Help picking a subaru? (I think this is a new topic..)
02-03-2014, 12:00 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 494
Total Cats: 6
Help picking a subaru? (I think this is a new topic..)
So I did a little searching but didnt quite see my questionn answered. Hopefully I looked far enough. If not, feel free to call me an idiot and yell at me.
So I am considering trading in my current DD for lack of cargo room, lack of rear leg room, for something cheaper I don't feel like I need to baby as much, and is manual, still awd for snowboarding trips, and a little more fun to commute in but still relatively comfortable.
So naturally Subaru wagon comes to mind. My questions is, if I am planning on doing some light mods anyways, (nothing too major, this will be my DD so it has to be day/weekend projects) is it worth it to buy a WRX vs just an impreza?
Logic is, if I am most likely replacing DP/exhaust/intake/tuning regardless, would it make more sense to buy the WRX and do those things, or buy an impreza for cheaper, and spend some of the money I saved by buying the stock impreza on the remaining turbo components to get it up to the same level as light mods on a WRX? or on a forester instead of an impreza platform? how much value is there in starting on an already turbo platform and improving it vs hassle of turbo-ing an NA car? (I mean turboing a miata isnt so difficult if you know what you are doing, is turboing a stock impreza much more involved? similar scenario: adding a turbo to an NA engine that was designed for turbo initially)
Also, best bang for your buck model? I know 02-05 have fragile transmissions from what I have read, and 06-07 has the 2.5L vs the 2.0, but for a moderate power level, is paying more for the 2.5 really worth it? is the difference in spool really that much different between the two?
Summary: obviously an 06-07 wrx would be a more fun car than an 02 2.0L impreza, but is the price difference worth it if I could just mod the impreza to the same power levels?
comments/thoughts/reasons I am an idiot all welcome.
So I am considering trading in my current DD for lack of cargo room, lack of rear leg room, for something cheaper I don't feel like I need to baby as much, and is manual, still awd for snowboarding trips, and a little more fun to commute in but still relatively comfortable.
So naturally Subaru wagon comes to mind. My questions is, if I am planning on doing some light mods anyways, (nothing too major, this will be my DD so it has to be day/weekend projects) is it worth it to buy a WRX vs just an impreza?
Logic is, if I am most likely replacing DP/exhaust/intake/tuning regardless, would it make more sense to buy the WRX and do those things, or buy an impreza for cheaper, and spend some of the money I saved by buying the stock impreza on the remaining turbo components to get it up to the same level as light mods on a WRX? or on a forester instead of an impreza platform? how much value is there in starting on an already turbo platform and improving it vs hassle of turbo-ing an NA car? (I mean turboing a miata isnt so difficult if you know what you are doing, is turboing a stock impreza much more involved? similar scenario: adding a turbo to an NA engine that was designed for turbo initially)
Also, best bang for your buck model? I know 02-05 have fragile transmissions from what I have read, and 06-07 has the 2.5L vs the 2.0, but for a moderate power level, is paying more for the 2.5 really worth it? is the difference in spool really that much different between the two?
Summary: obviously an 06-07 wrx would be a more fun car than an 02 2.0L impreza, but is the price difference worth it if I could just mod the impreza to the same power levels?
comments/thoughts/reasons I am an idiot all welcome.
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 12:05 PM
#2
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
no chance I'd buy just an imprezza; there's barely a MPG bonus to compensate for the performance hit without the turbo.
I also wouldn't go with a 2.0L either.
I'm assuming you're looking at wagons? My WRX hatch can fit things up to 8' long depending. I just had a 6' ladder in the back this weekend. So many versatile.
I also wouldn't go with a 2.0L either.
I'm assuming you're looking at wagons? My WRX hatch can fit things up to 8' long depending. I just had a 6' ladder in the back this weekend. So many versatile.
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 12:13 PM
#3
Newb
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Garden Grove, California, United States
Posts: 42
Total Cats: -7
The impreza 2.5rs is naturally aspirated. The WRX was 2.0 untill 06, then upped to 2.5.
Modding an impreza to attempt matching the WRX would be pointless. The gearset on the WRX was updated in '04 to "RA" gears, if I remember correctly, but they're still not bulletproof by any means.
Car Purchasing Forum
read through the stickies.
Modding an impreza to attempt matching the WRX would be pointless. The gearset on the WRX was updated in '04 to "RA" gears, if I remember correctly, but they're still not bulletproof by any means.
Car Purchasing Forum
read through the stickies.
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 12:42 PM
#6
the 06-07 indeed does have quite a bit more lowend torque.
the 06-07 also has longer gearing, and the boxes tend to snap just as often as the "glass box" before it.
the 2.0 does get better gas mileage when you drive it like a sane person
you can't go wrong with either, but each has different pro's and cons
the 06-07 also has longer gearing, and the boxes tend to snap just as often as the "glass box" before it.
the 2.0 does get better gas mileage when you drive it like a sane person
you can't go wrong with either, but each has different pro's and cons
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 12:46 PM
#7
Junior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 494
Total Cats: 6
Brain: yeah I'm looking at a wagon. Seems like for the stuff I want to do, that make more sense than a sedan. My current back seats don't even fold down, so I have like no usable cargo space. Much lame. want many versatile.
18PSI: I hadn't really seen anyone talking about turboing the RS, but I wasnt sure why. Im not trying to be an innovator and do more work than what makes sense, just curious why nobody has gone that route. Cost savings just don't justify the extra hassle I assume?
Ill keep trying to compare dyno results etc, but I guess I only have the one question left, and that is if the 06 with a 2.5 is only 3 hp and like 20 tq more powerful than the 02-05 2.0, is it worth paying extra for? If the trans in the 02-05 isnt really as bad as some people make it out to be, I don't see a big benefit between the 06 over the 05 at stock conditions. BUT if I plan to mod in the future I imagine the 2,5 responds better than the 2.0 to the same mods? example, say the catless dp/exhaust is installed on both engines, if it boosts performance by a given %, the stock comparisons are so close, I would end up at pretty similar power levels then too. So is it worth paying a few grand extra for an 06 vs 05? or am I mistaken in my assumption that they would respond the same? if 2.5 would respond outrageously better, maybe it is worth a few grand more up front?
non performance wise, it looks like both models have less than impressive road noise levels, sound system, nothing fancy inside, so other than AL control arms, I dont see a huge difference in 06 vs 05 just in overall aspects of ownership.
Im going to try to test drive both, just making sure there weren't any obvious reasons to rule out either. both are just under 100k, but the 05 is about 3k cheaper than the 06 and both seem to be in decent/good shape.
18PSI: I hadn't really seen anyone talking about turboing the RS, but I wasnt sure why. Im not trying to be an innovator and do more work than what makes sense, just curious why nobody has gone that route. Cost savings just don't justify the extra hassle I assume?
Ill keep trying to compare dyno results etc, but I guess I only have the one question left, and that is if the 06 with a 2.5 is only 3 hp and like 20 tq more powerful than the 02-05 2.0, is it worth paying extra for? If the trans in the 02-05 isnt really as bad as some people make it out to be, I don't see a big benefit between the 06 over the 05 at stock conditions. BUT if I plan to mod in the future I imagine the 2,5 responds better than the 2.0 to the same mods? example, say the catless dp/exhaust is installed on both engines, if it boosts performance by a given %, the stock comparisons are so close, I would end up at pretty similar power levels then too. So is it worth paying a few grand extra for an 06 vs 05? or am I mistaken in my assumption that they would respond the same? if 2.5 would respond outrageously better, maybe it is worth a few grand more up front?
non performance wise, it looks like both models have less than impressive road noise levels, sound system, nothing fancy inside, so other than AL control arms, I dont see a huge difference in 06 vs 05 just in overall aspects of ownership.
Im going to try to test drive both, just making sure there weren't any obvious reasons to rule out either. both are just under 100k, but the 05 is about 3k cheaper than the 06 and both seem to be in decent/good shape.
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 01:06 PM
#10
Brain: yeah I'm looking at a wagon. Seems like for the stuff I want to do, that make more sense than a sedan. My current back seats don't even fold down, so I have like no usable cargo space. Much lame. want many versatile.
18PSI: I hadn't really seen anyone talking about turboing the RS, but I wasnt sure why. Im not trying to be an innovator and do more work than what makes sense, just curious why nobody has gone that route. Cost savings just don't justify the extra hassle I assume?
Ill keep trying to compare dyno results etc, but I guess I only have the one question left, and that is if the 06 with a 2.5 is only 3 hp and like 20 tq more powerful than the 02-05 2.0, is it worth paying extra for? If the trans in the 02-05 isnt really as bad as some people make it out to be, I don't see a big benefit between the 06 over the 05 at stock conditions. BUT if I plan to mod in the future I imagine the 2,5 responds better than the 2.0 to the same mods? example, say the catless dp/exhaust is installed on both engines, if it boosts performance by a given %, the stock comparisons are so close, I would end up at pretty similar power levels then too. So is it worth paying a few grand extra for an 06 vs 05? or am I mistaken in my assumption that they would respond the same? if 2.5 would respond outrageously better, maybe it is worth a few grand more up front?
non performance wise, it looks like both models have less than impressive road noise levels, sound system, nothing fancy inside, so other than AL control arms, I dont see a huge difference in 06 vs 05 just in overall aspects of ownership.
Im going to try to test drive both, just making sure there weren't any obvious reasons to rule out either. both are just under 100k, but the 05 is about 3k cheaper than the 06 and both seem to be in decent/good shape.
18PSI: I hadn't really seen anyone talking about turboing the RS, but I wasnt sure why. Im not trying to be an innovator and do more work than what makes sense, just curious why nobody has gone that route. Cost savings just don't justify the extra hassle I assume?
Ill keep trying to compare dyno results etc, but I guess I only have the one question left, and that is if the 06 with a 2.5 is only 3 hp and like 20 tq more powerful than the 02-05 2.0, is it worth paying extra for? If the trans in the 02-05 isnt really as bad as some people make it out to be, I don't see a big benefit between the 06 over the 05 at stock conditions. BUT if I plan to mod in the future I imagine the 2,5 responds better than the 2.0 to the same mods? example, say the catless dp/exhaust is installed on both engines, if it boosts performance by a given %, the stock comparisons are so close, I would end up at pretty similar power levels then too. So is it worth paying a few grand extra for an 06 vs 05? or am I mistaken in my assumption that they would respond the same? if 2.5 would respond outrageously better, maybe it is worth a few grand more up front?
non performance wise, it looks like both models have less than impressive road noise levels, sound system, nothing fancy inside, so other than AL control arms, I dont see a huge difference in 06 vs 05 just in overall aspects of ownership.
Im going to try to test drive both, just making sure there weren't any obvious reasons to rule out either. both are just under 100k, but the 05 is about 3k cheaper than the 06 and both seem to be in decent/good shape.
that is exactly it, not worth it. if you do a crappy hack job using band aids it will be mediocre at best. if you do it right you'll be like 2k less than a wrx out of pocket which is just silly.
2
never underestimate the power of .5L and AVCS. peak numbers show you next to nothing about how a car feels. the 2.5 feels like a small v6, vs the 2.0 feels like a turbo 4. both are great in their own respect, just depends on what you want: better gas mileage or better torque. also the 2.5 makes so much more with mods.
I've had an 04(wrx), 05(wrx), 06(wrx), 07(wrx), and 08(fxt)
as far as all around awesome the forester has been the best. next would be the 06 wrx. the rest after that. my current 04 is cool i'm definitely enjoying it and like the mpg it gets vs the others, but if I was to mod it (I won't) I'd definitely go for the 06+
the 06-08 its basically an 06+ wrx with a lot more room, higher ride height, and way shorter gearing.
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 01:13 PM
#11
If you are going to go N/A I'd say any wagon would do... I prefer turbo. I owned a 9-2x n/a and even though it was extremely comfortable it wasn't enough space for me in the rear for my dog and other things I did. I ended up getting rid of it and bought myself an SF forester (98ish-02). It has a ej20k 2.0L Turbo Motor now but it's from a wrx wagon from overseas and is 9.0:1 compression. I personally don't like acvs, and I like to keep things simple. The little extra compression helps the pickup at low rpm.
I highly suggest a forester if you like to utilize headroom, space, throw a bunch of stuff in the back, tow small trailers, do construction, have a pet, etc.
I can definitely say, I sort of agree with the above about possibly going with a 2.5 turbo mainly because of the aftermarket support and newer motors get about the same gas mileage if not better than my 2.0L turbo. The Version 3/4 stuff uses a wierd type of ecu system that isn't as tunable in the states - so its pretty limited. That said... Collectively, if you decide to go Subaru... set your expectations on gas mileage LOW... don't expect to get the greatest w/ awd. But in my opinion, my forester is the best all purpose vehicle I have ever owned - I will never not have one or something like it.
I highly suggest a forester if you like to utilize headroom, space, throw a bunch of stuff in the back, tow small trailers, do construction, have a pet, etc.
I can definitely say, I sort of agree with the above about possibly going with a 2.5 turbo mainly because of the aftermarket support and newer motors get about the same gas mileage if not better than my 2.0L turbo. The Version 3/4 stuff uses a wierd type of ecu system that isn't as tunable in the states - so its pretty limited. That said... Collectively, if you decide to go Subaru... set your expectations on gas mileage LOW... don't expect to get the greatest w/ awd. But in my opinion, my forester is the best all purpose vehicle I have ever owned - I will never not have one or something like it.
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 01:25 PM
#12
Junior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 494
Total Cats: 6
Meeners: I might have been kinda confusing, I am not looking for NA. was just considering if I bought NA and turbo myself versus buying turbo.
18PSI: thanks for the comments. I was looking for someone with actual experience with the options vs just reading stats on a website so I appreciate the insight.
As far as gas mileage, it looks to be rated pretty similar to my DD 20/26 ish but my commute to work is 40 miles of about 95% highway cruising so I normally get 26-27 depending on traffic and how late I am running..
and as far as the WRX vs Forester, I normally drive by myself to work and thats all it's used for. I dont have any animals, or work from the car, or plan on throwing disco roller skate parties in the back, so I think just the WRX would be plenty of space for carrying snowboards and gear, my bike occasionally, and car parts. Its more length and width that I am looking for, versus height.
But it sounds like if the 2.5 responds much better than the 2.0, so it might be worth going with the slightly more expensive model. I'll be trading in a higher value car regardless so it's just me being a Jew trying to get as much money in the trade as possible.
Thanks for the comments everyone.
18PSI: thanks for the comments. I was looking for someone with actual experience with the options vs just reading stats on a website so I appreciate the insight.
As far as gas mileage, it looks to be rated pretty similar to my DD 20/26 ish but my commute to work is 40 miles of about 95% highway cruising so I normally get 26-27 depending on traffic and how late I am running..
and as far as the WRX vs Forester, I normally drive by myself to work and thats all it's used for. I dont have any animals, or work from the car, or plan on throwing disco roller skate parties in the back, so I think just the WRX would be plenty of space for carrying snowboards and gear, my bike occasionally, and car parts. Its more length and width that I am looking for, versus height.
But it sounds like if the 2.5 responds much better than the 2.0, so it might be worth going with the slightly more expensive model. I'll be trading in a higher value car regardless so it's just me being a Jew trying to get as much money in the trade as possible.
Thanks for the comments everyone.
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 01:43 PM
#15
Meeners: I might have been kinda confusing, I am not looking for NA. was just considering if I bought NA and turbo myself versus buying turbo.
18PSI: thanks for the comments. I was looking for someone with actual experience with the options vs just reading stats on a website so I appreciate the insight.
As far as gas mileage, it looks to be rated pretty similar to my DD 20/26 ish but my commute to work is 40 miles of about 95% highway cruising so I normally get 26-27 depending on traffic and how late I am running..
and as far as the WRX vs Forester, I normally drive by myself to work and thats all it's used for. I dont have any animals, or work from the car, or plan on throwing disco roller skate parties in the back, so I think just the WRX would be plenty of space for carrying snowboards and gear, my bike occasionally, and car parts. Its more length and width that I am looking for, versus height.
But it sounds like if the 2.5 responds much better than the 2.0, so it might be worth going with the slightly more expensive model. I'll be trading in a higher value car regardless so it's just me being a Jew trying to get as much money in the trade as possible.
Thanks for the comments everyone.
18PSI: thanks for the comments. I was looking for someone with actual experience with the options vs just reading stats on a website so I appreciate the insight.
As far as gas mileage, it looks to be rated pretty similar to my DD 20/26 ish but my commute to work is 40 miles of about 95% highway cruising so I normally get 26-27 depending on traffic and how late I am running..
and as far as the WRX vs Forester, I normally drive by myself to work and thats all it's used for. I dont have any animals, or work from the car, or plan on throwing disco roller skate parties in the back, so I think just the WRX would be plenty of space for carrying snowboards and gear, my bike occasionally, and car parts. Its more length and width that I am looking for, versus height.
But it sounds like if the 2.5 responds much better than the 2.0, so it might be worth going with the slightly more expensive model. I'll be trading in a higher value car regardless so it's just me being a Jew trying to get as much money in the trade as possible.
Thanks for the comments everyone.
Yes as far as 2.0 vs 2.5, even though I have a personal vendetta against the 2.5 and like to pick on the big boys... the fight is strong with the EJ.
Disclaimer: as soon as you purchase a subaru and you modify it you will indefinitely be introduced to the Subi-douchebagery. There are a few great people that do work and understand the cars in DEPTH, however - A large quantity of the commun can't figure out a wrench from a 12 pt socket and think that internet read knowledge supersedes life/seat-time/garage-time and deems them God's. These are the people that buy the cars and immediately assume they are automatically the next supercar to beat on Pinks. Careful. Learn a ton, and have fun.
I've done a few judging appearances for a large local Subaru meet, car show, picnics, etc... and can definitely tell you that there are a lot of knowledgable folk and collectively people REALLY love these cars. I don't claim to know anything really, however I can attest that these are really great cars. Very versatile and Subaru was smart as far as part interchangeability. Regardless what car you choose, I think you will enjoy it.
Oh ya... Winter Tires in the Winter and you might as well dub that thing an all terrain vehicle.
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 02:48 PM
#17
lol Scott, comparing your vf52 car to a td04 you're cool dawg.
Overall peak power remains the same, but DAT TORQUE
Also Meeners, there is no logical argument you can ever provide for the 2.0 vs the 2.5 when it comes to making power. Even if you were to want to build a revvy setup you'd end up with 2.35L or 2.1/2.2, pretty much never a 2.slow.
I bet you do rustle a few jimmies on the forums with a discussion like that though
Overall peak power remains the same, but DAT TORQUE
Also Meeners, there is no logical argument you can ever provide for the 2.0 vs the 2.5 when it comes to making power. Even if you were to want to build a revvy setup you'd end up with 2.35L or 2.1/2.2, pretty much never a 2.slow.
I bet you do rustle a few jimmies on the forums with a discussion like that though
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 02:52 PM
#19
Junior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 494
Total Cats: 6
I think I am leaning towards the 06 wrx, which I was already leaning towards but wanted to make sure I had some good reason for preferential treatment. Hopefully the dealership doesn't hate me for popping in after work right before they try to close to go for a test drive..
Thanks again for the comments everyone.
Thanks again for the comments everyone.
Reply
0
0
02-03-2014, 03:03 PM
#20
Oh yes? (Insert Verbal Ricer Fly by Here...) 
(Insert ricer explanation on why my 2.0L is unlike all other 2.0L's here)
Lol... I'm a revolutionist and erroneously stubborn but I ain't stupid hehe... I've driven a few STI's and XT's. They hurt my feelings The only thing I got going on is I've surprised quite a few mildly modded guys 
Forever alone though... Turbo SF chassis are hilariously fun sleepers status. At the meets they always think I'm a poser and I be like
Dey be like, get out of here... n/a poser you ain't elite.
Then I be like. It's turbo doh...
Dey be like... Naw ungh? Those didn't come turbo, stupid old ricer...
Then I be like: *hard park*... pop hood... run inside and get mellow mushroom pizza, come back to open arm subi hugs... juke moves run to car. peel out with pizza in hand holding out window like Papa John.
I made most of that last part up.
(Insert ricer explanation on why my 2.0L is unlike all other 2.0L's here)
lol Scott, comparing your vf52 car to a td04 you're cool dawg.
Overall peak power remains the same, but DAT TORQUE
Also Meeners, there is no logical argument you can ever provide for the 2.0 vs the 2.5 when it comes to making power. Even if you were to want to build a revvy setup you'd end up with 2.35L or 2.1/2.2, pretty much never a 2.slow.
I bet you do rustle a few jimmies on the forums with a discussion like that though
Overall peak power remains the same, but DAT TORQUE
Also Meeners, there is no logical argument you can ever provide for the 2.0 vs the 2.5 when it comes to making power. Even if you were to want to build a revvy setup you'd end up with 2.35L or 2.1/2.2, pretty much never a 2.slow.
I bet you do rustle a few jimmies on the forums with a discussion like that though
Forever alone though... Turbo SF chassis are hilariously fun sleepers status. At the meets they always think I'm a poser and I be like
Dey be like, get out of here... n/a poser you ain't elite.
Then I be like. It's turbo doh...
Dey be like... Naw ungh? Those didn't come turbo, stupid old ricer...
Then I be like: *hard park*... pop hood... run inside and get mellow mushroom pizza, come back to open arm subi hugs... juke moves run to car. peel out with pizza in hand holding out window like Papa John.
I made most of that last part up.
Reply
0
0
