As most of you likely don't yet know - the RSX was involved in an accident last week. A young couple in an older Honda Accord failed to stop (failed to slow down) for a stop-sign, and hit the front corner of my car as I was going through the intersection (I had a green-light at the time). And to make things interesting, while I was still stuck in my car (drivers door can't be opened anymore) they got out of the accord, tore off the license plate, and ran on foot. So anyways - I've been car shopping lately, and have pretty much narrowed it down to the final two, and am looking for more opinions just to make sure I didn't go and forget something or anything like that.
So..., 2008 Subaru Impreza WRX 5-door (http://www.subaru.ca/SubaruData.aspx?WebPageID=6722&WebSiteID=282&CompareType=S&CarIds=349&Category=AllSpecCategory) VS 2008 Audi A4 2.0T Avant Quattro (http://www.audi.ca/audi/ca/en2/new_cars/Audi_A4/A4_Avant/Model_Features.html). Discuss!
Pictures..
Audi: (http://www.audi.ca/etc/medialib/cms4imp/audi2/aoa/product/A4AvantMY07/crops/exterior.Par.0035.Image.jpg) (Mine would likely be red though)
WRX: (http://s2.desktopmachine.com/pics/Subaru_Impreza-WRX_70_1280x800.jpg)
Adam just got a Subaru Impreza and hates it. I think he put it something like "A $15,000 car with $15,000 worth of engine and AWD". Fit and finish is lacking for the price of the car. The Impreza really is just an entry level car with a premium price tag attached. The Fifth Gear TV show in the Europe disliked it as well.
Discuss? Opinion?
Okay, import a fifteen-year-old Skyline GT-R. You'll have $10k+ left over for modifications.
That's a pretty cool choice.
What would you say the most important features of a vehicle are?
Or maybe this one...
(http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//media/roadtests/roadtest/08.subaru.impreza.wrx.sti/08.subaru.impreza.wrx.sti.f34.1.500.jpg)
(http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//media/roadtests/roadtest/08.subaru.impreza.wrx.sti/08.subaru.impreza.wrx.sti.r34.1.500.jpg)
And Mr. A. I'm going to not answer your question, as I was kinda hoping to get replies talking about things other than the things I've been focusing on for the last week. I do already have my mind mostly made up - but its interesting to hear new things and its not too late to change the decision until I've signed a lot of paperwork.
Is that the new STi 5-door? I haven't bothered keeping up with how the newest Subarus look, but those look like STi wheels.
Volvo XC70 (http://www.volvocanada.com/Showroom/2008/XC70/ModelHome.aspx?lng=2) (or even cooler, a "Volvord (http://www.telusplanet.net/public/gilesij/Volvord/)"; a Volvo with a Ford 302 in it). The XC70 has AWD, heated seats, and better ground clearance than the other two you're looking at. The Volvord is cheaper and has more power, although it would take quite a bit to build.
Hummer H3 (http://www.gmcanada.com/gm/english/vehicles/hummer/h3/showroom/summary), Saab 9-7X (http://www.gmcanada.com/gm/english/vehicles/saab/97x/showroom/summary), or Chevrolet Tahoe (http://www.gmcanada.com/gm/english/vehicles/chevrolet/tahoe/showroom/summary). They all have decent engines, proper 4WD, and lots of room. None of them will make people call you a riceboy.
Volkswagen Passat Wagon (http://www.vw.ca/vwca/models/0,,51,00.html), pretty much a natural match-up against the Audi.
Why are you looking at station wagons? Why are you looking at AWD? Why are you looking at turbocharged cars? The answers to these questions would steer our response. Otherwise you're just gonna hear, "Audi sucks! Get the Sube!", "No it doesn't, Sube sucks! Get the Audi!"
I guess, are you asking us what we would buy, or are you asking us to suggest cars for you to buy, or are you asking us to poke holes in the cars you've already picked?
Yes - thats the new STI.
That Volvo looks kinda interesting - the fact that it comes standard with skid plates would seem to indicate that its at least semi-decent off road.
As to the other questions... I'm looking at wagon's because I'd prefer a car over a SUV, but still need to be able to carry enough cargo to go mountain-biking, or LAN partying, or whatever else I decide I want to do (so - it should fit an office chair or mountain-bike inside). While the choices I narrowed it down to happen to all be AWD, my restriction is only that it's not FWD. Same thing with the turbo's - just happened that the selection of cars that fit my other requirements happened to have turbo's, my power requirements are only that it's more than the RSX / fun to drive.
And the final question (the important one) - I'm more looking for people to poke holes in, or point out things I missed (good or bad things) about the cars I've narrowed it down to. Volvo is the only brand I hadn't already checked out - I'm fairly familiar with what my options could be, and I'm just trying to learn as much as possible about the few that made my short list.
And here's a pic of the RSX, if anyone's interested.
Quote from: Cova on December 05, 2007, 11:59:27 AM
And here's a pic of the RSX, if anyone's interested.
That's a big ouchie.
Heh, Car and Driver (I think) did an offroad comparison ten or so years ago - the cars ranged from a Volvo XC70 (lowest clearance) to Ford Explorer (highest clearance). They took all five or six vehicles they were comparing through a proper offroad course, and the Volvo never got stuck.
Cargo capacity? Trucks win. Chevy Canyon with 4x4 and a removable box top or lid. Heated cargo capacity? SUVs, minivans, or full-length vans. Fun to drive? Highly subjective, so impossible to say what wins. Are you looking for large cargo capacity while maintaining seating, or is it okay for seats to have to be folded?
As for other large-cargo-capacity non-SUV/non-minivan non-FWD vehicles... Dodge Magnum? Caliber AWD? Mercedes wagons? Volkswagen Passat/Jetta wagons? Subaru Legacy Wagon? Subaru Forester? Lotus Elise with a motorcycle trailer (there's a Smart car that pulls a motorcycle trailer in St. Albert)?
If you were willing to buy and import from the US and you're okay with folding seats down to get your cargo capacity and you want something that's been touted as "fun-to-drive", you could buy and import a Volkswagen R32 from the States? They're about US$35k...
Holes in the Audi:
- Audi quality was still questionable as late as three years ago
- Audi interiors are known to be somewhat cramped for tall people
- Pretty high price
- Might have high cost of repairs (I don't know, but it's built in Europe as are the parts AFAIK, which means shipping costs get added to parts costs)
- Are you sure you're able to fit a mountain bike inside the back of it? They're not *that* big
Holes in the WRX:
- The aforementioned revelation that the drivetrain is awesome but that Subaru seems to have skimped on touchy-feely interior bits
- Tiny hatch area (does it even fit an office chair?)
- Bouncy ride
- Still pretty pricey
- High cost of repairs from what I've read
By the way, did the other person's insurance company officially write of your car?
So what car are you deciding on?
If I were to redo my purchase I would get an Audi A3... or look at getting something with a bit more features and a bit less hype.
Lets put it this way the Subaru is a decent car but for 23K that should be maxed out without turbo, the snow and AWD do not mix unless you have traction control (This is true).
Let me explain how that works, it is usually 60/40 there is either an auto clutch to make it 50/50 or in the STI it is a knob. So if the front tires are spinning and the back ones have grip, for example going around a corner when coming out of my neighborhood... you now have a rear wheel car, which is nice to have in the summer but on hell of a bitch to handle on the road when it is slippery.
Positives for the AWD is on the highway @%&#ing thing sticks like glue, I was doing 120 over a brigde that was icy the only thing that caused the car to slip was the massive wind gusts. Now my rant is from the 07 Impreza not the 08. From what I read the new one is better but still is overpriced for what you get.
I just looked at the Audi A3 it would be probably 5K more then my Subaru, which was 29,500K but it is also a solid car. So I think after the winter is over, I might convince my wife that the A3 is a much better car or just sell the Impreza... anyone want to buy an 07 Impreza Special Edition, slightly used (8 months or so)... only 18,000 km :D
Quote from: Adams on December 05, 2007, 04:16:38 PM
the snow and AWD do not mix unless you have traction control (This is true).
Let me explain how that works, it is usually 60/40 there is either an auto clutch to make it 50/50 or in the STI it is a knob. So if the front tires are spinning and the back ones have grip, for example going around a corner when coming out of my neighborhood... you now have a rear wheel car, which is nice to have in the summer but on hell of a bitch to handle on the road when it is slippery.
I'm trying to imagine what you're describing here. Do you mean that you were traveling in a straight line, then tried to turn but couldn't because your fronts lost traction (aka your car understeered)? Or do you mean that you were stopped at a corner, then hit the gas and tried to turn but the fronts lost traction and the rear swung out?
For the record, my Suburban works beautifully on the icy roads. As long as I leave it in "Auto 4WD", it reacts exactly how I want it to. I can get it to slide sideways or spin out, but only when I'm *really* trying. If I drive the Suburban the way I would a non-4WD vehicle, I'll probably never slide or spin out. Of course, it's human nature to drive faster when a vehicle isn't exhibiting traction problems...
Quote from: Adams on December 05, 2007, 04:16:38 PM
the snow and AWD do not mix unless you have traction control (This is true).
Uhh..., regardless of traction control, AWD will be better in snow than FWD or RWD. In fact, just comparing generic drive systems (not any specific vehicle) and with no fancy electronic anything (so just the drive system, no TCS, etc.) on snow, AWD will be the best, followed by RWD, and FWD is the worst.
Quote from: Adams on December 05, 2007, 04:16:38 PM
Let me explain how that works, it is usually 60/40 there is either an auto clutch to make it 50/50 or in the STI it is a knob. So if the front tires are spinning and the back ones have grip, for example going around a corner when coming out of my neighborhood... you now have a rear wheel car, which is nice to have in the summer but on hell of a bitch to handle on the road when it is slippery.
If considering a standard subaru, you have a limited-slip center diff (front/rear power split) and just regular open diff's at the front and rear. So - in a situation where you apply too much power for the road condition, power will be split front/rear as evenly as possible (regardless of 40/60 or 50/50 split), and 1 front tire will spin, and 1 rear tire will spin. In a corner weight would shift to the outside, so the inside tires would be the ones spinning.
In the STI it's limited-slip diffs front, center, and rear. If you apply too much power, all 4 wheels will spin.
And of course a traction-control-system will totally change what I just said, as it will apply individual brake power to any spinning wheels. That will cause the diff to send more power to wheels with traction - if they spin too TCS may intervene and reduce your throttle input.
Quote from: Adams on December 05, 2007, 04:16:38 PM
I just looked at the Audi A3 it would be probably 5K more then my Subaru, which was 29,500K but it is also a solid car. So I think after the winter is over, I might convince my wife that the A3 is a much better car or just sell the Impreza... anyone want to buy an 07 Impreza Special Edition, slightly used (8 months or so)... only 18,000 km :D
Unfortunately the A3 is only available in AWD if you get the 3.2L engine - aka the S3, which is priced in the 55K range. Also, with the bigger engine and AWD it is only available in automatic transmission..
Quote from: Thorin on December 05, 2007, 04:53:50 PM
Quote from: Adams on December 05, 2007, 04:16:38 PM
the snow and AWD do not mix unless you have traction control (This is true).
Let me explain how that works, it is usually 60/40 there is either an auto clutch to make it 50/50 or in the STI it is a knob. So if the front tires are spinning and the back ones have grip, for example going around a corner when coming out of my neighborhood... you now have a rear wheel car, which is nice to have in the summer but on hell of a bitch to handle on the road when it is slippery.
I'm trying to imagine what you're describing here. Do you mean that you were traveling in a straight line, then tried to turn but couldn't because your fronts lost traction (aka your car understeered)? Or do you mean that you were stopped at a corner, then hit the gas and tried to turn but the fronts lost traction and the rear swung out?
For the record, my Suburban works beautifully on the icy roads. As long as I leave it in "Auto 4WD", it reacts exactly how I want it to. I can get it to slide sideways or spin out, but only when I'm *really* trying. If I drive the Suburban the way I would a non-4WD vehicle, I'll probably never slide or spin out. Of course, it's human nature to drive faster when a vehicle isn't exhibiting traction problems...
The second one I stop to turn on to another road and the back-end will swing out from the front tires. The only saving grace is that the front end will pull the back end into place. True, but I normally try not to drive too fast but it seems either the tires or the awd cause the car to act out of character.
Quote from: Cova on December 05, 2007, 06:08:35 PM
Quote from: Adams on December 05, 2007, 04:16:38 PM
the snow and AWD do not mix unless you have traction control (This is true).
Uhh..., regardless of traction control, AWD will be better in snow than FWD or RWD. In fact, just comparing generic drive systems (not any specific vehicle) and with no fancy electronic anything (so just the drive system, no TCS, etc.) on snow, AWD will be the best, followed by RWD, and FWD is the worst.
Quote from: Adams on December 05, 2007, 04:16:38 PM
Let me explain how that works, it is usually 60/40 there is either an auto clutch to make it 50/50 or in the STI it is a knob. So if the front tires are spinning and the back ones have grip, for example going around a corner when coming out of my neighborhood... you now have a rear wheel car, which is nice to have in the summer but on hell of a bitch to handle on the road when it is slippery.
If considering a standard subaru, you have a limited-slip center diff (front/rear power split) and just regular open diff's at the front and rear. So - in a situation where you apply too much power for the road condition, power will be split front/rear as evenly as possible (regardless of 40/60 or 50/50 split), and 1 front tire will spin, and 1 rear tire will spin. In a corner weight would shift to the outside, so the inside tires would be the ones spinning.
In the STI it's limited-slip diffs front, center, and rear. If you apply too much power, all 4 wheels will spin.
And of course a traction-control-system will totally change what I just said, as it will apply individual brake power to any spinning wheels. That will cause the diff to send more power to wheels with traction - if they spin too TCS may intervene and reduce your throttle input.
Quote from: Adams on December 05, 2007, 04:16:38 PM
I just looked at the Audi A3 it would be probably 5K more then my Subaru, which was 29,500K but it is also a solid car. So I think after the winter is over, I might convince my wife that the A3 is a much better car or just sell the Impreza... anyone want to buy an 07 Impreza Special Edition, slightly used (8 months or so)... only 18,000 km :D
Unfortunately the A3 is only available in AWD if you get the 3.2L engine - aka the S3, which is priced in the 55K range. Also, with the bigger engine and AWD it is only available in automatic transmission..
Ok, ok let me back up the AWD is very nice to have and it seems to work very well when I am on the highway / freeway or when I am taking larger turns but sometimes during the stop and go traffic when I turn left or right I seem to loose control of the back end. I was playing with it last night it takes a bit of getting use to but now I can control it and compensate for it.
Ok here is the real reason not to get a Subaru, I had a tire puncture about 4 months after I got my car, I didn't want to buy 4 new tires so I called up Subaru to see what they could do. I was told the tire would cost 475 dollars, I said pardon... I only want one tire, and no rim. Yep it will be 475 for that tire and it won't be in for 4 weeks... Now I held my temper and said you mean you don't keep any in stock? Nope we are a small shop she replied and said that they don't keep a lot of parts in stock. I asked how long she would guess it would take for a part for the engine would take? About the same time frame. Now I called around and found really there was no price difference for those tires anywhere and they seem to be very expensive. I am just wondering how much the STi tires would cost? Oh and how I got the puncture, damn construction by my house at least I got the construction company to pay for it. Total price $509.00 to mount and balance the tire.
So you would take a RWD car over a FWD car in the winter? I always thought it was better to pull the car then push the car? Well I guess I have learnt something. :D
Oh and the (This is true) part was supposed to have a question mark... so (this is true?)
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 08:17:39 AM
Quote from: Thorin on December 05, 2007, 04:53:50 PM
Quote from: Adams on December 05, 2007, 04:16:38 PM
the snow and AWD do not mix unless you have traction control (This is true).
Let me explain how that works, it is usually 60/40 there is either an auto clutch to make it 50/50 or in the STI it is a knob. So if the front tires are spinning and the back ones have grip, for example going around a corner when coming out of my neighborhood... you now have a rear wheel car, which is nice to have in the summer but on hell of a bitch to handle on the road when it is slippery.
I'm trying to imagine what you're describing here. Do you mean that you were traveling in a straight line, then tried to turn but couldn't because your fronts lost traction (aka your car understeered)? Or do you mean that you were stopped at a corner, then hit the gas and tried to turn but the fronts lost traction and the rear swung out?
The second one I stop to turn on to another road and the back-end will swing out from the front tires. The only saving grace is that the front end will pull the back end into place. [..] I normally try not to drive too fast but it seems either the tires or the awd cause the car to act out of character.
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 08:30:45 AM
Ok, ok let me back up the AWD is very nice to have and it seems to work very well when I am on the highway / freeway or when I am taking larger turns but sometimes during the stop and go traffic when I turn left or right I seem to loose control of the back end. I was playing with it last night it takes a bit of getting use to but now I can control it and compensate for it.
Sounds like too-liberal an application of the go pedal... The front tires are probably spinning as well but you can't tell because you're focusing on the rear swinging out. If you were driving a FWD or RWD car through that same corner, would you be givin' it as much gas, or would you have to keep off the gas more to keep the car from swinging out? The answer to that question will indicate whether you're just driving it harder because you think it should have better traction... And I can tell you I drive my Suburban more aggressively in the snow than I do my FWD light-weight Colt because, well, the Suburban has better traction.
Are the tires summer or all-season tires? True winter tires that retain their pliability and elasticity might give you the grip you're expecting. (checks subaru.ca) Yeah, they're low-profile all-seasons... If you're looking for some, I suggest you mount them on winter rims, go an inch smaller on the rim, and at least 10mm less wide for the tire. So, your WRX has 215/45R17 regular, so I suggest 205/55R16 winter tires. The Michelin X-Ice on canadiantire.ca (I'm only referencing CanTire because they actually publish prices on their site) are listed at $192.74. Throw in a steel rim and hubcap and tax and installation, you're probably looking at a $280-$300 price tag per tire. For some people that's too much, for others it's a worthwhile investment in winter traction.
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 08:30:45 AM
Ok here is the real reason not to get a Subaru, I had a tire puncture about 4 months after I got my car, I didn't want to buy 4 new tires so I called up Subaru to see what they could do. I was told the tire would cost 475 dollars, I said pardon... I only want one tire, and no rim. Yep it will be 475 for that tire and it won't be in for 4 weeks... Now I held my temper and said you mean you don't keep any in stock? Nope we are a small shop she replied and said that they don't keep a lot of parts in stock. I asked how long she would guess it would take for a part for the engine would take? About the same time frame. Now I called around and found really there was no price difference for those tires anywhere and they seem to be very expensive. I am just wondering how much the STi tires would cost? Oh and how I got the puncture, damn construction by my house at least I got the construction company to pay for it. Total price $509.00 to mount and balance the tire.
I'm surprised they didn't just plug the hole for you for a couple tenners. Was it a huge puncture? $475 for a specific tire of a specific make and model is believable (I don't even know what tire store would carry Potenzas)... But you could've bought a couple performance tires of a different brand for less. Still, I'm really surprised that they couldn't just plug the puncture. As for time frame for the parts, well, there aren't a lot of WRXs on the road in Edmonton. If you had a regular Legacy with the other motor the parts would more likely be in stock, because there's a larger customer base to sell them to. Still, when parts are made in Japan or Europe rather than here (I'm looking at you, Mitsubishi and BMW!), it can take forever and they cost too much. He'll have that same problem whether he buys the Sube or the Audi.
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 08:30:45 AM
So you would take a RWD car over a FWD car in the winter? I always thought it was better to pull the car then push the car? Well I guess I have learnt something. :D
I would have to try each car before picking one over the other. Some FWD cars slide like crazy because of poor weight balance. Some RWD cars have good snow traction because of proper weight balance. The size and type of the tire matters quite a bit, too. And then you throw in letter systems (ABS, TCS, ESP, ABD, etc), and it's all up in the air. In emergency procedures I'm more comfortable driving a RWD than a FWD vehicle because the response to throttle and brake input seems more natural to me. Although I've found the Suburban's AWD response the *most* natural.
Puncture was a side wall rip... >:(
The tires are all seasons I believe, I think I will look at getting some winter tires next year, this year was a trial year since I have never had a car with winter tires. Also I am driving about 50% more now so I guess it would be a good idea to look at winter tires and summer tires.
Some background on my last vehicle, it was a 2002 Grand Am Manual and FWD now I have a 2007 Impreza so I guess I have to get used to well an automatic transmission (That was my wife's idea) and AWD. :D
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 08:30:45 AM
Ok, ok let me back up the AWD is very nice to have and it seems to work very well when I am on the highway / freeway or when I am taking larger turns but sometimes during the stop and go traffic when I turn left or right I seem to loose control of the back end. I was playing with it last night it takes a bit of getting use to but now I can control it and compensate for it.
First off, especially on snow/ice, you have to be prepared for at least a little bit of sliding around - but that doesn't mean loss of control. When you know what you're doing you can use the throttle to help get the car around the corner, and I don't just mean stunting. If you want some time, I'll take you out somewhere to find a nice big empty parking lot/field that hasn't had its snow cleared, and do a little training on car control in slippery conditions. Best way to learn to control a car thats sliding, is to spend lots of time in cars that are sliding.
As to the reason behind why the back-end is sliding out on you, I am going to guess that the TCS is the only thing keeping the front wheels from also spinning and sliding, and you need to wait a little longer in the corner before getting back on the throttle. The WRX I test drove late last week acted in a way consistent with that - with the TCS on if you were heavy on the gas you could still slide the ass-end around, though the front wheels stayed planted. Of course, with the TCS off the WRX was very happy doing nice very controllable 4-wheel drifts.
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 08:30:45 AM
Ok here is the real reason not to get a Subaru, I had a tire puncture about 4 months after I got my car, I didn't want to buy 4 new tires so I called up Subaru to see what they could do. I was told the tire would cost 475 dollars, I said pardon... I only want one tire, and no rim. Yep it will be 475 for that tire and it won't be in for 4 weeks... Now I held my temper and said you mean you don't keep any in stock? Nope we are a small shop she replied and said that they don't keep a lot of parts in stock. I asked how long she would guess it would take for a part for the engine would take? About the same time frame. Now I called around and found really there was no price difference for those tires anywhere and they seem to be very expensive. I am just wondering how much the STi tires would cost? Oh and how I got the puncture, damn construction by my house at least I got the construction company to pay for it. Total price $509.00 to mount and balance the tire.
1. Why didn't you repair the existing tire instead of replacing it?
2. I'd never pay that much for a tire - I'd just go down to tire village or a similar place, and order 1 tire of the same brand/model/size that Subaru uses. For comparison - I had performance summer tires on the RSX, almost identical tires to the factory STI tires except in a different size, and the set of 4, mounted and balanced, was about $1100. And I got a screw in one of them a few years back - had it repaired at canadian tire, took 1/2 an hour and didn't cost much. Now the STI would come with 18" rims, so that'll bump tire prices for it up to the about $300 mark prolly - but thats no different than any other car with 18" rims.
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 08:30:45 AMSo you would take a RWD car over a FWD car in the winter? I always thought it was better to pull the car then push the car? Well I guess I have learnt something. :D
The
only advantage FWD has is starting from a slippery intersection, most of the vehicles weight is on the front wheels which gives you maximum traction there (especially if the vehicle is naturally front-heavy eg. a truck). Acceleration in non-slippery conditions FWD loses traction because weight shifts to the rear. Torque steer is another issue that virtually all FWD's have - the torque from the engine turning the front tires ends up partially transfering through the steering, and the car pulls left/right when you get on the gas. In the corners, FWD understeers, while RWD oversteers - I'll take oversteer anyday, where the front-wheels still maintain traction and with a little counter-steering you can keep the car on the intended path. The moment you lose traction in a FWD, you lose steering as well.
Or look at it from a slightly different point of view. Your car only has 4 small patches where rubber meets pavement - and all engine power, steering input, braking, etc. all has to get by with only the friction from those 4 small contact-patches. Don't you think it makes more sense to use the front 2 for steering and the back 2 for acceleration, instead of the front 2 for everything, and the back 2 just hold the ass of the car off the ground.
And finally..., if FWD is so good, why is it that none of the high-end cars use it. Porsche doesn't make a FWD vehicle. BMW doesn't make a FWD vehicle. The only FWD mercedes is the new B-class (their cheapest car). Infinity I don't think makes a FWD vehicle.
Porsche, no. BMW owns and directs the design of Mini, a FWD small car. Mercedes has a stable of models sold in Europe but not North America that are FWD (and diesel). Infiniti used to have the G20, a FWD 4-cylinder. Acura and Lexus (direct competitors to Infiniti) are
all about FWD in their cars.
Other high-end car manufacturers? Cadillac used to be FWD only but is now mixed. Volvo has FWD nowadays. Rover doesn't sell any cars in Canada, but they have FWD cars in England. Jaguar sells both FWD and RWD. I guess the question here, though, is what is the cut-off to be considered "high-end"? Price? Drive configuration? Do we look at manufacturer or at each individual model (Porsche has $60k cars, Chevrolet has $110k cars)?
I will take a well-designed and -balanced vehicle over a poorly-designed and -balanced vehicle any day. For instance, a Buick Century (FWD) drives much nicer in the snow than a Ford F-150 (RWD), and an Infiniti G35 sedan (RWD) drives much nicer in the snow than a Ford Focus (FWD).
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 10:11:54 AM
Puncture was a side wall rip... >:(
Yeah, that's a big hole... That really sucks! At least you didn't have to pay for it, like you said.
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 10:11:54 AM
Some background on my last vehicle, it was a 2002 Grand Am Manual and FWD now I have a 2007 Impreza so I guess I have to get used to well an automatic transmission (That was my wife's idea) and AWD. :D
And a different power output, different initial throttle response, different weight balance, different wheelbase, different tire size, and possibly traction control (don't know if your Grand Am had traction control - it was dependent on what model and trim level you had - but your WRX should have it).
So back to the original topic - Cova, have we poked enough holes in your two picks yet? :D
Sorry for topic hogging... I am guessing you are heavily choosing the Impreza... what dealership you going to? I dealt with Renzo @ the South side Rally Dealership. Nice guy, good knowledge let both me and my wife do some donuts in a parking lot to see how the AWD worked.
Quote from: Thorin on December 06, 2007, 11:09:24 AM
Other high-end car manufacturers? Cadillac used to be FWD only but is now mixed. Volvo has FWD nowadays. Rover doesn't sell any cars in Canada, but they have FWD cars in England. Jaguar sells both FWD and RWD. I guess the question here, though, is what is the cut-off to be considered "high-end"? Price? Drive configuration? Do we look at manufacturer or at each individual model (Porsche has $60k cars, Chevrolet has $110k cars)?
I suppose "high-end" was the wrong term to use, as there are a few examples of very nice, very expensive FWD cars. The RWD split is aligned more with cars designed for people who enjoy driving (which is typically higher-end stuff, but not all), and who would likely have the experience to know how to handle a RWD properly. Where FWD vehicles are marketed more towards soccer-mom's who just want to move the kids from point A to B.
Quote from: Thorin on December 06, 2007, 11:09:24 AMI will take a well-designed and -balanced vehicle over a poorly-designed and -balanced vehicle any day. For instance, a Buick Century (FWD) drives much nicer in the snow than a Ford F-150 (RWD), and an Infiniti G35 sedan (RWD) drives much nicer in the snow than a Ford Focus (FWD).
I'd still take the F-150 over the Century. A few sand bags in the back and decent tires and you'll be fine. Or for a more interesting ride, make sure the weight you add is unsecure and slides around easy :)
Quote from: Thorin on December 06, 2007, 11:09:24 AMSo back to the original topic - Cova, have we poked enough holes in your two picks yet? :D
1. I don't mind the topic drifting around. We're still discussing cars, we're keeping it civilized, and
2. I've pretty much decided on the 2008 STi. Through much discussion (both here and elsewhere) I've come to the decision that I'd rather put the $ into engine/drivetrain/etc. instead of interior luxury - the STi meets my luxury needs (heated power everything, 7" touch-screen navigation, automatic climate control, etc.)
So with that said - here's another pic of the STi, and feel free to take this thread off onto other topics, as long as it remains car/driving related.
(http://www.zcars.com.au/images/2008-wrx-sti-wallpaper.jpg)
Quote from: Adams on December 06, 2007, 12:35:27 PM
Sorry for topic hogging... I am guessing you are heavily choosing the Impreza... what dealership you going to? I dealt with Renzo @ the South side Rally Dealership. Nice guy, good knowledge let both me and my wife do some donuts in a parking lot to see how the AWD worked.
So far I've also been dealing with Renzo @ south-side rally. Ironic that you had the same salesman, and double-ironic that Renzo happens to be an old friend of mine. Hadn't seen him in probably close to 10 years - walked into the dealership last week when I test-drove the WRX, and it was one of those "Hey - you look familiar, I know you" moments. He took me and the WRX out to a empty field full of now - doesn't get much slipperier than snow on grass - and we played for a bit, checking the AWD with and without TCS, testing ABS, etc.
And feel free to "topic-hog" - if it was bothering me I wouldn't have written all those giant responses.
I just had to point this out... My wife (who would qualify as a hockey mom but not yet a soccer mom) drives a RWD Suburban. Whereas, well, just view the attached picture. ;D
Quote from: Cova on December 06, 2007, 01:39:08 PM
I've pretty much decided on the 2008 STi. Through much discussion (both here and elsewhere) I've come to the decision that I'd rather put the $ into engine/drivetrain/etc. instead of interior luxury - the STi meets my luxury needs (heated power everything, 7" touch-screen navigation, automatic climate control, etc.)
Congrats on picking. It's always hard when you're trying to figure out how to spend $50,000+... The STi's not a bad choice at all. So would you have ever considered importing a Skyline GT-R?
Quote from: Thorin on December 06, 2007, 03:05:56 PM
Congrats on picking. It's always hard when you're trying to figure out how to spend $50,000+... The STi's not a bad choice at all. So would you have ever considered importing a Skyline GT-R?
Nope. I much prefer new over used - especially considering to import a Skyline it'd have to be 15+ years old. It would also not have some of the interior-luxury that I'm looking for (eg. heated seats mandatory), and being a sedan-style with a trunk also doesn't meet my storage requirements (must be able to haul my mountain-bike, or the entire set of gear I take to LANs - includes office chair). I'm sure it'd be a great car to drive - it's just not the one for me.
I don't think I could go back to a car that doesn't have heated seats.
I was driving a car with heated seats long before the idea took hold in North America. Back in 1989 I was tooling around in a Volvo 240 station wagon imported (via the Volvo Diplomat import service) from Sweden (thank you mommy and daddy for providing a brick for me to learn on). Since then I've had cars with and without heated seats, and currently have two vehicles - one with heated seats, the other without.
Although sitting down on a warm seat is nice, there are some things to consider
- Overheating the lower back will cause it to tire more quickly; to test this, try setting the heat on high for a five or six hour drive and notice how tired your back feels when you get out
- Overheating the buttocks and thighs will cause less warm blood to go to your calves and feet; to test this, get in your car when it's really cold out and set the heat on high - notice after fifteen minutes that your feet feel like ice cubes!
The only time I miss the heated seats while driving my non-heated-seat Colt is on those first ten minutes when the car is still warming up. After that, the body heat is retained and reflected by the seat enough for me to stay warm. The heated seats feel nice 'n all, but I can imagine driving a car without them no problemo.
Now, hot air out of the ventilation system? *That* I couldn't imagine driving without!
If you have a leather interior, heated seats are a GREAT thing in the winter.. As for the over heating I have never used them for more than the initial warm up.. I don't like the extra warmth all the time.
I got addicted to heated seats in the RSX. They get turned on sometime in October, and stay on until May. The only time I even consider turning them off in the winter is if I get out on the highway - even if traffic sucks and it takes me 30 mins to get to/from work I leave the heated seats on the entire ride.
What's the ETA on the STI in North America/Canada? Couldn't be all that quick seeing as it was JUST announced and Japan always gets the first few shipments. When my brother-in-law was shopping for his STI it was about a 6 month waiting list so he instead bought an Infiniti G35.
I've always been a fan of the STI and Evo. Hard to drive though when I test drove one a couple years back, not a fan of driving around at 4000 rpm.
Quote from: Shayne on December 08, 2007, 09:47:03 AM
What's the ETA on the STI in North America/Canada? Couldn't be all that quick seeing as it was JUST announced and Japan always gets the first few shipments. When my brother-in-law was shopping for his STI it was about a 6 month waiting list so he instead bought an Infiniti G35.
I've always been a fan of the STI and Evo. Hard to drive though when I test drove one a couple years back, not a fan of driving around at 4000 rpm.
The first STI's that'll be arriving here in Edmonton were built in late Nov. and are expected to arrive in January. And I've got a deposit down already - there are going to be 9 in that first shipment and my name is on 1 of them.
And I don't see why they should be much harder to drive than anything else. Throttle-control on ice will obviously be a little more tricky considering I'm almost doubling the HP of the RSX, but I don't see any reason to cruise around at 4K RPMs (the break-in period for the engine says to stay under 4K for the first 1000 km's actually).
Although having to drive at 4,000rpm is a bit of an overstatement, I do agree with your general sentiment Shayne. The gearing, final drive, and tire diameters show that the engine spins pretty quick at highway speeds.
Quote from: http://www.zercustoms.com/news/2008-Subaru-Impreza-WRX-STI-in-Detail.html
Gear Ratio 3.636 (1st) 2.375 (2nd) 1.761 (3rd) 1.346 (4th) 1.062 (5th) 0.842 (6th) 3.545 (Reverse)
Final drive axle ratio 3.900
[..]
Tyres 245/40R18
Compute Tire Circumference245/40R18 means 653.2mm diameter (245mm * 40%/sidewall * 2 sidewalls + (18in * 25.4mm/in) = 653.2mm), which means approximately 2,052.1mm circumference (653.2mm * Pi = 2,052.0883mm). So the tire travels about 2 meters for each full revolution.
Compute Vehicle Speed from Engine Revolutions, Gear and Final Drive Ratios, and Tire Circumference - engine revolutions/minute / gear ratio = axle revolutions/minute
- axle revolutions/minute / final drive ratio = tire revolutions/minute
- tire revolutions/minute * tire circumference meters/revolution = distance meters/minute
- distance meters/minute * 60 minutes/hour = distance meters/hour
- distance meters/hour * kilometer/1,000meters = distance kilometers/hour
1st gear: 1,000 / 3.636 = 275 / 3.900 = 70 * 2 = 140 * 60 = 8,400 / 1,000 = 8.4km/h
1,000 rpm = 8.4km/h, 2,000 rpm = 16.8km/h, 3,000 rpm = 25.2km/h,
4,000 rpm = 33.6km/h2nd gear: 1,000 / 2.375 = 421 / 3.900 = 107 * 2 = 214 * 60 = 12,840 / 1,000 = 12.8km/h
1,000 rpm = 12.8km/h, 2,000 rpm = 25.6km/h, 3,000 rpm = 38.4km/h,
4,000 rpm = 51.2km/h3rd gear: 1,000 / 1.761 = 567 / 3.900 = 145 * 2 = 290 * 60 = 17,400 / 1,000 = 17.4km/h
1,000 rpm = 17.4km/h, 2,000 rpm = 34.8km/h, 3,000 rpm = 52.2km/h,
4,000 rpm = 69.6km/h4th gear: 1,000 / 1.346 = 742 / 3.900 = 190 * 2 = 380 * 60 = 22,800 / 1,000 = 22.8km/h
1,000 rpm = 22.8km/h, 2,000 rpm = 45.6km/h, 3,000 rpm = 68.4km/h,
4,000 rpm = 91.2km/h5th gear: 1,000 / 1.062 = 941 / 3.900 = 241 * 2 = 482 * 60 = 28,920 / 1,000 = 28.9km/h
1,000 rpm = 28.9km/h, 2,000 rpm = 57.8km/h, 3,000 rpm = 86.7km/h,
4,000 rpm = 115.6km/h6th gear: 1,000 / 0.842 = 1,187 / 3.900 = 304 * 2 = 608 * 60 = 36,480 / 1,000 = 36.4km/h
1,000 rpm = 36.4km/h, 2,000 rpm = 72.8km/h, 3,000 rpm = 109.2km/h,
4,000 rpm = 145.6km/hSo if you're driving at posted speeds and around 4,000rpm, you'd be in 2nd gear driving on residential streets, 3rd gear on St Albert Trail, 4th gear (at about 3,500rpm) on Whitemud Drive, 5th gear (at about 3,500 rpm) on 100km/h highways, and 5th gear (at 4,000rpm) on 110km/h highways.
Obviously you can gear up at slower speeds (4th or 5th gear in the city) and use the overdrive gear (6th) on the highway. Still, you'll be around 3,300rpm in 6th at 120km/h.
Note that my math is very close but not exact in the work above, as I rounded the tire diameter, axle revolutions, tire revolutions, and distance in km/h down in all cases.
Compared to my Suburban (which has a 3.42 rear end):
Quote from: http://media.gm.com/division/2005_prodinfo/chevrolet/trucks/suburban/index.html
Gear ratios (:1):
First: 3.06
Second: 1.63
Third: 1.00
Fourth: 0.70
Reverse: 2.29
Final drive ratio (all models, opt.): 3.42:1 ? 4.10:1
[..]
Tires: 1/2-ton: P265/70R17 off-road steel-belted radials
265/70R17 means 802.8mm diameter (265mm * 70%/sidewall * 2 sidewalls + (17in * 25.4mm/in) = 802.8mm), which means approx 2,522mm circumference, or approx 2.5 meters travel per revolution.
1st gear: 1,000 / 3.060 = 326 / 3.420 = 95 * 2.5 = 237 * 60 = 14,220 / 1,000 = 14.2km/h
1,000 rpm = 14.2km/h, 2,000 rpm = 28.4km/h, 3,000 rpm = 42.6km/h,
4,000 rpm = 56.8km/h2nd gear: 1,000 / 1.630 = 613 / 3.420 = 179 * 2.5 = 447 * 60 = 26,820 / 1,000 = 26.8km/h
1,000 rpm = 26.8km/h, 2,000 rpm = 53.6km/h, 3,000 rpm = 80.4km/h,
4,000 rpm = 107.2km/h3rd gear: 1,000 / 1.000 = 1,000 / 3.420 = 292 * 2.5 = 730 * 60 = 43,800 / 1,000 = 43.8km/h
1,000 rpm = 43.8km/h, 2,000 rpm = 87.6km/h, 3,000 rpm = 131.4km/h,
4,000 rpm = 175.2km/h4th gear: 1,000 / 0.700 = 1,428 / 3.420 = 417 * 2.5 = 1,042 * 60 = 62,520 / 1,000 = 62.5km/h
1,000 rpm = 62.5km/h, 2,000 rpm = 125km/h, 3,000 rpm = 187.5km/h,
4,000 rpm = 250km/hThe Suburban has an automatic transmission with a fluid-filled torque converter that causes the engine to spin faster than it would if the transmission was standard (this is what allows you to keep the car in Drive while stopped at a light). This is noticable during acceleration, but once a speed has been reached there is only a small loss of RPMs between the engine and the transmission. I haven't bothered to adjust for that in my calculations, but when pulling a trailer or carrying a heavy load (seven adults?) the engine will be running faster at the speeds listed above.
Still, the Suburban runs at 1,900rpm at 120km/h, compared to the STi's 3,300rpm at the same speed. But hey, you're gonna get that from most small-engined cars.
its a 2.5L engine delivering huge amounts of HP. I just noticed that without the revs high the turbo lag was horrid. I dont think horrid describes it fully though. Sure you dont have to cruise around at 4000, but if you ever want to pass, or have the revs high enough to shift without stalling you gotta get it up there. Don't get me wrong though, I LOVE the sound of that turbo spooling up, its just sort of a pain to drive. Reminds me a lot of the last STR-4 actually (ive read the new one is even worse). Hard to get the "perfect" launch at a red light without a bunch of practice.
Granted I've owned some rather under powered manuals in my life time (84 Aries, 92 Scoupe, 05 Cobalt) so maybe it's just me.
My wife wants something bigger and preferably an automatic (sore knees after a day of driving).
I think what you're describing is lack of low-end grunt rather than turbo lag. "Turbo lag" means the interminable wait between putting your foot down and getting extra air pushed into the engine (creating extra power). You're simply describing a lack of adequate power at low RPMs; this is due to the boost threshold (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbocharger#Boost_Threshold). Turbo lag occurs at all RPMs, low or high.
Most small engines (typically four cylinders) have inadequate power at low RPMs. When you bolt on a supercharger or turbocharger that greatly increases the power at high RPMs, it just becomes more obvious that they're lacking in low-end power. It is possible to create small engines that have decent power at low RPMs but then they quickly run out of juice at higher RPMs. And since power is figured out by multiplying torque by RPMs, that's a lot of oomph you'd be losing.
The general rule of thumb is that small engines need to rev high for highway driving while large engines use a lot of gas in town. You can get one or the other.
You guys need to spend some time on old 2-stroke dirt bikes - will give you a whole new perspective on driving something with a narrow power-band. Of course, modern 2-stroke engines are much smoother. And the same thing tends to apply to turbocharged small car engines - 10 years back they had nothing off the line (boost threshold) and horrible turbo-lag whenever you got on the gas. But modern small turbo-engines typically develop decent torque at reasonably low rev's, and have much more advanced turbo's that spin up faster / generate less lag. I know for instance between the 07 and 08 STIs peak torque now comes about 400RPMs earlier (4K instead of 4.4).
Anyways - I have lots of experience with very narrow power bands (I've had bikes flip over backwards hitting the power-band unexpectedly in a low gear), and don't anticipate any problems in that regard.
Do you happen to have torque and power charts for the 07 and 08 STI to compare? The peak might hit lower, but the curve may be more angular, less flat.
The problem with all published torque and power numbers is that the manufacturer only has to tell you the peak of each. This tells you nothing of the engine characteristics at RPMs other than where peak torque or power hit. If the manufacturers were forced to publish the charts we'd be able to see whether a car or truck at low or medium or high RPM has a lot of power or not. As it is now, they can up the horsepower and torque numbers by simply tuning the engine to have a high torque or horsepower at a certain RPM (I'm looking at you, MazdaSpeed3 (http://images.automobilemag.com/features/0610_c+2007_mazdaspeed_3+dyno_chart.jpg)!)
Its sitting at the dealership now..., should be mine in the next couple days.
Quote from: Cova on January 18, 2008, 02:53:17 PM
Its sitting at the dealership now..., should be mine in the next couple days.
Congrats man! Looks like a nice machine.
Well I've had it for a while now - love this car. So far I've put on winter tires/rims, covered every forward-facing area with 3M stuff, and tinted all the windows that I legally can as dark as possible. A little over 1K km's on it now, so past the official break-in period - its a ton of fun to drive, but I can tell already I don't think my winter tires are gonna last very long >:D
Probably hard to tell in winter, but how does it stack up performance wise to the Acura?
Quote from: Mags on February 15, 2008, 12:39:05 PM
Probably hard to tell in winter, but how does it stack up performance wise to the Acura?
It's faster in 6" of snow than the acura was on clean dry pavement.