RWD Coupe vs AWD Sedan vs FWD Hot Hatch

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by Voodoo Rufus

I'll play devil's advocate for a bit. The choice of car should be based on what objective you want it to fill. Utility, commute, fun, passenger carrying, weather conditions in which you live, etc. Or a combination of all. In that case, that's where Subarus shine. I wouldn't consider the WRX / STI as having a particularly high CG, esp compared to other cars in the same market. It will be lower than I-4 or V-6 powered cars. Heck, even Subaru markets that as part of the boxer advantage. The understeer can be largely resolved with a fatter rear swaybar (cheap enough), and 2009+ models have a lot less than their predecessors because of stiffer rear springs. If you're more skillful, chuck it into a corner to upset the chassis and hold your drift. It just won't be as easy to induce as the 86 twins. Steering feel, add better bushings. Maintenance shouldn't be any worse than anything else, aside from maybe more frequent oil changes (I found 5k on my old WRX to be just fine, and ran 8k with no issues). Lesser mileage compared to other 4/5 door sedans, true, but you can still get 24-27MPG highway. 1 or 2 more if you're tuned with a TBE.

The bad news, everything I've read lately (mostly from IWSTI.com) indicates 2015 for the next STI. I wish it would come out this year.

AWD sedan: go anywhere in any weather, do anything, handle well and go fast while carrying all your buds with you at the same time.

For the record, I've driven the FRS, BRZ, multiple WRX and STI models and years, and ridden in a Focus ST. And I like Subarus, BRZ and STI especially. They just have a unique lovable character.

Haha I'm ready with my own devil's advocate style post.

Yeah I definitely agree with the first part of what you said. How good a car is depends on what you want to use it for. The STI hatch offers a lot more practicality than most of its competitors. The problem with it (and the reason I sold mine) was that it was a "jack of all trades, master of none". I had room in my garage for a second car, so I could afford to have a less compromised project car (FR-S), while having a sporty/practical daily driver (GTI).

A couple of counterpoints on the STI:

- CG is higher than pretty much every other high-performance car out there (Evo X, Cayman, 370z, Miata, FR-S/BRZ, Corvette, S2000, etc.)

- Understeer -- a thicker RSB can help resolve the steady-state understeer (along with an aggressive alignment and suspension), but the STI will never carry speed on corner entry the way a balanced RWD sports car will (weight distribution), and the power-on understeer is an issue for which there's no cheap fix (drivetrain layout).

- Steering feel -- steering rack bushings helped with the slop, but still a far ways off from the feel that you'd get from a Cayman or Miata (or even the twins), for example. The rack itself is pretty slow as well. I hear the aftermarket Q-rack worked wonders, but it was pretty expensive and had its downsides (lose VDC).

- Maintenance -- Synthetic oil changes every 3750 miles. Tires have to be replaced in 4's and are expensive in 245/40/18 (compared with 215/45/17 in an FR-S, for example). Brake pads and rotors are pretty expensive. Overall the STI comparatively costs more to track than, say, an S2000 or Miata or FR-S.

- Gas mileage -- on my daily commute, I'm getting 28 mpg with the FR-S, compared with 19 mpg I got in my STI. Over 15,000 miles/year, that's $1000/year extra on gas alone.

I should also mention the seats in my STI were awful compared with the recaros in the Evo or the base seats in the twins.

The STI is pretty good at many things (fast, sporty, comfortable, practical) and I'd probably still have mine if I could only have one car. But if it's possible to have a dedicated sports car, that's the route I'd suggest.

[BioRage]

Have you test drove them all?

RWD Coupes:

Scion FRS/Subaru BRZ - YES!
Hyundai Genesis Coupe - Heavy, but fast.

AWD Sedans:

Subaru WRX - This is Subarus money maker, save up to get an STi. That's my regret with my 03 WRX :P
Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart - No.

FWD Hot Hatches:

Volkswagen GTI - New ones are alright.
Mazdaspeed 3 - These lowered with wheels = sexy.

[Voodoo Rufus]

DarkSunrise, I don't disagree on any particular point except the oil changes. I got my oil analyzed every change and I was up to 7500 miles with a lot of oil life left on my old Rex.

AWD cars (unless you have a 911 or something) are all compromises. The price you pay for more propulsive traction.

If you can have two vehicles, go for a dedicated sports car for sure. Especially if you want to track anything.

[Trashed675]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

- Gas mileage -- on my daily commute, I'm getting 28 mpg with the FR-S, compared with 19 mpg I got in my STI. Over 15,000 miles/year, that's $1000/year extra on gas alone.

One of the main reasons i didn't buy a nice used STI. Every time i hop in my brothers 09 STI, i see the mpg average on the center clock/mileage thing and its vary rarely above 17mpg, while my FRS hardly ever drops below 30(i've seen 36 while driving along hwy 101 at 50-60mph). He does have a few bolt ons and a tune so he's at about 300hp at the wheels, but still.

Also insurance for a 25 year old male with an STI, no thanks, the FRS was barely more then my tC.

If youre looking for AWD and practical, you should look at a used Audi A4 2.0t. Thats what i was cross shopping the FRS with, MUCH nicer interior, same engine as a GTI, so modding is easy. Just my 2c.

[infinite012]

Originally Posted by Trashed675

Also insurance for a 25 year old male with an STI, no thanks, the FRS was barely more then my tC.

The insurance on my 2008 STI was $3 cheaper than on the BRZ. I'm a 25 year old male.

Figure that one out.

[Caustik]

Hey guys, thanks for all the input so far! @BioRage: I've only test driven the FRS so far. @Voodoo and Dark sunrise, I probably will be going with a single car at the moment. I wish I could have a DD and a dedicated sports/weekend car but at this point I think that's out of the realm of possibility.

I think I can eliminate the ralliart from the list. Some of you have mentioned the problems of RWD + snow. Fortunately winters in the STL area aren't too terrible, but regardless something I should keep in mind.

[BioRage]

Originally Posted by Caustik

Hey guys, thanks for all the input so far! @BioRage: I've only test driven the FRS so far. @Voodoo and Dark sunrise, I probably will be going with a single car ATM. I wish I could have a DD and a dedicated sports/weekend car but at this point I think that's out of the realm of possibility.

You should test drive them all and see what you like.

The the reasltic factors kick in:

A) Are you single?
B) Do you have kids or expecting kids?
C) How long do you see yourself with a new car?
--> Plan on leasing, or buying it out, and perhaps getting a new car down the road.

4DR's are more practical than 2DR's obviously. If you drive people around often, etc than I would suggest a 4DR car.

If you plan on getting something else down the road, I would just get something more family oriented now, or a sports car now, and do the other down the road.

TO MANY FACTORS TO NAME!~

TL;DR GO TEST DRIVE EM ALL!

[DanoFA20]

only neg w the wrx is the gear box is long and floppy and the seats dont hold you in unfortunately

[Voodoo Rufus]

Yes, test drive. It's the only way to really find out what you like. Easy enough, too. The Subaru dealer I went to didn't even copy my license to let me drive their BRZ and STI.

[86'd]

I'll play devil's advocate to your devil's advocate!

I think it's more fair to compare the regular WRX to the twins, for no better reason other than I own one.

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

A couple of counterpoints on the STI:

- CG is higher than pretty much every other high-performance car out there (Evo X, Cayman, 370z, Miata, FR-S/BRZ, Corvette, S2000, etc.)

Eh. CG doesn't really mean anything on the street. But if it did the S2000 had a horrible CD of .33 and the Miata even worse at .38.

The WRX has a .36 CD.

- Understeer -- a thicker RSB can help resolve the steady-state understeer (along with an aggressive alignment and suspension), but the STI will never carry speed on corner entry the way a balanced RWD sports car will (weight distribution), and the power-on understeer is an issue for which there's no cheap fix (drivetrain layout).

Can't argue here, other than for 97% of driving/commuting this doesn't really come into play though. If you're tracking, it depends on the track. I really want to see a higher horsepower BRZ compete with some of the more elite cars on a track like Nurburgring. You may not get the STI to feel like a BRZ, but that doesn't mean the STI won't objectively handle better.

- Steering feel -- steering rack bushings helped with the slop, but still a far ways off from the feel that you'd get from a Cayman or Miata (or even the twins), for example. The rack itself is pretty slow as well. I hear the aftermarket Q-rack worked wonders, but it was pretty expensive and had its downsides (lose VDC).

If you're coming from a Prius (96 Accord) the WRX feels like a race car, if you're coming from an Elise then it's sloppy. The steering feel in the WRX isn't bad. It's not as weighty as I like and the FR-S/BRZ's is better, but again that's the whole point of the twins.

- Maintenance -- Synthetic oil changes every 3750 miles. Tires have to be replaced in 4's and are expensive in 245/40/18 (compared with 215/45/17 in an FR-S, for example). Brake pads and rotors are pretty expensive. Overall the STI comparatively costs more to track than, say, an S2000 or Miata or FR-S.

WRX oil change: 3750 for extreme conditions; 7500 for regular. Yes, I know. You need to be a bit more mindful with the turbo, check the oil and coolant a bit more often. I'm splitting the difference changing my oil around 4-5k, topping off when necessary. If you're not doing this with the FR-S/BRZ you should. In short, I'd probably do the same for any car and when I do usually things turn out OK.

Again I'm comparing a WRX, maintenance is about the same for both except for later in the car's life. You're right on the tires; but if the difference in tread is that great that you'd need to change one, you're probably replacing all of the tires anyway. Clutch will probably go out faster (80-100k) in the WRX and well, that's all I can think of. Oh and timing belt needs to be eventually changed. The FA20 uses a chain.

- Gas mileage -- on my daily commute, I'm getting 28 mpg with the FR-S, compared with 19 mpg I got in my STI. Over 15,000 miles/year, that's $1000/year extra on gas alone.

I only drive 10k a year and get 20mpg average in my WRX. That's only $512 a year more with gas @$4 a gallon.

I say only because to me it's not a big deal, but $42 a month can be a lot for some people.

I should also mention the seats in my STI were awful compared with the recaros in the Evo or the base seats in the twins.

The STI is pretty good at many things (fast, sporty, comfortable, practical) and I'd probably still have mine if I could only have one car. But if it's possible to have a dedicated sports car, that's the route I'd suggest.

Eh. I took out the "lumbar" support in my WRX and I'm sunken in a bit more. No the seats aren't the greatest but they are a good mix of comfort and sport. As much as I loved my S2000 seats I don't know if I can go back to them; the position just hurt my back too much.

The WRX/STI are great cars. But they are practical sedans, that happen to handle well and are fast. They are the driver's car for the segment.

The twins are meant to be driver's cars period.

One last point. Speed/Mod-ability. You can put a little over $1k (Cobb AP/Downpipe) and be Stage 2 on a WRX and make close to 300whp. Add an E85 conversion and you're adding another 50hp. Max, $4k. With a turbo kit on the twins you're looking at $5k+ at least.

If you're trying to get the WRX to handle and feel like the twins, it just ain't going to happen.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by 86'd

I'll play devil's advocate to your devil's advocate!

I think it's more fair to compare the regular WRX to the twins, for no better reason other than I own one.




Eh. CG doesn't really mean anything on the street. But if it did the S2000 had a horrible CD of .33 and the Miata even worse at .38.

The WRX has a .36 CD.



Can't argue here, other than for 97% of driving/commuting this doesn't really come into play though. If you're tracking, it depends on the track. I really want to see a higher horsepower BRZ compete with some of the more elite cars on a track like Nurburgring. You may not get the STI to feel like a BRZ, but that doesn't mean the STI won't objectively handle better.



If you're coming from a Prius (96 Accord) the WRX feels like a race car, if you're coming from an Elise then it's sloppy. The steering feel in the WRX isn't bad. It's not as weighty as I like and the FR-S/BRZ's is better, but again that's the whole point of the twins.



WRX oil change: 3750 for extreme conditions; 7500 for regular. Yes, I know. You need to be a bit more mindful with the turbo, check the oil and coolant a bit more often. I'm splitting the difference changing my oil around 4-5k, topping off when necessary. If you're not doing this with the FR-S/BRZ you should. In short, I'd probably do the same for any car and when I do usually things turn out OK.

Again I'm comparing a WRX, maintenance is about the same for both except for later in the car's life. You're right on the tires; but if the difference in tread is that great that you'd need to change one, you're probably replacing all of the tires anyway. Clutch will probably go out faster (80-100k) in the WRX and well, that's all I can think of. Oh and timing belt needs to be eventually changed. The FA20 uses a chain.



I only drive 10k a year and get 20mpg average in my WRX. That's only $512 a year more with gas @$4 a gallon.

I say only because to me it's not a big deal, but $42 a month can be a lot for some people.



Eh. I took out the "lumbar" support in my WRX and I'm sunken in a bit more. No the seats aren't the greatest but they are a good mix of comfort and sport. As much as I loved my S2000 seats I don't know if I can go back to them; the position just hurt my back too much.

The WRX/STI are great cars. But they are practical sedans, that happen to handle well and are fast. They are the driver's car for the segment.

The twins are meant to be driver's cars period.

One last point. Speed/Mod-ability. You can put a little over $1k (Cobb AP/Downpipe) and be Stage 2 on a WRX and make close to 300whp. Add an E85 conversion and you're adding another 50hp. Max, $4k. With a turbo kit on the twins you're looking at $5k+ at least.

If you're trying to get the WRX to handle and feel like the twins, it just ain't going to happen.

center of gravity has nothing to do with the drag.

there are other things that i dont really agree with but a lot of its personal. i find the wrx to be boring for any given powerpoint. the gti is probably the best of the bunch as far as being a car goes. the frs is probably the best as far as being sporty goes. all the others fall somewhere in between.

[86'd]

Originally Posted by fatoni

center of gravity has nothing to do with the drag.

there are other things that i dont really agree with but a lot of its personal. i find the wrx to be boring for any given powerpoint. the gti is probably the best of the bunch as far as being a car goes. the frs is probably the best as far as being sporty goes. all the others fall somewhere in between.

Wow. My bad. I totally read CD instead of CG in the quoted post.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by 86'd

Wow. My bad. I totally read CD instead of CG in the quoted post.

its all good. sometimes i use the cd drive to hold a glass of whiskey while im on my laptop so i totally get it.

[DarkSunrise]

Yep, the STI was a fine car for what it was, and I had a lot of good times in mine. Just important to know the downsides, especially if serious about buying one.

In addition to the WRX, I'd strongly suggest test-driving the Evo X GSR. One dealer offered to sell me one for about $31k. More than the WRX, but starting to become comparable. You do lose some practicality with the sedan-only design and limited trunk though.