It allows the company to sell more cars, which eventually means greater allocation of R&D towards developing the chassis.
...
However, plonking the company's CVT into the car just makes financial sense, opens up the market a little, and is surprisingly good fun as anyone who's driven one will tell you.
if i were in the market for a vehicle like this, it WOULD be on my list because it has an "auto" option...the Civic Si was ruled out because it was only available in stick when i bought my Rio5.
^^^This is what Brendan's referring to in the article. My buddy's dad owned Civic SI after Civic SI after Civic SI for YEARS, but then they copped out and made the SI 6MT-only and the 'sport' trim couldn't hold the road (suspension differences). He promptly dropped the Civic SI and got a base model TSX auto.
The AVAILABILITY of an automatic doesn't hurt a car, but opens up sales to a refugee-sized-boat-load of people. To not have the option of an auto is utterly ludicrous. Subaru has to run a business. The CVT was better than making an expensive DCT that people would bash for being too jumpy (*cough, Ford*) and makes their boxer configurations more efficient (as pancakes tend to be thirstier than I4s).
Here's my issue: I won't buy a manual car. I don't like them. I can drive them well, it's second nature to me, but I commute - it's irritating. Modern automatics with 'manual mode' gives me enough control over the car and I simply don't need the 'more engaging drive.'
My buddy and I argue about self-driving cars a lot. He makes one very good point, though: Even if we all were to give up driving on the street for the convenience and safety that self-driving cars bring, there will always be tracks/motorsport where we can let loose and actually enjoy driving.
The WRX, to me, is a step-up from an economy AWD car. My car wants are as follows:
1. As small as possible*
2. 'Possible' is subject to my needs (5% of the time or otherwise
) and includes:
a) 5 seats
b) sizeable trunk
c) 60/40 split rear seats
d) not claustrophobic-feeling inside (e.g. the Lexus IS feels cramped to me, and I'm 5'7", 160lbs).
3. AWD
4. Automatic tranny
5. Sufficient power for highway passing, climbing hills without my foot glued to the floor (i.e. my Corolla makes me nervous for driving in/around Ithaca, NY)
6. reasonable interior - as luxurious as possible, but this is secondary to all of the above.
With the above in mind, the WRX w/ CVT checks all of my boxes. It's reasonably economical (9L/100km is effing fantastic for that car - only BMWs offer the power:economy value that I'd look for, and those would cost quite a bit more). The only thing that stops me is the Legacy 3.6R. It's bigger than I want (so violates #1 above), but as far as pricing is concerned, it's far better value. I don't care about outward "performance" so much as I find the regular Impreza to be underpowered and the WRX is the solution to it. The firm ride may not be to my taste, nor the tire noise - but that's for me to decide when it comes down to buying. The heft/dimensions of the Legacy may make the WRX more compelling to me. Also, the 3.6R will use far more gas in regular driving than the 2.0T.
...the 3-point-turn slowness is concerning for me and something I really need to check out - thanks for pointing it out, Brendan!
Oh, and I should add this in as I submitted this review some time before the S4 JDM model came out: 296 horsepower and 295 lb-ft and the same CVT handles it.
I bet the Japanese specs are on a higher octane fuel. IIRC, their premium is 99RON which equates to about 94 (R+M)/2.
...and in Japan, there's less (if any?) reliance on Ethanol in fuel. Ethanol belongs in bellies, not in gas tanks.
moron politicians that allowed dilution of our fuel.
...but there are enough skinny jean types that can't operate a clutch that want to be seen in a Subaru to make financial sense.
Hey, skinny jeans make my as$ look great!
