Tag Archives: Automobilemag.com

2015 Subaru WRX Premium – Is the STI the Better Rex? – Automobile Magazine


“Should I have splurged on an STI?” It’s a question all Subaru WRX owners ask themselves at some point. We’re no exception. We’ve enjoyed our Four Seasons 2015 Subaru WRX Premium, but from the very beginning have wondered whether we should have sought those three extra letters. It came to a head when a 2016 Subaru WRX STI arrived at our office for two weeks, wearing the same shade of blue pearl paint as our car.”

Read more @ http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/12_month_car_reviews/1506-2015-subaru-wrx-premium-june-update/

Notes –

Many people insist that the current (2015-2016) WRX is equal or even better than the current STI.  This is mainly due to the ultra-tunability of the WRX’s FA20DIT engine, the fact that it has a broader spread of torque through it’s rev range than an STI, and the fact that it’s cheaper.

I’ve been instisting that the STI is the better car because it’s more track-tuned.  No, not everyone is interested in track driving, but we’re talking about cars with rally heritage here (both the WRX and the STI shares that heritage).  It’s funny that the WRX supporters appear to conveniently forget this to support their argument but it is almost always   mentioned when someone compares the WRX to a FWD or RWD car.

What I love about this article is that they highlight the WRX’s street strengths (it’s torque availability across the rev range) while also showing that the STI is the better car when it comes to spirited driving (it’s edgier and those edges become a negative aspect in daily driving, but become positive once the pace increases).

On the track, that immediacy gives the STI a clear advantage. More aggressive torque vectoring helps it claw through corners more quickly, and more communicative steering lets you approach the limits of adhesion with greater confidence. “It’s a WRX with all the slop and bushings and hesitation removed,” says Holmes. Even here, however, we’re talking about the difference between good and great. We’ve taken our Four Seasons WRX to the track; it’s no slouch.

I’ve said the following many times, too:

Making a decision between them boils down to how you’ll be using your Subaru. If you plan to spend lots of time at the racetrack, figure out how to scratch together the extra $8,100 for an STI. Its superior suspension and sensitive controls simply make it a more rewarding car to drive at ten-tenths.

Both cars are great.  One is less focused but great for the street, while one is track-focused and great for the track.  Run either one out of their element and their weaknesses will show.

I usually frown upon articles that compare the two cars.  They’re not made to compete against each other.  Back in the day when there was the Ford Mustang LX 5.0 and the Ford Mustang GT, you rarely saw articles comparing the two.  You didn’t see comparisons of Suzuki’s B-King and their Hayabusa, either.  You don’t normally see comparisons of Dodge’s Hemi-powered Charger SRT and their non-SRT Charger.  You typically don’t see the Porsche Cayman base model compared to the Cayman GTS, yet so many people get wrapped around the axle in trying to compare the STI and WRX.  I don’t really get it.  They’re two different cars that focus on two different markets.  Buy what you want and be happy about it (without trying to justify which is better because of your subjective view).

Lastly, no, you can’t buy a WRX and tack on the parts that it lacks ($8000+) to make it equal an STI.  You’ll run out of that extra $8000 in savings well before you end up with an STI equivalent…and you’ll still just have an WRX.  The STI’s 6-speed alone justifies it’s higher price, but the STI is the sum of it’s parts…they’re all tuned to make the STI what it is.  I DO NOT hate the WRX, but it is the base product of the product line.


Here’s a video I just found that has an opinion (I don’t really agree with ALL of it but it does mention some things I didn’t comment on) —

2015 WRX, Why No Hatch? – Automobile Magazine

I continue to see bickering and arguments (and just general piss-tivity) over the fact that Subaru nixed the hatch for 2015.  So, here’s a documented reason.  Note that I’ve posted articles stating some reasons before, but I haven’t posted this particular reason (or article):

One big change that might upset some of the faithful is that Subaru is dropping the hatchback. It’s an unexpected move given that the hatchback/sedan split has been running about fifty/fifty. Subaru product planners explain that they had to sacrifice the second body style in order to get the greater degree of differentiation from the Impreza that they were seeking with the new WRX.

Read more @ http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/driven/1403_2015_subaru_wrx_review/

2015 Subaru WRX Reviews




All of the reviews are pretty good, considering that these are still pre-production cars.  At least one magazine said that a full review would be done relatively soon, so we should have an in-depth review to read, “relatively soon.”

At least one mag also tested the car in the 0-60 and quarter mile:

In straight-line testing, our 3330-pound tester, a top-of-the-line Limited with the six-speed manual, proved slower than the 2013 WRX Special Edition (4.7 seconds, 13.5 seconds at 100.0 mph) and the 2012 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution MR (5.1 seconds, 13.8 seconds at 100.0 mph), with 0 to 60 mph coming in 5.5 seconds and the quarter mile in 14.0 seconds at 98.1 mph. Quick, for sure, and quicker than the 3193-pound 252-horsepower Ford Focus ST (5.9 seconds, 14.6 seconds at 95.9 mph), but well off the times of the 3195-pound WRX SE and the 3631-pound Evo MR. What’s with the weight gain? Chalk it up to additional safety structures and new equipment such as a power moonroof and harman/kardon audio. The silver lining: road test editor Scott Mortara noted that a better launch could easily drop the times a couple tenths, and in our handling and braking tests, the WRX flat-out exceled. Max lateral acceleration registered at 0.96 g, a level of adhesion that matches the Evo MR and easily outgrips the WRX SE (0.92). Figure eight? A speedy run of 25.3 seconds – 0.2 second behind the Evo but 0.3 ahead of the SE.

There’s only a 60-lb weight gain between the old and new WRX…that does not account for the huge discrepancy in the 0-60 and quarter mile, though.  The 2015 will never be as fast as that 2013 WRX SE they tested, mainly because the 2013 was equipped with a 5-sp manual, while all 2015s will be equipped with either a CVT or a 6-sp manual.  Yes, that means the 2015 now has an extra shift point, just as the GR/GV STIs did…remember everyone stating that the WRX was quicker like it was some magic sauce that Subaru had applied to their go-fast concoction?  Well, the reason why it was faster was because the STI has closer-ratio gears…a driver has to shift the STI before the end of the 0-60 and quarter mile, which means it’s going to finish both events slower than the 2013 WRX.

Also, look at the other data…the max lateral acceleration and figure eight results…ahead of the 2013 SE  in both cases and ahead of the Evo in one.  That’s not bad at all.