08 WRX came in today

Who wants to see the Scooby Outback?







I get the feeling that the paint is going to cause issues, given that they really don't follow the body lines like it did before. Still, I've always liked the Outback products, but this one? Hmmm, I don't know...
 
I thought it was just the shadows, but that is the nastiest factory paint job I have ever seen.

And the car doesn't look much different than the WRX.
 
Change up the paint on that outback and I'd say it's just fine... Although, this definately makes me feel like the wagon Impreza is becoming less and less necessary.
In fact, I'm feeling like the Impreza should lose the wagon altogether and just let the outback take over the wagon market.
Since I don't know the specs on outbacks it might not work well but if the outback has an engine capable of matching a WRX wagon then I would say go for it. 👍
 
Brad, you sick b@stard. You are enjoying this, aren't you? :yuck::lol:

Yeah, I agree with you guys, change the paint job, it's not that bad....... except when was the last time you've seen Outback Subaru with standard paint job? Exactly.

It is horrible. Must be some kind of practical joke.
 
Brad, you sick b@stard. You are enjoying this, aren't you? :yuck::lol:

Only a little. After looking at the car and seeing that it had the potential to be something totally awesome, this only disappoints me further.

...If they would do something like a matte-black side trim where the silver is, that would actually look decent... You know, like the V70X or the Audi All-Road...
 
True, but they can ditch the paint and make the bumpers look separate...
 
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.

Which is ironic since they were already doing that just fine with the Legacy. With the Impreza becoming more conservative and "grown up", that leaves little to discern between the Legacy and Impreza platforms. They're already similar in size, so what's to gain by choosing one over the other? You want the uglier one?


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.

Having less turbo lag is fine, provided you don't end up with an engine that feels like it's attached to a CVT. Believe it or not, part of what makes sports cars ranging from the Atom to to F430 great is that higher revs means more power, which really makes working the engine worth your while. It means the effort you put in returns solid rewards. The ~1999 Audi S4 had very little turbo lag, but the the engine was completely characterless, to the point where it seemed aenemic, even though that was far from the truth.

And yes, I was referring to the torque distribution, not weight distribution. If the weight distribution moved closer to 50:50, then that's always good in my book. Not that it should have any bearing on torque distribution....


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.

True, but the Golf GTI (1976) was built from similar origins. Does that make it any less of a fantastic hatch? Does that make it's return to form in 2004 any less of a relief?


Boosted rep for common sense,

Thank you,

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

thank you,

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

M

and thank you.


My local dealer has a WRC blue GT (or whatever the turbo version is). I'm going to try to check it out ASAP, drive and all. And then I'll wish my former salesman the best of luck. He'll need it.
 
Is it wrong if I'd rather buy a Subaru Baja than the 5-door WRX?
^ I think thats the best move you'll ever make. :indiff:

-> I hate the 2008 WRX, its tamer, uglier, and a rip-off. So bad, that the JDM version doesn't even consider it a "WRX", instead, its called the S-GT. In which the S-GT is obviously more powerful than the "same" output as my wagons "WRX". And I also thought that my car would be the ugliest Impreza ever, looks like I was blown away! :ouch: :yuck:

-> And look:

2008-subaru-impreza-2.jpg

^ Is that a Lexus? :yuck:
19282_2.jpg


2008-impreza-wrx.jpg

^ I see a Chrysler! :ill: :yuck:
sebring.jpg


08-wrx-off-site-009.jpg

^ I see a Mazda 3! In which, the 'Speed3 (or should I say the MPS) totally obliterates THAT WRX! Bravo Mazda! :yuck: :dunce:
new_mazda3_fr.jpg


070406subaru_impreza_wrx_2008_rside.jpg

^ An overpriced Kia Rio...
rio_sedan_back.jpg

...or a Suzuki Forenza (made by Daewoo) twin! :yuck: :indiff:
2007.suzuki.forenza.20104812-E.jpg


subaru-impreza-wrx-2008-revista-3.jpg

^ A walmart version of the Tribeca. :indiff:
subaru_b9tribeca_limited7passenger_2007_interior_19_346x270.jpg



-> I hate this WRX so much, if I see a first 2008 WRX on the streets of Vegas and flunts it like a total jock, I will race his butt! :mad:

-> I guess Subaru/FHI, wants to lose its fans ON PURPOSE! :dunce:

-> I don't even know if I will ever test drive this car, in fact I'll be more looking forward of driving the next Lancer Ralliart/GSR next year. :indiff:

=One of the worst cars of 2008 by far=

:ill::yuck::dunce::indiff:
 
Believe it or not, part of what makes sports cars ranging from the Atom to to F430 great is that higher revs means more power, which really makes working the engine worth your while.

I always thought it was because they had power - not because the power was hard to get to. I've always taken the approach that the lower the RPM for which the power came on the better. In fact, if I have one complaint about my RSX... well... it's that it doesn't have an armrest. But if I have two complaints about my RSX its that I have to work the engine to get the power out.

Give me a big throaty V8 with oodles of torque right off the line any day.
 
I always thought it was because they had power - not because the power was hard to get to.

It's not that the power is "hard to get to", but that there's even more the longer you wring out the engine.

Danoff
I've always taken the approach that the lower the RPM for which the power came on the better. In fact, if I have one complaint about my RSX... well... it's that it doesn't have an armrest. But if I have two complaints about my RSX its that I have to work the engine to get the power out.

Do you have the base spec RSX? That engine is really not enough for a car that heavy. It's enough to get around town and mimic a Civic, but that's about it.

Danoff
Give me a big throaty V8 with oodles of torque right off the line any day.

Then you definitely have the wrong car. ;) There's nothing wrong with a good muscle car. Most muscle cars' engines top out at around 5,000 RPM anyway; having an engine that spins to 7,000 but has nothing more to offer above 4,000 is pointless. For example, the Covette Z06 7.0L V8 is strong from ~1,500 rpm, but gets ridiculous near the redline; the current WRX engine is just anodyne, like an electric engine.

My local dealer has a WRC blue GT (or whatever the turbo version is). I'm going to try to check it out ASAP, drive and all. And then I'll wish my former salesman the best of luck. He'll need it.

First hand drive here.
 
Who wants to see the Scooby Outback?



I get the feeling that the paint is going to cause issues, given that they really don't follow the body lines like it did before. Still, I've always liked the Outback products, but this one? Hmmm, I don't know...

Is that an Outback?

Wait, what made Subaru changed the ever so adorable, and agressive looking Legacy Outback?

subaru.outback.jpg



The paint on the Impreza Outback is really off, yes 👎
 
Do you have the base spec RSX? That engine is really not enough for a car that heavy. It's enough to get around town and mimic a Civic, but that's about it.

It's the type-S, which actually makes less torque (if I remember correctly) than the base spec. Pretty much it turns on past 4k rpm (vtec kicked in yo), but I'm not a big fan of that. Yes, the engine is not suited for my taste - but the rest of the car is, so I compromised.
 
It's the type-S, which actually makes less torque (if I remember correctly) than the base spec. Pretty much it turns on past 4k rpm (vtec kicked in yo), but I'm not a big fan of that. Yes, the engine is not suited for my taste - but the rest of the car is, so I compromised.

I looked on edmunds and max torque is about the same, almost no difference. It just comes in 2000-3000 (depending on year) revs earlier at 4000rpm in the base model.
 
I looked on edmunds and max torque is about the same, almost no difference. It just comes in 2000-3000 (depending on year) revs earlier at 4000rpm in the base model.

That's right. Now I'm remembering. 2-3k earlier is substantial.
 
Matte white would've been cooler. I don't think I've ever seen a matte white car.
 
It was dead nearly a year... I hadn't realized that!

Still, I don't like it. I don't think I ever will. Its bad when GM interiors are more "soft" than whats in a Subaru...
 
I was hoping I'd warm up to it, but no luck well over a year later. The STi is a little batter than the base Impreza and WRX, but still a very disappointing look.
 
I'm just thankful that Legacy owners still have a great looking car to hop into every day. I'm still not a big fan of the Impreza's, or WRX's either. I would think that with their new body style, Mazda 3's and 6's sales must be up. There's always the option to put on full JDM body kits to change the entire look of the car to help it out, but their base design still has something to be desired in my opinion.
 
The 09 WRX sedan looks a lot better than the hatch imo.

I didn't even like the STi hatch when I saw it in person...

STi are suppose to be 4 door sedans...
 
Back