- 51,151
- Australia
- SpacedustDaddy
True about the less boost.Perhaps, but that shouldn't really apply to the WRX which is not really much heavier than it's ancestor 20 years ago - it's only 150lbs heavier than the 2002 WRX per google, and nobody described that car as slow. It's actually impressive that Subaru has managed to build an AWD performance sedan that weighs less than 3500lbs. Amazingly, it's only gone up in price by about $4,000. That means its $6,000 cheaper than the 2002 car, adjusted for inflation.
Perhaps the bigger engine with less boost is a lot less zingy than the previous car. I can understand it if the car feels like it's underperforming.
You‘re right about less power. The Impreza RS were fine with the 165hp engine(I think the Pontiac Bonnevilles from the same period, had about 30 more hp from a V6). It was just the rest of the world got the WRXs and “we” were missing out in the states, at the time. Then, 225hp wasn’t enough. Then, STI came with a satisfactory 300hp. I guess to justify prices today, more power or more electronics are required.Depends on how high the mountains are. Altitude is always forgotten on this subject. Maybe too many journalists are testing in California or something. "I need a good driving road. Off to the mountains at 9000 feet!" Turbochargers are a buffer for the difference, but still.
With that said, surely the last thing the industry needs now is more 350-400+ horsepower cars. Like, all across the board -- from fun sporting driving, to burning less oil, to severe economic anxiety. I've driven an ND just like yours. 👍 👍 As far as I'm concerned, automakers need to get their **** together and build more cars like that with more seats and doors.
Now, Subaru are previewing their EV. The instant acceleration age just negates any power war. 5-6second 0-60mph are normal. Features, range and charging time, are key factors over “bhp” numbers.