subaru got it better with the EJ251 in the next 2.5 RS that lasted until 2001, but it wasn't that great. The engines that have come out since then have been nearly bulletproof, though.
With the exception of the EJ25D, Subaru's EJ engines have had excellent reliability overall. The cause for it (and some early JDM DOHC engines to a small extent) were because of the open deck or semi-open deck design, bigger, hotter, iron heads, and weaker, more malleable aluminum blocks, along with an inherently poorly designed head gasket.
The thicker metal gaskets that Subaru sells as replacements in the EJ25D engine, and that have come standard in every model since the EJ251 engine, have left little in the way of malfunction left in the design.
The reason the EJ22E design is the most reliable (my dad's Legacy is awesome at over 200k miles now) is because of its simple SOHC design that doesn't get as hot, non-interference engine (this would not be the case for the EJ22 for 1998 and beyond), and relatively stout, thick block. There's a reason it's often used in light aircrafts.
Third paragraph:
"When I?d try to do the imitate his moves,"
I have no doubt Subaru has worked to improve durability but I still remain quite skeptical but wish them luck - I'd very much like my next car to be a Subaru (and eagerly awaiting the return of the Outback XT w/MT).
As to using flat/boxer engines in airplanes, it's because of cooling and packaging, and not anything to do with durability or strength. The flat-style engine is inherently much more friendly for air cooling as the cylinders are much more exposed WRT to an inline engine (no liquid cooling = more reliable and lower maintenance). The flat style engine is also much easier to package inside the nose of a small Cessna or in the small nacelle of a dual engine Beechcraft.
Quote from: GoCougs on July 27, 2010, 11:30:11 PM
I have no doubt Subaru has worked to improve durability but I still remain quite skeptical but wish them luck - I'd very much like my next car to be a Subaru (and eagerly awaiting the return of the Outback XT w/MT).
As to using flat/boxer engines in airplanes, it's because of cooling and packaging, and not anything to do with durability or strength. The flat-style engine is inherently much more friendly for air cooling as the cylinders are much more exposed WRT to an inline engine (no liquid cooling = more reliable and lower maintenance). The flat style engine is also much easier to package inside the nose of a small Cessna or in the small nacelle of a dual engine Beechcraft.
Would you ever consider a WRX?
I feel like you've answered this question before, but since I don't remember your response, I'll go ahead and ask you again.
Quote from: CALL_911 on July 28, 2010, 11:42:35 AM
Would you ever consider a WRX?
I feel like you've answered this question before, but since I don't remember your response, I'll go ahead and ask you again.
I believe he said it was too small, which is understandable.
I still want an old WRX to bomb down back roads in.
Yeah, WRX is too small, too low rent, looks too ricey for me (especially with the STi body coming in 2011) and the "wagon" version is actually a hatch which has less cargo space than the WRX sedan.
The sedan is also five inches longer than the hatch.
Subaru has had its failings, but it has always improved its products afterwards and usually has come to side with the customer when it comes to rectifying a bad situation.
Quote from: Raza on July 26, 2010, 03:42:18 PM
If Subaru wants to sell AWD Toyotas, they're welcome to, and will likely gain marketshare (if they haven't already), but they won't get my dollars with that half assed bullshit.
IIRC, Subaru was the only manufacturer to sell more in 2008 than 2007, AND 2009 than 2008.
They've gained traction as the cars have looked more "mainstream" and the AWD thing is a seller in some regions.
As noted though, they take a definite hit for the poorer gas mileage and cheaper interiors. I wonder if they would sell more if they could offer FWD only versions cheaper than the current prices, or if that would wreck the brand ?!
Why would they want to?
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on July 28, 2010, 03:43:29 PM
IIRC, Subaru was the only manufacturer to sell more in 2008 than 2007, AND 2009 than 2008.
They've gained traction as the cars have looked more "mainstream" and the AWD thing is a seller in some regions.
As noted though, they take a definite hit for the poorer gas mileage and cheaper interiors. I wonder if they would sell more if they could offer FWD only versions cheaper than the current prices, or if that would wreck the brand ?!
Exactly. If you want volume, you push mainstream. Porsche did it, but they did it right. They sold the Cayenne. They didn't soften everything up to the point that mommies would use them for the school run. Subaru ripped out the heart of their core model for sales. They sold out. So the sheep will follow the shepherd, but I am not one.
Quote from: the Teuton on July 29, 2010, 05:18:18 PM
Why would they want to?
Yeah! Why would a company want to sell
more cars!?
Quote from: Raza on July 29, 2010, 05:21:02 PM
Yeah! Why would a company want to sell more cars!?
It'd be diluting the brand, like selling a FWD BMW.
Quote from: the Teuton on July 29, 2010, 05:23:47 PM
It'd be diluting the brand, like selling a FWD BMW.
They already diluted the brand.
And they are planning a FWD BMW.
Quote from: Raza on July 29, 2010, 05:24:13 PM
They already diluted the brand.
And they are planning a FWD BMW.
I suppose you have a point. But when VW is going back to beam axles, drum brakes, and the 2.Slow, does it really make sense to make a sportier car that isn't a WRX? Other than the Mazda3, nothing in the class is too, too sporty out of the box.
Quote from: the Teuton on July 29, 2010, 05:36:51 PM
I suppose you have a point. But when VW is going back to beam axles, drum brakes, and the 2.Slow, does it really make sense to make a sportier car that isn't a WRX? Other than the Mazda3, nothing in the class is too, too sporty out of the box.
Drum brakes?
I want to see specs on this new Jetta. Hopefully it will get panned (after the MkV got such great reviews) and they'll make the MkVII a better car again. Although, it'll probably sell more since it'll be worse for the enthusiast. That second Jetta 2.5 I drove? Nowhere near as good as my car, but I'd have been okay driving it if I had one. If we rate my car a 10/10 on the Jetta scale, that was about a 6.5. The first 2.5 was about a 3, maybe four. You figure a 2.5 with a stick would be about a 7. Not too bad. But I'm thinking about the black front from the 2010. I digress....
That's my point. They moved mainstream to get more marketshare and it worked. Alienate the diehards for the mainstream consumer and you'll almost always see short term growth. Long term, if you can ride the cycle like Toyota did. So, why not add gas mileage to the one thing they can brag about? It's just one word if they offer FWD. "AWD
available on all our models!"
Quote from: GoCougs on July 27, 2010, 11:30:11 PM
I have no doubt Subaru has worked to improve durability but I still remain quite skeptical but wish them luck - I'd very much like my next car to be a Subaru (and eagerly awaiting the return of the Outback XT w/MT).
As to using flat/boxer engines in airplanes, it's because of cooling and packaging, and not anything to do with durability or strength. The flat-style engine is inherently much more friendly for air cooling as the cylinders are much more exposed WRT to an inline engine (no liquid cooling = more reliable and lower maintenance). The flat style engine is also much easier to package inside the nose of a small Cessna or in the small nacelle of a dual engine Beechcraft.
Boxer configuration also has superior primary balance to most other layouts (save for I6s and V12s, the latter commonly used in WWII era aircraft).
Fundamentally, you're right. My dad's Legacy is FWD. It's just fine -- and it probably has better steering feel than my Impreza ever did.
But Subaru has spent 15 years to carve out this niche as an AWD manufacturer, no, the AWD manufacturer. To throw that away for a quick buck really would make it into just another Toyota.
And yeah, my boss said the Jetta was going to have drum brakes in the rear. I'm sure he gets flooded with press releases, so I'm going to trust him for the moment.
Quote from: the Teuton on July 29, 2010, 06:08:28 PM
Fundamentally, you're right. My dad's Legacy is FWD. It's just fine -- and it probably has better steering feel than my Impreza ever did.
But Subaru has spent 15 years to carve out this niche as an AWD manufacturer, no, the AWD manufacturer. To throw that away for a quick buck really would make it into just another Toyota.
And yeah, my boss said the Jetta was going to have drum brakes in the rear. I'm sure he gets flooded with press releases, so I'm going to trust him for the moment.
Two steps forward, three steps back... :(
Quote from: Raza on July 29, 2010, 05:58:37 PM
Drum brakes?
I want to see specs on this new Jetta. Hopefully it will get panned (after the MkV got such great reviews) and they'll make the MkVII a better car again. Although, it'll probably sell more since it'll be worse for the enthusiast. That second Jetta 2.5 I drove? Nowhere near as good as my car, but I'd have been okay driving it if I had one. If we rate my car a 10/10 on the Jetta scale, that was about a 6.5. The first 2.5 was about a 3, maybe four. You figure a 2.5 with a stick would be about a 7. Not too bad. But I'm thinking about the black front from the 2010. I digress....
That's my point. They moved mainstream to get more marketshare and it worked. Alienate the diehards for the mainstream consumer and you'll almost always see short term growth. Long term, if you can ride the cycle like Toyota did. So, why not add gas mileage to the one thing they can brag about? It's just one word if they offer FWD. "AWD available on all our models!"
Lower level trims (S and SE) will get drum rears. SEL and higher get 4-wheel discs. And all but the GLI will get a torsion beam rear suspension.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=22589.msg1370047#msg1370047 date=1280448800
Two steps forward, three steps back... :(
But hey, it'll be a Jetta that starts under $16,000! Isn't that what the market wants?
Quote from: the Teuton on July 29, 2010, 06:14:33 PM
But hey, it'll be a Jetta that starts under $16,000! Isn't that what the market wants?
VW is following Toyota to try to get Corolla sales numbers. First they introduce Corolla-esque styling. Then they drop in drum brakes, a torsion beam suspension and a relatively underpowered standard engine.
Quote from: MX793 on July 29, 2010, 06:33:19 PM
VW is following Toyota to try to get Corolla sales numbers. First they introduce Corolla-esque styling. Then they drop in drum brakes, a torsion beam suspension and a relatively underpowered standard engine.
Corolla's got way better power-to-weight than that Jetta.
Quote from: ifcar on July 29, 2010, 06:39:30 PM
Corolla's got way better power-to-weight than that Jetta.
They supposedly lopped like 150 lbs off of the weight of the new one, though it'll still be quite a bit heavier than the Corolla.
Quote from: MX793 on July 29, 2010, 06:40:31 PM
They supposedly lopped like 150 lbs off of the weight of the new one, though it'll still be quite a bit heavier than the Corolla.
And have quite a bit less power.
I think Subaru is 100% making the right product and strategic business calls. They've got a very loyal fan base, have moderate volumes, and was one of the few if not only auto makers that didn't feel the recession sales crunch. Their products have made vast leaps in refinement the last few generations.
Quote from: GoCougs on July 29, 2010, 06:55:19 PM
I think Subaru is 100% making the right product and strategic business calls. They've got a very loyal fan base, have moderate volumes, and was one of the few if not only auto makers that didn't feel the recession sales crunch. Their products have made vast leaps in refinement the last few generations.
That's pretty much my argument with the Impreza: It was similar enough that it didn't alienate me, but it was new (read: bland) enough that Subaru found a way to attract beige buyers who might be turned off by the Toyotas of the world for whatever reason. It's a win-win for Subes.
I'd take the new gen (un)impreza over the previous gen cars on build quality alone... I always loved the old 2.5rs and the bugeye wrxs, but damn those thing had some build quality issues
Quote from: the Teuton on July 29, 2010, 06:08:28 PM
Fundamentally, you're right. My dad's Legacy is FWD. It's just fine -- and it probably has better steering feel than my Impreza ever did.
But Subaru has spent 15 years to carve out this niche as an AWD manufacturer, no, the AWD manufacturer. To throw that away for a quick buck really would make it into just another Toyota.
And yeah, my boss said the Jetta was going to have drum brakes in the rear. I'm sure he gets flooded with press releases, so I'm going to trust him for the moment.
In this day and age, with CAFE and people wanting good gas mileage a FWD Impreza makes sense. They could get a lot more people in the door by confusing them with talk of great gas mileage and available "award winning symmetric all-wheel-drive". Outside of the snow belt there's no reason to buy a Subaru, and I would bet a map of their sales would reflect that.
Truthfully though.... if Subaru really wants to make a statement.... they could go RWD on all their 2WD models. I mean the engine/tranny is situated the right way and that would REALLY make a statement to enthusiasts. They could bill themselves as the working man's BMW.... but that's just a pipe dream....
Quote from: sportyaccordy on July 30, 2010, 09:25:52 AM
In this day and age, with CAFE and people wanting good gas mileage a FWD Impreza makes sense. They could get a lot more people in the door by confusing them with talk of great gas mileage and available "award winning symmetric all-wheel-drive". Outside of the snow belt there's no reason to buy a Subaru, and I would bet a map of their sales would reflect that.
Truthfully though.... if Subaru really wants to make a statement.... they could go RWD on all their 2WD models. I mean the engine/tranny is situated the right way and that would REALLY make a statement to enthusiasts. They could bill themselves as the working man's BMW.... but that's just a pipe dream....
Couple of issues...
First, a FWD Legacy or Impreza is a very tough sell vs. an Accord or Civic; even with AWD, plus the cars already get good mpg.
Second, AWD has plenty of advantages in wet climates as even moderate-powered FWD vehicles will easily lose traction.
Third, automakers don't make money selling cars to enthusiasts, and the relative few who are new car buying Subaru enthusiasts are all about the AWD/rally car thing.
Quote from: GoCougs on July 30, 2010, 11:00:16 AM
Couple of issues...
Third, automakers don't make money selling cars to enthusiasts, and the relative few who are new car buying Subaru enthusiasts are all about the AWD/rally car thing.
I'm sorry but this isn't quite right.
Quote from: GoCougs on July 30, 2010, 11:00:16 AM
Couple of issues...
First, a FWD Legacy or Impreza is a very tough sell vs. an Accord or Civic; even with AWD, plus the cars already get good mpg.
Second, AWD has plenty of advantages in wet climates as even moderate-powered FWD vehicles will easily lose traction.
Third, automakers don't make money selling cars to enthusiasts, and the relative few who are new car buying Subaru enthusiasts are all about the AWD/rally car thing.
1- Newer legacies are selling to people who would normally buy Camries or Accords.
2- I agree, but most people would be happy with better mpg than a little bit more traction. (For the record I've NEVER spun the tires in my current Subie, even on gravel.)
3- By making "enthusiast" cars, it ups the image of the entire brand. (ie WRX, SHO) Even though most buyers will buy the cheaper versions.
I think though that the majority of Subaru drivers like something a little quirkier but runs well. Not really the "rally thing"....
Quote from: GoCougs on July 30, 2010, 11:00:16 AM
Couple of issues...
First, a FWD Legacy or Impreza is a very tough sell vs. an Accord or Civic; even with AWD, plus the cars already get good mpg.
Second, AWD has plenty of advantages in wet climates as even moderate-powered FWD vehicles will easily lose traction.
Third, automakers don't make money selling cars to enthusiasts, and the relative few who are new car buying Subaru enthusiasts are all about the AWD/rally car thing.
It could just be a different avenue to take. And outside of snowy climates, unless you are on a racetrack there's no driving situation within the limits of the law that would benefit from the traction of AWD besides maybe merging onto a highway in the wet. Beyond that, an AWD vehicle will be just as prone to lose traction in a turn or braking.
Other than that, I agree, but I think it would be cool to have a cheap RWD car available. Subarus already give up space in the nose and cabin for their deisng.... might as well make something of it beyond the AWD thing.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on July 30, 2010, 01:48:41 PM
And outside of snowy climates, unless you are on a racetrack there's no driving situation within the limits of the law that would benefit from the traction of AWD besides maybe merging onto a highway in the wet.
-1
I can't tell you how many times I've spun the tires from a stop in my van. I've almost wished I had AWD on that thing because it's a NOTICEABLE difference in the Subaru.
Quote from: 68_427 on July 30, 2010, 11:04:19 AM
I'm sorry but this isn't quite right.
What's not right about that?
There's no money to be made off of enthusiasts. Enthusiasts are a tiny part of the market.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on July 30, 2010, 03:24:35 PM
-1
I can't tell you how many times I've spun the tires from a stop in my van. I've almost wished I had AWD on that thing because it's a NOTICEABLE difference in the Subaru.
Yeah, there's no solution for losing traction in a straight line.
I've never owned an AWD car. Have I driven AWD in snow? Yes. It's quite useful. But I've gone 8 years with 2WD, without incident, yes, with some shoveling, and in some horrible conditions. If I had money for a winter car, I'd get one that's AWD. But as an only car? For me, it presents a compromise with which I am not comfortable.
Quote from: thecarnut on July 30, 2010, 04:46:42 PM
What's not right about that?
There's no money to be made off of enthusiasts. Enthusiasts are a tiny part of the market.
I was talking about the part he stated most people buying new Subarus are doing it because of rally or something.
Quote from: 68_427 on July 30, 2010, 06:39:13 PM
I was talking about the part he stated most people buying new Subarus are doing it because of rally or something.
"the relative few who are new car buying Subaru enthusiasts are all about the AWD/rally car thing. "
Subaru enthusiasts probably buy it for the AWD.
Quote from: thecarnut on July 30, 2010, 07:20:21 PM
"the relative few who are new car buying Subaru enthusiasts are all about the AWD/rally car thing. "
Subaru enthusiasts probably buy it for the AWD.
But not all people buying new Subarus are Subaru enthusiasts. IE My mom wasn't. She bought hers because she liked how it looks. The AWD was just a plus. She is now a Subaru enthusiast though.
Quote from: Raza on July 30, 2010, 05:42:00 PM
Yeah, there's no solution for losing traction in a straight line.
I've never owned an AWD car. Have I driven AWD in snow? Yes. It's quite useful. But I've gone 8 years with 2WD, without incident, yes, with some shoveling, and in some horrible conditions. If I had money for a winter car, I'd get one that's AWD. But as an only car? For me, it presents a compromise with which I am not comfortable.
What if it was this??
(http://www.ssip.net/upload/porsche-959-white-3_91.jpg)
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on July 31, 2010, 05:01:23 AM
What if it was this??
(http://www.ssip.net/upload/porsche-959-white-3_91.jpg)
As much as I love the 959, can't beat one of these
(http://newbeetle.org/forums/attachments/photos-other-rides/48815d1221906514-evzbugs-1996-porsche-911-carrera-cabriolet-993rs.jpg)
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on July 31, 2010, 05:01:23 AM
What if it was this??
(http://www.ssip.net/upload/porsche-959-white-3_91.jpg)
There are rare examples of performance AWD done well, but you'll mostly find that they counter the boring-ness of AWD by moving the engine aft or with loads of electronic trickery to make it act more like a RWD car.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=22589.msg1371407#msg1371407 date=1280755517
There are rare examples of performance AWD done well, but you'll mostly find that they counter the boring-ness of AWD by moving the engine aft or with loads of electronic trickery to make it act more like a RWD car.
Like Lambos. They are AWD but they are so RWD biased that the front wheels only take on 30% of the power.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=22589.msg1371407#msg1371407 date=1280755517
There are rare examples of performance AWD done well, but you'll mostly find that they counter the boring-ness of AWD by moving the engine aft or with loads of electronic trickery to make it act more like a RWD car.
I'm sorry, but can't you defeat "stoginess" with proper gearing and locking diffs?