Autos.ca Home  


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Changes for 2009 Impreza US model (maybe Canada?)  (Read 14757 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
safristi
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 1997 Ford Ranger; 2012 Hyundai Veloster tech package.
Gender: Male
Location: Bethlehem
Posts: 40332



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #100 on: September 22, 2008, 01:59:46 pm »

.."18" rubber"...... Bow.....and here we were told ya were a..........lil PRICK'ly...


* cactus.jpg (5.8 KB, 162x211 - viewed 533 times.)
Logged

THERE IS NO CURE FOR "LOTUS"......ONLY TREATMENT.....
Snowman
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: Stage 2 2010 WRX STi, 2004 Honda S 2000, 2011 Toyota Venza, and Mom's 1996 Nissan Pathfinder
Gender: Male
Location: Oakville
Posts: 21003



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #101 on: October 19, 2008, 02:52:52 pm »

Quick test by Motor Trend:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/112_0810_2009_subaru_impreza_wrx_test/index.html

Logged

Giant Dwarf
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: '08 BMW 335i, '10 Mazda6 GT
Gender: Male
Location: Over Yonder
Posts: 10223



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #102 on: October 19, 2008, 09:03:20 pm »

Yup.. looks about the same as all the other recent tests on the new WRX.  Much better handling.  Much better accel.  Why buy an STI.  Sounds good to me.

But 0-60 in 4.8 sec?!  WoW!
Logged
johngenx
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 2009 Toyota Corolla 2001 Subaru Forester 2001 Suzuki Hayabusa
Gender: Male
Location: A space inside my own head where there are only mountains and climbing days...
Posts: 9879



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #103 on: October 19, 2008, 10:58:55 pm »

13.5 sec at 101.1 mph

 Shocked

Diggety!!
Logged

No place I'd rather be...
Turbo Bob
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T
Gender: Male
Location: Waterloo
Posts: 9172


Profesional Dash Stroker


View Profile WWW
 Stats
« Reply #104 on: October 19, 2008, 11:26:44 pm »

Even with a low downpayment the lease rates are pretty reasonable... hmmmm...

Not sure if I want to lease though, that feeling of paying $X per month and never owning anything.  Undecided
Logged

Power is how fast you hit the wall... Torque is how far you take the wall with you!

initial_D
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Location: Deer Red Green Lodge, Ab
Posts: 12318



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #105 on: October 20, 2008, 12:14:51 am »

You know your beans, Bob.  Smiley


Wonder what the insurance cost difference is between the STi & WRX265.
Logged
Vmango
Drunk on Fuel
****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: Stage 1 2010 WRX Limited, 2010 Acura MDX Tech
Gender: Male
Location: Waterloo, Ontario.
Posts: 1350


Vman


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #106 on: October 20, 2008, 08:48:58 am »

Insurance is generally pretty good as Subarus have great safety ratings. Also, if you get the 5-door (the one you want anyway) a lot of insurance companies list it as a "station wagon."
Logged

Clark Turner Custom Tuned
Snowman
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: Stage 2 2010 WRX STi, 2004 Honda S 2000, 2011 Toyota Venza, and Mom's 1996 Nissan Pathfinder
Gender: Male
Location: Oakville
Posts: 21003



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #107 on: October 20, 2008, 09:54:46 am »

The performance numbers for the 265 are so very close to a COBB Stage 2. Typical gains from stock from a stage 2 are 55-60 HP that results in a 0-60 of 4.6 seconds. Now toss in the improved handling as a result of suspension work and proper tires the package is complete. However a prospective buyer will have to budget $1000 for winter boots.

I have bounced back and forth between the STi and 265 for RUT RO 3 but the more you think about it the 265 is the logical choice. Just imagine what an aftermarket turbo-back would do to it?
Logged

jaman
Learner's Permit
*
Offline Offline

Location: Toronto
Posts: 40

member


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #108 on: October 20, 2008, 12:54:55 pm »

Just from an acceleration point of view, the 0-60 times for awd cars are always misleading because unless you're okay with killing your clutch/transmission, you're not coming anywhere close to the reported times. I personally like the 5-60 time better; more representative of real world.

However, I'm not trying to take anything way from this car's performance, a 0-60 time of 4.8 is wicked anyway you look at it.
Logged
Giant Dwarf
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: '08 BMW 335i, '10 Mazda6 GT
Gender: Male
Location: Over Yonder
Posts: 10223



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #109 on: October 20, 2008, 01:06:08 pm »

Jaman, that's a very good point -- the 30-50 and 50-70 numbers also mean a lot to me too.  If the car has good, usable power throughout the rev range (like, oh, say BMW's 3L turbo) and proper gearing, then it should excel in all those tests. 

Vman, WRXs have historically been hideous to insure in Ontario.  Second highest theft rate or something like that, not to mention so many young bucks writing them off -- they're brutal to insure compared to some of their competitors.  In both '04 and '06 when I seriously considered picking one up, the combination of insurance costs and unfavourable lease rates all conspired against the Subies for me.  At least one of those has been addressed...   Wink
Logged
Snowman
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: Stage 2 2010 WRX STi, 2004 Honda S 2000, 2011 Toyota Venza, and Mom's 1996 Nissan Pathfinder
Gender: Male
Location: Oakville
Posts: 21003



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #110 on: October 20, 2008, 01:13:18 pm »

Just from an acceleration point of view, the 0-60 times for awd cars are always misleading because unless you're okay with killing your clutch/transmission, you're not coming anywhere close to the reported times. I personally like the 5-60 time better; more representative of real world.

However, I'm not trying to take anything way from this car's performance, a 0-60 time of 4.8 is wicked anyway you look at it.

People with no experience with AWD cars tend to dump the clutch at launch which is a no no. The correct procedure is to slip the clutch while maintaining minimal rpm slightly above full turbo boost. The trick is to release the clutch in a fashion similar to lifting your foot after stepping in a pile of dog poo and applying full acceleration. I have beaten up two WRX’s in the past 6 years with countless dead stop launches with no transmission or clutch issues. It is all in the technique.
Logged

jaman
Learner's Permit
*
Offline Offline

Location: Toronto
Posts: 40

member


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #111 on: October 20, 2008, 06:16:15 pm »

By correct procedure, do you mean to get the lowest 0-60 time or clutch/transmission life? I would imagine that if your car has enough power to get some wheelspin, then dumping the clutch will result in lower 0-60 times.

So you're saying that after "countless dead stop launches" you didn't neeed a new clutch?

In either case, the presence of awd allows for much greater torque application before you get wheel spin. So there is much more stress on the entire drivetrain than would be in a 2-wheel drive car during a start from a dead stop. If the Subaru WRX is sufficiently built, then it's not a problem, but if it's like the Nissan GTR....then you're  Cry

People with no experience with AWD cars tend to dump the clutch at launch which is a no no. The correct procedure is to slip the clutch while maintaining minimal rpm slightly above full turbo boost. The trick is to release the clutch in a fashion similar to lifting your foot after stepping in a pile of dog poo and applying full acceleration. I have beaten up two WRX’s in the past 6 years with countless dead stop launches with no transmission or clutch issues. It is all in the technique.
Logged
Vmango
Drunk on Fuel
****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: Stage 1 2010 WRX Limited, 2010 Acura MDX Tech
Gender: Male
Location: Waterloo, Ontario.
Posts: 1350


Vman


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #112 on: October 20, 2008, 06:34:28 pm »

Well, I think "dumping" the clutch in any car is going to give you transmission woes.....

Logged

Clark Turner Custom Tuned
Snowman
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: Stage 2 2010 WRX STi, 2004 Honda S 2000, 2011 Toyota Venza, and Mom's 1996 Nissan Pathfinder
Gender: Male
Location: Oakville
Posts: 21003



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #113 on: October 20, 2008, 06:35:24 pm »

By correct procedure, do you mean to get the lowest 0-60 time or clutch/transmission life? I would imagine that if your car has enough power to get some wheelspin, then dumping the clutch will result in lower 0-60 times.

So you're saying that after "countless dead stop launches" you didn't neeed a new clutch?

In either case, the presence of awd allows for much greater torque application before you get wheel spin. So there is much more stress on the entire drivetrain than would be in a 2-wheel drive car during a start from a dead stop. If the Subaru WRX is sufficiently built, then it's not a problem, but if it's like the Nissan GTR....then you're  Cry

People with no experience with AWD cars tend to dump the clutch at launch which is a no no. The correct procedure is to slip the clutch while maintaining minimal rpm slightly above full turbo boost. The trick is to release the clutch in a fashion similar to lifting your foot after stepping in a pile of dog poo and applying full acceleration. I have beaten up two WRX’s in the past 6 years with countless dead stop launches with no transmission or clutch issues. It is all in the technique.


My 2002 WRX was modded to 345 HP and required no clutch or transmission work after 135,000 km. I was so happy I go another one. Wheelspin is counterproductive to traction  Smiley IMO people who mangled 2’dn gear and clutches in their WRX’s had skill set and IQ issues.
Logged

Turbo Bob
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T
Gender: Male
Location: Waterloo
Posts: 9172


Profesional Dash Stroker


View Profile WWW
 Stats
« Reply #114 on: October 20, 2008, 10:38:49 pm »

Well, I think "dumping" the clutch in any car is going to give you transmission woes.....

Exactly, I never dumped the clutch in the exige, too much mechanical sympathy...
Logged

Power is how fast you hit the wall... Torque is how far you take the wall with you!

evil_twin
Enthusiast
**
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 2010 Subaru WRX
Posts: 366


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #115 on: October 23, 2008, 10:45:30 am »

Man, all the positive reviews for this car make it harder and harder to consider anything else in the price range.

That performance is incredible, plus the practicality of AWD and space in the 5-door...

PLUS...you could get one loaded out the door for under $40k.

The obvious downsides are in the styling (subjective...but really, what were they thinking with those tail lights on the hatch?) and maybe interior quality.  But to be fair, I haven't sat in one, so maybe I'll be surprised.

I will certainly be stopping at the local subie dealer next spring for a test drive.  Or maybe even a winter test, just to see what the AWD can do Tongue

me likey.
Logged
Zombie
Auto Obsessed
***
Offline Offline

Vehicle: 08 WRX - 5 Door
Gender: Male
Location: ottawa, on
Posts: 931


Brainszzzzzzzzzzzzzz


View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #116 on: October 27, 2008, 05:57:51 pm »


My 2002 WRX was modded to 345 HP and required no clutch or transmission work after 135,000 km. I was so happy I go another one. Wheelspin is counterproductive to traction  Smiley IMO people who mangled 2’dn gear and clutches in their WRX’s had skill set and IQ issues.

Are you saying that you dump the clutch or not here?

In my WRX I haven't dump the clutch yet. What I have done is rev to about 3300, take my foot slightly off the gas, drop the clutch, get the car moving and then hammer the gas. It seems to be all about timing because sometimes I get better launches then others.

I would be scared to do this over 4000 in my car. I used to do it in my civic SIR but the wheels would just spin. Well actually once I did it in a loaded car, the wheels didn't spin and the clutch got stinky. I never did that again.
Logged

In a world where the dead are returning to life, the word "trouble" loses much of its meaning.

Snowman
Car Crazy
*****
Offline Offline

Vehicle: Stage 2 2010 WRX STi, 2004 Honda S 2000, 2011 Toyota Venza, and Mom's 1996 Nissan Pathfinder
Gender: Male
Location: Oakville
Posts: 21003



View Profile
 Stats
« Reply #117 on: October 27, 2008, 06:00:19 pm »


My 2002 WRX was modded to 345 HP and required no clutch or transmission work after 135,000 km. I was so happy I go another one. Wheelspin is counterproductive to traction  Smiley IMO people who mangled 2’dn gear and clutches in their WRX’s had skill set and IQ issues.

Are you saying that you dump the clutch or not here?

In my WRX I haven't dump the clutch yet. What I have done is rev to about 3300, take my foot slightly off the gas, drop the clutch, get the car moving and then hammer the gas. It seems to be all about timing because sometimes I get better launches then others.

I would be scared to do this over 4000 in my car. I used to do it in my civic SIR but the wheels would just spin. Well actually once I did it in a loaded car, the wheels didn't spin and the clutch got stinky. I never did that again.

No dumping
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.4 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
Brkdmrcn v4 By [BrKDmRcN]
| Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.075 seconds with 39 queries.