08 WRX came in today

[harrytuttle]

You're forgetting something there, it is primarily "mums and dads" that sit with the money.

Perhaps, but it's always been the goal of a mid-range car company to get into the youth market. "Youth" meaning not 16-20, but 20-25; those buying their first new car with their own money. VW does it perfectly, for example.

http://www1.vg.no/uploaded/image/bilderigg/2007/08/10/1186730995867_507.jpg
http://www1.vg.no/uploaded/image/bilderigg/2007/08/10/1186730676800_705.jpg
Now, imagine that on the road. Not so bad anymore, is it?

It is bad. No amount of WRC kit can overcome bad proportions. It's still a 5-door hatchback. Hatchbacks really only work in 3-door versions. Five-doors look like stunted wagons. And then there's the drunken detail lines around the front & rear lights.... There's nothing wrong with being generic (e.g., Subaru circa 1995), but just don't be lazy when you do it.


I've said my piece many times about the design, but there's also much to be said about the mechanics this time around. For example, the change to 2.5L engines across the board (2006) created a much lazier, effortless drive. It used to be a bit of work to keep the 2.0L turbo on boil, and while it was a challenge, it also was part of the character that made the Impreza a bit unique. No lag, no challenge; no challenge, less character.

The front:rear drive distribution was also changed (also 2006) to mimic the weight balance. What one has to do with the other is beyond me (and seems quite irrelevant), but the result was the far less tail-happy nature of the Impreza. No spin, no challenge; no challenge, less character.

The wheelbase has been extended by a few inches (2008) to give not only more legroom & cabin space, but to soften the ride, to make the car seem more comfortable & "mature". How exactly is a sports car supposed to be more sporty if the ride is more cushy? The ride, while it used to be a bit harsh, certainly let you know what was going on under the wheels. No info from the road, no challenge; no challenge, less character.


The detrimental aesthetic changes combined with this incremental softening of the character of the drive results in a car that is far removed from what it was just 3 years ago. It doesn't even make marketing sense. Subaru has no reputation for being just another generic car company. How can it expect to increase sales against long-time everyday-transport companies like Honda and Toyota? What is going to happen with Subaru is what happened with Saab: the existing user base was given the same old car on one hand while being alienated with new models that were non-Saab's on the other hand. Result? Year after year of plummeting sales.

Both Subaru and Saab need to do what they do best, and that's be themselves. Subaru was really getting into that groove up until 2006. The cars were getting better (both visually, mechanically, and in terms of reliability). Then they threw themselves a bit of curveball with Zapatinas, followed by shotgunning both feet just this year. Saab seems to have some idea of what to do, and judging by this thread, if going back to their best cars, they may be on the right track.

Whoever greenlighted the 2008 Impreza needs to be re-introduced to the shopfloor broom.

By the way, the Impreza had two peaks: one in terms of drive, the other in terms of looks.

 

[1X83Z]

So basically, you're not a mind reader.
You don't want to escalate an argument.
You don't like the Impreza.

You mistakenly assumed my words had a meaning that was never present.

I never said the people of the GTP didn't matter nor that their opinions didn't matter yet you have constantly made the ignorant assumption that I did.

Hang on. Before you fly off the handle, please be aware that what you wrote is that the opinions of the people here have no consequence. I took this to mean that the opinions of the people here have no consequence, however you WANTED me to take it as the opinions of the people here have no consequence because they are not potential Impreza owners. However because that was unstated, I did not make that assumption - I only read what was written, and what was written is that our opinions have no consequence. Do you understand?

Kent, buddy, I don't know if you're having a bad day or what, but I advise you at this point to do what you said earlier and 'not continue to this for a multitude of reasons.'

 

[Kent]

I point to the last post I made and thank you for your completely unnecessary advice.
You might want to take that advice for yourself.

 

[1X83Z]

I point to the last post I made and thank you for your completely unnecessary advice.
You might want to take that advice for yourself.

Hey Kent, I think that based on some prior discussions we've had, and some past discussions I've had with other forum staff members, you took my posts as attacks, and they simply weren't. Really, my tone in all of this is nothing but sincerity: I think we simply had a misunderstanding regarding what was meant.

With all that said, I think if you took a step back and gained a bit of perspective you could see things from my point of view. For me, the issue is simply this:

1. You said "the opinions of some here on the GTP have no actual consequence in the real world", with no qualifier.
2. But you meant, "opinions have no consequence ... because I believe the members of the GTP represent only a small portion of prospective Impreza Wagon buyers." Note the addition of the qualifer.

Now, I can understand and sympathize with point number two - it's one I've made before many times and to it, I certainly agree with you. My contention was with point number one - I thought it was unnecessarily harsh and a bit unfair to call our opinions, essentially, worthless. However, since then you have explained yourself - by adding the qualifier - and now it makes sense to me. My sole suggestion was that next time you want to make point number two, don't rely on point number one - state what you mean! Again, we are not mind readers.

Just my two cents - take this post how you wish, but please don't unfairly assume my tone to be judgemental or attacking - I'm just offering a point of view. Really.

 

[YSSMAN]

Both Subaru and Saab need to do what they do best, and that's be themselves. Subaru was really getting into that groove up until 2006. The cars were getting better (both visually, mechanically, and in terms of reliability). Then they threw themselves a bit of curveball with Zapatinas, followed by shotgunning both feet just this year. Saab seems to have some idea of what to do, and judging by this thread, if going back to their best cars, they may be on the right track.

Whoever greenlighted the 2008 Impreza needs to be re-introduced to the shopfloor broom.

By the way, the Impreza had two peaks: one in terms of drive, the other in terms of looks.

Boosted rep for common sense, furthermore giving some pretty solid reasons for why they screwed up. I just cannot stand the fact that the brand and the models have to be diluted this much purely in the interest of sales. Personally speaking, I'd never consider a Subaru now if they're all going to be like this. Sure, the Legacy (and its spin-offs) are still great, and the same can be said of the Forester (looks, no so much), but the Impreza is at the core of the brand, and as always it would be the model I'd consider first.

Being someone like me who generally prefers "odd" cars, this screams bad-move. I liked the awkward looks and performance of the Subaru line, and while the previous models appealed to kids in Gap, it looks like their trying to bring in the old folks from Eddie Bauer.

 

[Casio]

I agree with Joey, and it doesn't look that bad. There could be worse cars to copy designing from then the MKII Focus.

Secondly, car makes are allowed to change the target audience of cars. It's all about profits. It 20 people buy WRX and below Impreza's to WRX and above models, then obviously you're going to cater the next model to them. If 15 of those 20 people are just regular people who want a nice, safe, sedan with four-wheel-drive from a marque with a good reputation then you're going to cater even more specifically to them.

It's like the change from the 2.0 to 2.5, sure enthusiasts love revving engines with lag, but to most others a smoother engine is an improvement.

 

[Wolfe]

It's still a 5-door hatchback. Hatchbacks really only work in 3-door versions. Five-doors look like stunted wagons.

Quoted for truth, even beyond the scope of this one automobile. I can't stand 5-door hatchbacks from any marque.

However, even with all of this backlash over the styling, the rear 3/4 of the sedan looks perfectly acceptable to me. It even almost looks "good" (and will probably only grow on me):

I think picklesam is right. A redesigned front end could save this car's styling, just like with the previous Impreza (sorry, I'm not a fan of the bugeye). Here's an example I put together myself:

The detrimental aesthetic changes combined with this incremental softening of the character of the drive results in a car that is far removed from what it was just 3 years ago. It doesn't even make marketing sense. Subaru has no reputation for being just another generic car company. How can it expect to increase sales against long-time everyday-transport companies like Honda and Toyota?...

...Both Subaru and Saab need to do what they do best, and that's be themselves. Subaru was really getting into that groove up until 2006. The cars were getting better (both visually, mechanically, and in terms of reliability)...

...Whoever greenlighted the 2008 Impreza needs to be re-introduced to the shopfloor broom.

QFT again, and +Rep for the post (if the system would allow me).

 

[Rue]

IMHO the bland styling keeps the chavs away and the enthusiasts at play.

 

[McLaren]

Is it wrong if I'd rather buy a Subaru Baja than the 5-door WRX?

 

[///M-Spec]

But my point is, there was little backlash against this complaining when it happened. No one sat down and said "shut up, the car is better now" to the people complaining when Jeep put IFS (I just made that up!) in the Jeep Grand Cherokee, or when Porsche dumped air-cooled engines.

Can you really compare the absence of a parking light switch to the examples you listed?

Speaking just for myself, I know I've made at least one post to someone here on GTP that were "shut up, the car is better now" posts with regards to both the turbo and the V8 in the 3-series. And if there were someone ranting about water-cooled Porsches, I'd probably respond the same way. Not about the Jeep, though... my understanding of off-road suspension dynamics is limited.

-------

Perhaps, but it's always been the goal of a mid-range car company to get into the youth market. "Youth" meaning not 16-20, but 20-25; those buying their first new car with their own money. VW does it perfectly, for example.



It is bad. No amount of WRC kit can overcome bad proportions. It's still a 5-door hatchback. Hatchbacks really only work in 3-door versions. Five-doors look like stunted wagons. And then there's the drunken detail lines around the front & rear lights.... There's nothing wrong with being generic (e.g., Subaru circa 1995), but just don't be lazy when you do it.


I've said my piece many times about the design, but there's also much to be said about the mechanics this time around. For example, the change to 2.5L engines across the board (2006) created a much lazier, effortless drive. It used to be a bit of work to keep the 2.0L turbo on boil, and while it was a challenge, it also was part of the character that made the Impreza a bit unique. No lag, no challenge; no challenge, less character.

The front:rear drive distribution was also changed (also 2006) to mimic the weight balance. What one has to do with the other is beyond me (and seems quite irrelevant), but the result was the far less tail-happy nature of the Impreza. No spin, no challenge; no challenge, less character.

The wheelbase has been extended by a few inches (2008) to give not only more legroom & cabin space, but to soften the ride, to make the car seem more comfortable & "mature". How exactly is a sports car supposed to be more sporty if the ride is more cushy? The ride, while it used to be a bit harsh, certainly let you know what was going on under the wheels. No info from the road, no challenge; no challenge, less character.


The detrimental aesthetic changes combined with this incremental softening of the character of the drive results in a car that is far removed from what it was just 3 years ago. It doesn't even make marketing sense. Subaru has no reputation for being just another generic car company. How can it expect to increase sales against long-time everyday-transport companies like Honda and Toyota? What is going to happen with Subaru is what happened with Saab: the existing user base was given the same old car on one hand while being alienated with new models that were non-Saab's on the other hand. Result? Year after year of plummeting sales.

Both Subaru and Saab need to do what they do best, and that's be themselves. Subaru was really getting into that groove up until 2006. The cars were getting better (both visually, mechanically, and in terms of reliability). Then they threw themselves a bit of curveball with Zapatinas, followed by shotgunning both feet just this year. Saab seems to have some idea of what to do, and judging by this thread, if going back to their best cars, they may be on the right track.

Whoever greenlighted the 2008 Impreza needs to be re-introduced to the shopfloor broom.

By the way, the Impreza had two peaks: one in terms of drive, the other in terms of looks.

Gentlemen... now this is how you gripe about a car.


M

 

[Danoff]

I've said my piece many times about the design, but there's also much to be said about the mechanics this time around. For example, the change to 2.5L engines across the board (2006) created a much lazier, effortless drive. It used to be a bit of work to keep the 2.0L turbo on boil, and while it was a challenge, it also was part of the character that made the Impreza a bit unique. No lag, no challenge; no challenge, less character.

The front:rear drive distribution was also changed (also 2006) to mimic the weight balance. What one has to do with the other is beyond me (and seems quite irrelevant), but the result was the far less tail-happy nature of the Impreza. No spin, no challenge; no challenge, less character.

The wheelbase has been extended by a few inches (2008) to give not only more legroom & cabin space, but to soften the ride, to make the car seem more comfortable & "mature". How exactly is a sports car supposed to be more sporty if the ride is more cushy? The ride, while it used to be a bit harsh, certainly let you know what was going on under the wheels. No info from the road, no challenge; no challenge, less character.

I can see the complaint about the softened suspension, but please tell me you're not complaining about a larger engine, less turbo lag, and and better weight distribution.

 

[Tornado]

and better weight distribution.

That's not what he was complaining about. He was talking about distribution of torque, which is now 41:59 (with the current Impreza, not this nasty new thing). It was 35:65, which is much more rear biased. The current distribution takes a large stab from the cars' previous character as a tail-happy monster that happend to have high limits.

Can you really compare the absence of a parking light switch to the examples you listed?

I don't see why not. The scale of change maybe different to us as "outsiders," but to those who truly care I'd say it is just as blasphemous. And when combined with the other seemingly meaningless changes, I'm not surprised of how the die-hard Subaru nuts reacted.

Speaking just for myself, I know I've made at least one post to someone here on GTP that were "shut up, the car is better now" posts with regards to both the turbo and the V8 in the 3-series. And if there were someone ranting about water-cooled Porsches, I'd probably respond the same way. Not about the Jeep, though... my understanding of off-road suspension dynamics is limited.

And I have told people to shut up about air-cooled Porsches. But my point is that with those brands it is far more common to let those complaints go unchallenged than it is with Subaru (I remember all the complaining that happened from when the current Impreza was unveiled in 2001, and how that led to much infighting).
For example, Danoff just questioned harry's point on the larger engine above, and how it was better with the 2.5 than with the 2.0. And while that is true in my opinion, it does ruin the car's image as a rally car for the road if it runs an entirely different engine than the one used by the actual rally car; thus diminishing the cars' character.

 

[frestkd]

It's Toyota's fault ... the front looks like an early Solera

 

[a6m5]

It's Toyota's fault ... the front looks like an early Solera

I don't think Toyota had any part in the development of this WRX. Besides, we were starting to see the trend before the Toyota investment in Subaru.

 

[Tornado]

And it's "Solara."

 

[Azuremen]

Harry, you seem to be forgetting the WRX is not a true sports car, but rather one built on what use to be an econobox.

I drove an 06, and it was quite tail happy. Why did they change it? Simple, same reason Toyota changed the suspension on the 93 MR2s, because people where having trouble controlling the car. The larger engine, brakes, etc, also helped the car out quite a bit.

If you want a dedicated sports car, then get a Porche or Elise or such. Otherwise, always remember the Impreza, is, at its heart, an econobox.

 

[Tornado]

Why did they change it? Simple, same reason Toyota changed the suspension on the 93 MR2s, because people where having trouble controlling the car.

I find that hard to believe. The Rex had amazingly high limits for what it was, and it had none of the nasty at the limit tendencies found in early SW20 MR2s. All Subaru did by making the power less rear biased was make it understeer more (as the power bias was probably originally done to overcome the somewhat poor weight distribution) when pushed (though the active yaw controller introduced at the same time as the revised torque split probably nullified this change completely).
Revised suspension and tires is what fixes nasty at the limit tendencies. Making the car understeer more through more frontward power simply makes the nasty tendencies harder to get to.

 

[///M-Spec]

I don't see why not. The scale of change maybe different to us as "outsiders," but to those who truly care I'd say it is just as blasphemous. And when combined with the other seemingly meaningless changes, I'm not surprised of how the die-hard Subaru nuts reacted.

I think the scale of change is precisely why the OP got so many negative responses (if not negative, then nonsupporting). That and the vehemence of his anger. Notice that harrytuttle's post wasn't received in even remotely the same way. That's because he brought up issues that actually have a bearing on what made the car good or bad. And he articulated it in a thoughtful mature, manner rather than have a tantrum over --to most people here-- trivial details.

And I have told people to shut up about air-cooled Porsches. But my point is that with those brands it is far more common to let those complaints go unchallenged than it is with Subaru (I remember all the complaining that happened from when the current Impreza was unveiled in 2001, and how that led to much infighting).

I think it entirely depends on where you are (on the Interweb). I've read plenty of back and forth arguing (often over trivial nonsense) in the BMW and Porsche camp over newer cars.

Here's a typical thing that happens: a new BMW comes out. Something changes. It's bigger, heavier, more powerful, complicated, expensive, etc. Owners of the car that it replaces either whine incessantly or take random potshots at the new model or the 'poseurs' who buy them.

Owners of the new car, understandably miffed their intelligence, taste or even masculinity is being called into question because they bought a car they happen to like very much, get their hackles up... and then it's on. I've seen it happen on more occasions that I care to recall.

You should read some of the back and forth between 335i owners and E46 M3 owners earlier this year. Pitiful little egos on display. I've heard the same arguments back when the E36 replaced the E30. And while I wasn't old enough to remember, I'm certain the same thing happened when the E21 replaced the 2002... in 1976.

For example, Danoff just questioned harry's point on the larger engine above, and how it was better with the 2.5 than with the 2.0. And while that is true in my opinion, it does ruin the car's image as a rally car for the road if it runs an entirely different engine than the one used by the actual rally car; thus diminishing the cars' character.

And if you read some of the things M3 owners are saying about the new V8, it's about the same type of discussion.


M

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, I had a look at a standard Impreza today...



Well, first things first, they look much better in person. I was shocked that it doesn't look nearly as average, but having an '07 model not too far away didn't help me like the '08 model any more. I talked with the salesman about the car for probably 20 minutes or more (it was really nice outside, cooler out than in the dealer), and he seemed pretty confident in the car.

He completely understands our gripes about it looking like a Toyota, but he noted that it will likely make the care more attractive to more people... But the thing he was most-excited about was the overall "value" of the car. I'll admit that at roughly $21K it didn't seem like that great of a "value" to me, especially with a better-equipped Legacy parked behind it for the same price. But he saids they're a lot quieter, easier to drive, and overall more enjoyable.



You definitely get that feeling with the interior. The overall layout is quite nice, very good-looking just like the Tribeca on the inside. The controls are laid out nicely, all of which have a very solid feel to them, and overall makes it feel like an up-level model. The thing I loved most were the seats, extremely comfortable, and I loved the material... Something like what the family couch would be made out of. But there was a problem:



Hard plastics. Very hard plastics. Cheap, hard, plastics.

The first thing I do any time I get into a car is feel the dash up, and I was disappointed. I like having a bit of "squish" on the dashboard, something that VW ruined me with. This was like feeling the top of your kitchen counter, hard as a rock. The difference here is that it looks really good until you get up close, which is nice, and its what Toyota does really well with their newer products, but I'm still calling for VW interior quality here... Especially on a $21K car...

 

[Danoff]

The first thing I do any time I get into a car is feel the dash up, and I was disappointed. I like having a bit of "squish" on the dashboard, something that VW ruined me with.

Are you sitting on your dashboard for some reason? Why on earth do you care?

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Are you sitting on your dashboard for some reason? Why on earth do you care?

Yeah, I always wonder why cheap plastic is mentioned so often or rather people put so much emphasis on it.

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, I don't have a particularly good answer for you. I tend to find that the softer-touch plastics look better, more expensive, and such. Take a look at the Rabbit, which I consider to be the class-leader in terms of how it should look:

It looks more expensive (probably is), but its found in a much-cheaper car. The new Saturn VUE is much the same, with soft-touch plastics all around the car. It makes the interior look much more upscale, more complete. Granted, it may not cost much more to the car company, but it makes the interior look that much better. Its one thing where the Americans are beginning to accelerate, taking a page from the German car book to get the interior right. Toyota used to put the soft-touch plastics in their cars (our '95 Camry had it), and it put a whole new level of "niceness" into the vehicle.

 

[///M-Spec]

Are you sitting on your dashboard for some reason? Why on earth do you care?

No, but you do touch the door panels. And the center console. And soft-touch plastics feel nicer than hard plastics. It would feel inconsistent to make the those parts of the nice stuff, but cheap out on the rest.

It's all a part of the 'subjective quality' aspect of the interior that automakers spend lots of money to get right and interiors are no different. Sometimes they succeed, in the case of VAG products. Sometimes they fail, as apparently in this case.

Here's a prime example of why subjective quality is still important even you can't measure or quantify it. Picture closing a car door. Say on a W124 E-Class Benz. It should make a sound that imparts an impression of solidity, of laser precision and vault like construction. *WHUMP* Now picture closing the door on a '75 Pacer. *CLUNK* Hollow. Insubstantial. Cheap.

Both doors close, though. So functionally there is no difference between the Benz door and the Pacer door. But one reminds you why it cost over 35 grand new and the other reminds you why people struggle to forget it ever existed.

I agree with YSSMAN on this. VW has set the interior quality standard for this price range, and I would expect any newcomer to do as well or better.


M

 

[niky]

Not to mention the fact that the harder plastic on these newer cars rattle more when they get a few thousand miles under their belts.

Yes, people don't sit on the dashboard, or even touch it that often, which is why YSSMAN's qualifier:

The difference here is that it looks really good until you get up close, which is nice, and its what Toyota does...

is important.

I'm seeing a whole bunch of new cars succumb to plastic death... sometimes, it's subtle, and the plastics aren't where you would have occassion to touch them... (07 Mazda3 dashboard and pillars, for example, which are even cheaper and harder than the 06's, if that's possible)... sometimes it's not, and car manufacturers like Ford, Toyota, Honda and Mitsubishi will often have hard, cheap-feeling plastic on doors and handles, too. I'm disappointed by the 07 CR-V's interior door handle... not only is it plastic, instead of covered in some synthetic, like grab-handles should be... but it comes loose easily... ouch.

And, as aforementioned, that really, really rattles. When a car reaches a certain age, all those hard pieces start coming loose. When soft pieces, coated in vinyl or some other rubberized substance, come loose, they sort of just flop. When plastic pieces come loose, they rattle. The harder the plastic, the more brittle and rattly they are down the road.

Hell, half of the complaints we get over the 06-07 Civics here are for rattles... and that isn't even the worst of the plastic-fantastic set.

 

[Kent]

I know it seems off subject to some extent, but have any of you sat down in the '03 and later Corolla S (specifically the "S")?
It's got leather all over the place and the quality is much better than it seems anyone expects from Toyota (partly the reason I bought my Corolla).
I don't expect anyone to say it has a better interior than any of the VWs but I certainly hope everyone has experienced a ride with the Corolla S because the steering wheel and dashboard alone would definately impress based on what YSSMAN is describing as ideal. 👍

I'll pull together some digi-cam photos tomorrow when I get the chance.

 

[YSSMAN]

They aren't bad. They're from the era when Toyota still did almost everything right, and thus far the Scion xD is the closest new Toyota product I've seen to the way things "should" be. Soft-touch plastics strewn across an affordable car is the way to do it... Too bad they didn't save a few dollars and put some more excitement into the drive... But thats not what the Corolla was going for anyway.

Personally speaking, I spend a lot of time behind the wheel, so the interior is one of the most important things for me to look at when I'm buying a car. First things first, the seats have to be comfortable for a guy my size (6 foot, 160 lbs). Secondly, I look for the quality of the materials used in the cabin... That usually involves knocking on each of the pannels, pressing all the buttons, turning all the knobs, and furthermore (as seen in the photo), pushing on the plastics to check the stiffness of the material. But, you can't always call it based on the front seats either, so you have to check the back as well...

Without a doubt, Volkswagen has pretty much hit the nail on the head for the overall package for me. This isn't brand bias, no kind of BS whatsoever, they just do it right. Quality is the same throughout the entire car, the seats are exceptional comfortable while still being supportive, and everything feels expensive and of quality. Compared to other cars even in higher price classes, in some cases the VW will put them to shame.

I think, overall, there is one last thing that you have to be able to do when you sit in a car. Its kinda hard to explain in words, but its what I'd call the "Ahhhh" factor. You should be able to sit in a car, everything closed up, take a deep breath, and just have that overall feel of comfort. Of course, your preferences my be greatly different than mine, but when I sit in some cars, no matter how nice the interior may be, they often don't have the "Ahhhh" factor. I felt that way in the Lexus LS460 and BMW 760Li, but by contrast I took a dip in price and luxury, and felt extremely relaxed in the Volvo S80. Of the two cars I looked closest at today, the Subaru and the Toyota, I'd have to say that overall neither had the "Ahhhh factor."

But, only spending a few minutes in a car is very different than spending a few hours in one.

 

[niky]

I know it seems off subject to some extent, but have any of you sat down in the '03 and later Corolla S (specifically the "S")?
It's got leather all over the place and the quality is much better than it seems anyone expects from Toyota (partly the reason I bought my Corolla).
I don't expect anyone to say it has a better interior than any of the VWs but I certainly hope everyone has experienced a ride with the Corolla S because the steering wheel and dashboard alone would definately impress based on what YSSMAN is describing as ideal. 👍

I'll pull together some digi-cam photos tomorrow when I get the chance.

Unfortunately, like YSSMAN has said, the Corolla harkens back to a time when Toyota got it right... (something like six years ago)... it's better screwed together than most... although a lot would depend, I guess, on what version your region gets.

Now, fast forward from the 2000-2001 Corolla to about 2002 or 2003... the Toyota Vios (Echo Sedan) for our market... a downgrade in materials, of sorts, but acceptable, since this is an entry-level car... but at the top-of-the-line, the materials are acceptable in some areas, and great in others... forward to the current Yaris... top-of-the-line, also... there's absolutely no redeeming quality to the plastic at all. The current sedan (2007 model here), has a decent dashboard and some plastics are okay, but it's still a step down from the way things were in 03', which was a step down from 01'.

Note that in 01', we still had the Protege for Mazda, whose interior had lots more soft-touch materials than the Mazda3 after it... (which, again, in the 07 restyle went even cheaper inside (locally)).

The current Corolla has to keep the nice interior... it's the only selling factor the Corolla has for new car buyers over the competition.

Of course, I've said previously that the engine in the Corolla is one sweet little thing, good mix of torque, power and economy... and the chassis manages to be quite stiff and light at the same time... but, unfortunately, that doesn't get as many butts into the showrooms as it used to... I wish Toyota would hurry up with the new Corolla.

-----

Of course, there's another angle... A friend remarked last week that Toyota is great at making interiors... if you're paying enough for the car... ...if it's a relatively cheap car, even if it's more expensive than the competition, it's the plastics-bin for you.

 

[GT Pro]

I saw the new WRX today (albeit it doesn't arrive 'till September for us Australians) and even though it looks better in person, it still brings a mixed bag of thoughts. For me it's just not how it used to be, and it saddens me that they are turning they're back on the track-bred enthusiasts and are instead entering the booming market of 'hot-hatches'. A bold, but poor effort.

 

[Joey D]

I wasn't aware that normal Impreza had changed, you can't even build one on their website...how lame is that?

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, they're just starting to show up at the dealers. The Subaru guy was saying that they weren't allowed to even advertise for them locally for the next few months, just because so few were coming I would guess. I think he said he was getting a couple more Imprezas next week, but we're still two or three weeks out for WRX deliveries.

According to him, I was one of the first people to come out and look at it, so we'll see how popular the car gets over time. I'm thinking I would have liked it a lot more if it was say, about $4000 cheaper in the spec it was in. I still wouldn't spend $21K for that.