Topic: Test Drive: 2015 Subaru WRX STI

[Autos_Editor]

Subaru sticks to the script with the latest edition of its iconic hoon-mobile WRX STI.

Read More...

[nlm]

Nice. The first pics of this production version left me ho-hum about the design. But now that I've seen a few in the flesh the design looks really good and especially modern next to the previous-gen design.

"Ah, who am I kidding? Does anybody forking out 40 large for this specialized piece of Subie engineering really care about such things?"

Nope - I always skim past this part of reviews for this car.

I guess the big question: is the base STi worth the $8k premium (before tax) on the base WRX?

The 6-spd in the STi is different than the 6-speed in the WRX?

[Noto]

I guess the big question: is the base STi worth the $8k premium (before tax) on the base WRX?

Depends on your intentions.  Daily driver?  No chance.  Occasional track use?  Probably.

For me, requirement for automatic means the STi is dead to me.  WRX isn't, though

By the way:

Those headlights 


That engine bay, in theory , but visually?     An engine cover would go a long way in prettying 'er up.

[Fobroader]

Oh hell yeah, there is enough upgraded equipment to make the $8K worth it. If I was looking at these cars, Id be very hard pressed not to get the STi, I know Id be kicking myself down the road....or after the first track day.

[dirtyjeffer]

i'd go with the WRX in auto trim, personally...i don't think the extra stuff in the STi is worth $8k to me (plus i want an auto)...i also prefer the newer engine in the WRX...people have criticized VW for keeping their 8v 2.0L for a long time, this 2.5L Subie has been around a dogs age too.

[Noto]

people have criticized VW for keeping their 8v 2.0L for a long time, this 2.5L Subie has been around a dogs age too.

Yeah, but that's because the Subie's engine is still competitive and often referred to as a "gem".

An 8v 2.0L is just a sad given VW's massive potential.  It produces neither the power nor the fuel economy to be decent.

[dirtyjeffer]

An 8v 2.0L is just a sad given VW's massive potential.  It produces neither the power nor the fuel economy to be decent.

but they no longer offer it...Subie still offers their 2.5.

[Noto]

An 8v 2.0L is just a sad given VW's massive potential.  It produces neither the power nor the fuel economy to be decent.

but they no longer offer it...Subie still offers their 2.5.

The EJ255 is now strictly reserved for the STi - a niche product that will likely get a new engine in the mid-cycle refresh, and even if it doesn't, it still produces 305hp and almost the same in torque out of a 2.5L 4-banger.

On the 1.6-mile Streets of Willow race course with racer Randy Pobst behind the wheel, for instance, only 0.25 second separated fastest from slowest.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1403_bmw_m235i_mercedes_cla45_amg_subaru_wrx_sti_comparison/#ixzz36Q8Iux10

No doubt the 2.0T from MB is a stellar piece of technological mastery (with a full warranty), but Subaru's has 25+ years of proven reliability and performance - and in the STi, still produced the fastest lap time.  It's by no means 'obsolete', beating out the most powerful production engine per displacement and a turbo inline 6.  I'm sure that the 2.0T from the CLA put into the STi would have even better lap times (i.e. lap times are down to the car, not just the engine), but the engine is clearly competitive.

[Fobroader]

An 8v 2.0L is just a sad given VW's massive potential.  It produces neither the power nor the fuel economy to be decent.

but they no longer offer it...Subie still offers their 2.5.

Because its still a highly competitive engine, the 2. slow was a horrid POS.

[OliverD]

An 8v 2.0L is just a sad given VW's massive potential.  It produces neither the power nor the fuel economy to be decent.

but they no longer offer it...Subie still offers their 2.5.

The old 2.0 is the base engine in the current Jetta.

[tpl]

An 8v 2.0L is just a sad given VW's massive potential.  It produces neither the power nor the fuel economy to be decent.

but they no longer offer it...Subie still offers their 2.5.

The old 2.0 is the base engine in the current Jetta.

I bet lots of people don't care that it is not fast.   It is a non-interference engine which is not a bad thing and i suspect it will rumble along forever with an oil change once in a while.

[dirtyjeffer]

An 8v 2.0L is just a sad given VW's massive potential.  It produces neither the power nor the fuel economy to be decent.

but they no longer offer it...Subie still offers their 2.5.

The old 2.0 is the base engine in the current Jetta.

not any more...the base engine is their new 1.8T...and VW didn't have any trouble selling boatloads of base trim cars equipped with the 2.slow engine...sure, we in here criticize its lack of modern sophistication and high power output, but aren't the "normal consumer"...regular people just want something that does what they ask of it and fits their budget...i know plenty of people who drive a vehicle with that engine in it and have no complaints whatsoever about it...same goes for the "Tractor Engine" 2.5L I5 they also used.

[OliverD]

An 8v 2.0L is just a sad given VW's massive potential.  It produces neither the power nor the fuel economy to be decent.

but they no longer offer it...Subie still offers their 2.5.

The old 2.0 is the base engine in the current Jetta.

not any more...the base engine is their new 1.8T...and VW didn't have any trouble selling boatloads of base trim cars equipped with the 2.slow engine...sure, we in here criticize its lack of modern sophistication and high power output, but aren't the "normal consumer"...regular people just want something that does what they ask of it and fits their budget...i know plenty of people who drive a vehicle with that engine in it and have no complaints whatsoever about it...same goes for the "Tractor Engine" 2.5L I5 they also used.

No, the base engine is still the 2.0, both in the current '14 Jetta and the facelifted '15 model.

[Noto]

I think the point of contention here is that at least one person has beef with the fact that Subaru is continuing to use a 25+ year old engine block in an all-new car.

...not that it's an unusual practice, but that the STI has an old engine whilst the WRX has a newer, albeit smaller and barely weaker engine.  I had expected some revisions to the EJ255, but it doesn't appear that there were any.

Well, at least it kept the price down on the STI, and at least they still offer the STI (even if they're not putting much money into its development and focusing instead on the WRX).

[johngenx]

The STi has a lot more over the WRX than the extra ponies.  The suspension is much stiffer and designed for really, really fast travel.  The DCCD system is fantastic.

I'm still disappointed that Subaru didn't come though with their concept, but the "new" STi is basically a 100x better chassis that has the previous engine in it.  The difference between the 2015 and 2014 is that the newest car can exploit every single one of those 305hp.  The previous car, in stock form, didn't get around a track all that much faster when power was added, as the chassis, while good, was not the precision instrument the new one is.

If I were WRX shopping, I'd really try to stretch the budget for an STi, but the WRX is really good too, and at under $35K, a performance buy.  Both are year-round performance cars that finally have chassis' to match the AWD ability.

[dirtyjeffer]

No, the base engine is still the 2.0, both in the current '14 Jetta and the facelifted '15 model.

my apologies...it is the base engine in the Passat (vs the 2.5L)...in any case, VW has sold tons of them with little complaints.

[dirtyjeffer]

I think the point of contention here is that at least one person has beef with the fact that Subaru is continuing to use a 25+ year old engine block in an all-new car.

i don't have a problem with Subie still using the 2.5...i just find it silly to criticize VW for using an old 2.0L, yet giving Subie a pass on their 2.5...that's all.

i'll be the first to admit that i thought VW's choice to use the 2.slow engine in base trims was a bad move that would likely cost them...it didn't...they made a fortune and sold a boatload of vehicles...i ate a hat on that one. 

[Patrick_D1]

I'm driving one of these this week (in World Rally Blue, of course  ). People can complain all they want about the old engine, but I see no need for replacement. It's still bloody quick and doesn't give much up in terms of refinement or drivability. Kudos to Subaru.

[EV-Light]

Meh...that 90s interior design and cheap plastic kills it for me! I will take a Golf R instead...http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/1407_2015_volkswagen_golf_r_euro_spec_first_test/

[Robin2]

The STi has a lot more over the WRX than the extra ponies.  The suspension is much stiffer and designed for really, really fast travel.  The DCCD system is fantastic.

Not anymore.  Racecomp engineering put both 2015's on the dyno and compared the suspension.  It's nearly identical now.

previous generation, it was very different the numbers.

Taken from nasioc:

STI fronts are mono tube

WRX front is twin tube

BOTH REARS are TWIN TUBE. (notice graphs look almost the same)
---------------------------

measurements below are for WRX

bump front 48.1 mm (1.89 inch)
droop front 88.9 mm (3.5 inch)

44.5 mm front bumpstop

bump rear 51mm (2 inch)
droop rear 66 mm (2.6 inch)

55 mm rear bumpstop

_____________________________________


STI front spring rates 5.8K
STI rear spring rates 5.3k

WRX front spring rates 5.8K
WRX rear spring ratees 5.2K



STI front sway bar 24mm
STI rear sway bar 20mm

WRX front bar 23mm ( measured on press car FEB 2014)
WRX rear bar 20mm