RE: Subaru TA340C: the hot Scooby lives!

[anonymous-user]

ThePlanner said:

Max_Torque said:

Richard330s said:

great value for a 59 plate from new for £26.5k.

Go on then, what's it worth now ???

To be honest who cares what cars are worth.

I'm going to hazard a guess that about 99% of car buyers will have an interest in the value of their car in 3 years time!


(sure, there are a few rich people who just don't care, but they are very much the minority)

[allsop83]

Love Subaru's....

The fun started when my old man got a Series McRae back in '97 and then moved onto the P1 (which I then bought off him...)

I have owned 22B, P1, Catalunya and an '03 UK STI but I have to be honest and admit that Subaru has had it's day.
The fun, charm and appeal of these were that they were fast enough to ruffle the established performance cars and at a fraction of the cost. Now they are just too expensive- although not neccesarily TOO expensive for what they are but they will need to be pushing 500bhp at £40,ooo to get back the the charm they previously had.

If I had £40k and was car shopping i would be taking my pick of GTR's or looking at that 1M.

[g00chy]

cant help noticing that everyone with sti/scoob/wrx etc in there name says xxxx is or was a fantastic scooby with this and that mods..

so, your all saying a standard off the forcourt car wasnt that good?
so this one should appeal to you then.

[ScoobieWRX]

g00chy said:

cant help noticing that everyone with sti/scoob/wrx etc in there name says xxxx is or was a fantastic scooby with this and that mods..

so, your all saying a standard off the forcourt car wasnt that good?
so this one should appeal to you then.

No!! The cars are good as they are but i want mine to handle even better, go faster, stop better, look different, whatever etc...

The GTR is a fabulous bit of kit out of the box but it doesn't stop owners wanting it to be even quicker, handle/steer better, stop better etc...

Owners of all manner of high performance machinery mod to their cars to personalise and improve them for their own requirements. It doesn't mean they weren't any good in the first place.

[ThePlanner]

Max_Torque said:

ThePlanner said:

Max_Torque said:

Richard330s said:

great value for a 59 plate from new for £26.5k.

Go on then, what's it worth now ???

To be honest who cares what cars are worth.

I'm going to hazard a guess that about 99% of car buyers will have an interest in the value of their car in 3 years time!


(sure, there are a few rich people who just don't care, but they are very much the minority)

lets be honest here 99% of the general public dont look at depreciation as a cost of ownnership. The cost of owning a car only covers Tax, Insurance, petrol, servicing. Not many people take into account the true cost of owning a car. Hence why not many people give a st about what it worth in a few years time.

Its not about being rich, its about the mentality of the buying public.

I do not look at how much my car is going to be worth in 3 years time, because i do not know when i am going to chop it in. I do not have the 3 year count down in my head to i must buy a new car in 36 months after buying this one whats it going to be worth at trade in.

Edited by ThePlanner on Monday 6th February 13:58

[Ali_T]

Max_Torque said:

I'm going to hazard a guess that about 99% of car buyers will have an interest in the value of their car in 3 years time!


(sure, there are a few rich people who just don't care, but they are very much the minority)

Well, after my 330S blew up (thanks for the explanation on piston design a few pages back, now I know WHY it blew up, didn't make it any less traumatic) I traded it for an Evo XFQ330 (had no trust left in Subaru after some stty goings on). I paid £27k for it in April 09 and traded it for £19k last October, at 2 and 1/2 years old and 20k. That's really not bad at all IMO.

For those interested, I test drove the 320R shortly before the whole sorry debacle. The Evo X is superior in just about every way, regardless of weight. It may be slightly slower in a straight line but it's soooo much more fluid and poised in corners that I'm happy to sacrifice a little speed.

[IMI A]

I think the problem for this package is an 09 GTR. Knocks the spots off it (knocks the spots of anything sub £140k really!).

[ThePlanner]

IMI A said:

I think the problem for this package is an 09 GTR. Knocks the spots off it (knocks the spots of anything sub £140k really!).

But the issue with the GTR is running costs.

[GravelBen]

Ali_T said:

For those interested, I test drove the 320R shortly before the whole sorry debacle. The Evo X is superior in just about every way, regardless of weight. It may be slightly slower in a straight line but it's soooo much more fluid and poised in corners that I'm happy to sacrifice a little speed.

Its interesting the difference in reviews (and hence perhaps in cars) between different markets - while UK reviews always seem to favour Evos, NZ reviews found the Evo X somewhat dull and nose-heavy in comparison to the STI.

As an aside, if production-class competition is any gauge of a road car the STI hatch dominates Group-N while the Evo X has failed to achieve much at all.

Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 7th February 09:51

[big_rob_sydney]

I must be one of the typical owners. I've owned:

98 wrx
98 sti
04 sti
98 22b (current)

I tried the "new age", and to be honest, hated it. This was why I went back to the classic subaru.

And I agree, the new ones are too heavy. Other marques have improved dramatically in terms of power to weight over the last 20 years (when the wrx first came out, more or less), and while subarus now have more power, they have a lot more weight to cart around.

What do we expect a contemporary car with AWD to weigh? Well the spec c is a lightened version of the car, and I'd argue that should be the standard. Why does Subaru insist on trying to make EVERY car appeal to every buyer? You cant make everyone happy all the time, so dont bother.

For people who want a more upmarket class of car, Subaru should try it with the liberty / legacy, and leave the wrx / sti to be the lightweight rally car / ram raid special, and give it some more herbs. Its heritage is in racing, not in being the soccer mums car (reference to subaru's pursuit of the US market), so get back to where it all began, and follow the same method that worked.

If as a company you want more revenue, instead of butchering a car that was very successful and trading off of past glories, how about expanding the lineup eg porsche ( from 911 to cayman, boxster, panamera, etc).

[dank]

looks awful in my opinion, tiny little wheels!!

ha ha

[LukeyLikey]

GravelBen said:

Ali_T said:

For those interested, I test drove the 320R shortly before the whole sorry debacle. The Evo X is superior in just about every way, regardless of weight. It may be slightly slower in a straight line but it's soooo much more fluid and poised in corners that I'm happy to sacrifice a little speed.

Its interesting the difference in reviews (and hence perhaps in cars) between different markets - while UK reviews always seem to favour Evos, NZ reviews found the Evo X somewhat dull and nose-heavy in comparison to the STI.

As an aside, if production-class competition is any gauge of a road car the STI hatch dominates Group-N while the Evo X has failed to achieve much at all.

Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 7th February 09:51

EVO X superior in every way?! The STI has a brilliantly engineered flat four engine with massive character, the EVO has an in-line four, like, well pretty much everything else, sounds average, little or no character. Never liked the looks of the EVO and while the Impreza has never been an oil painting it looks meaner and more purposeful (subjective, I know, but that works both ways). The STI four wheel drive system is better, Subaru call it Symmetrical and when you look into the details it is better (why shouldn't it be, they pioneered all wheel drive on saloon cars 40 years ago before even Audi got there). The point of symmetrical all wheel drive is that the weight and drive is split evenly side to side so the handling is more even and consistent. The low CoG from the boxer engine helps with that too. Group N results mentioned above would seem to back this up.

I know this is an age old argument and you can clearly see where I stand but EVO X is certainly not superior in every way, in fact it could well be the reverse. I for one could not think of spending £30k+ on an in-line four cylinder Mitsubishi.

[LukeyLikey]

...and another thing, I've had loads of STI's, including three hatches - never had a single issue with pistons or anything else. I drive them properly too (which means foot to the floor, rain or shine). Given that so many of these cars get modified in some way, perhaps there's more than meets the eye to some of the negative comments I've read here. It certainly has not been my experience (from a long line of turbo scooby's dating from the mid '90's).

[superman84]

The subaru awd system is better than Mitsi's, really? Im not clued up on this gen impreza but in the past the evo acd/sayc has been much more advanced. Even dccd is a bit mickey mouse in comparision.

Also as a previous scooby owner I do miss the burble but evo engines tend to be stronger and easier/ cheaper to tune to big power. Not a big fan of either the x or the new sti (can't stand the hatch but this is nicer) - theyre getting uglier, heavier and power outputs don't seem to be going up either apart from the ridiculously expensive special editions.

Edited by superman84 on Tuesday 7th February 18:18

[LukeyLikey]

allsop83 said:

Love Subaru's....

The fun started when my old man got a Series McRae back in '97 and then moved onto the P1 (which I then bought off him...)

I have owned 22B, P1, Catalunya and an '03 UK STI but I have to be honest and admit that Subaru has had it's day.
The fun, charm and appeal of these were that they were fast enough to ruffle the established performance cars and at a fraction of the cost. Now they are just too expensive- although not neccesarily TOO expensive for what they are but they will need to be pushing 500bhp at £40,ooo to get back the the charm they previously had.

If I had £40k and was car shopping i would be taking my pick of GTR's or looking at that 1M.

Hmmm, I seem to be on a roll here, sorry for that... I love the 1M but it is a completely different thing. If you like that, buy it. It doesn't make a £40k STI irrelevant.

I've had M3's in the past and I loved them but a Subaru's engineering is completely different. All cars are compromised and the great thing about them is they reflect the designers and engineers attitudes to what is important. For example, flat four engines are smoother, lighter and lower - all important benefits. So why do only Porsche and Subaru use them? Because they introduce packaging compromises.

The 1M is based on a mass market small hatch, like the Impreza, but Subaru say "stuff the packaging - our cars will use boxer and AWD because that's what we believe in, doesn't matter if that gives a smaller passenger compartment." BMW take a different route, and that's great.

The engineering in a Subaru is very unique and extremely good. I don't care if you can't tell that from the interior, I can tell it from the driver's seat.

I'm lucky enough to have quite a few nice cars but I can only drive one of them throughout the whole year - the Impreza. If I didn't own one I would be driving something much less interesting right now and life's too short for that.

[Legacywr]

My 2011 STI is faster around the nurburgring than the 1M
...not in my hands though obviously! haha

[paulmoonraker]

LukeyLikey said:

EVO X superior in every way?! The STI has a brilliantly engineered flat four engine with massive character, the EVO has an in-line four, like, well pretty much everything else, sounds average, little or no character. Never liked the looks of the EVO and while the Impreza has never been an oil painting it looks meaner and more purposeful (subjective, I know, but that works both ways). The STI four wheel drive system is better, Subaru call it Symmetrical and when you look into the details it is better (why shouldn't it be, they pioneered all wheel drive on saloon cars 40 years ago before even Audi got there). The point of symmetrical all wheel drive is that the weight and drive is split evenly side to side so the handling is more even and consistent. The low CoG from the boxer engine helps with that too. Group N results mentioned above would seem to back this up.

I know this is an age old argument and you can clearly see where I stand but EVO X is certainly not superior in every way, in fact it could well be the reverse. I for one could not think of spending £30k+ on an in-line four cylinder Mitsubishi.

Technically speaking the Evo is the better car. IMO this a widely accepted fact. However, on Top Gear the hatch STi beat the Evo X round the track - make of that what you will.... I track my STi, and I have to say, watching Evos, they always seem more precise and don't suffer from understeer like the scooby...

If you want to talk about which car has more character and which is more loveable, well that's a different story...

[Legacywr]

The STI is a nicer everyday car than the Evo X.

[Ali_T]

LukeyLikey said:

EVO X superior in every way?! The STI has a brilliantly engineered flat four engine with massive character, the EVO has an in-line four, like, well pretty much everything else, sounds average, little or no character. Never liked the looks of the EVO and while the Impreza has never been an oil painting it looks meaner and more purposeful (subjective, I know, but that works both ways). The STI four wheel drive system is better, Subaru call it Symmetrical and when you look into the details it is better (why shouldn't it be, they pioneered all wheel drive on saloon cars 40 years ago before even Audi got there). The point of symmetrical all wheel drive is that the weight and drive is split evenly side to side so the handling is more even and consistent. The low CoG from the boxer engine helps with that too. Group N results mentioned above would seem to back this up.

I know this is an age old argument and you can clearly see where I stand but EVO X is certainly not superior in every way, in fact it could well be the reverse. I for one could not think of spending £30k+ on an in-line four cylinder Mitsubishi.

I've owned both. Have you? The Evo X FQ330 is better in every way than the STI 330S. Handling, ride, build quality, transmission smoothness (ever lifted off and then quickly reapplied the throttle on a 330S over 100mph....you won't do twice in a hurry, drivetrain shunt is shocking), engine smoothness, turbo lag (the Subaru makes a characterful noise, but suffers large dollops of '70s style lag)....you get the picture. I even went out of my way and spent money on the Prodrive springs for the 330S to try and improve the floaty, rep mobile, handling but it would take a complete bush kit to get it anywhere close to a standard Evo X, never mind a modified one. The chronic understeer in sharp corners was also rep mobile-like and no amount of symmetrical AWD could prevent it ploughing straight on in the wet. There was a lot I did like about it but, even disregarding the engine issue, I wouldn't buy another one, not now I've seen how much better the opposition is.

As for that brilliantly engineered engine? I don't regard any engine that lunches a piston and block inside 20,000 miles as brilliant. Feel free to do more homework and see how bad the situation is worldwide. It's a joke.

[paulmoonraker]

Legacywr said:

The STI is a nicer everyday car than the Evo X.

This does seem the general consensus... To me, the Evo is more focused, but this comes with compromise...