RE: Subaru TA340C: the hot Scooby lives!

[paulmoonraker]

Ali_T said:

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.

You have a sour taste because of your nightmare with Subaru However, for what it's worth, I would not trust the newer 2.5 lump - period.

[LukeyLikey]

paulmoonraker said:

Ali_T said:

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.

You have a sour taste because of your nightmare with Subaru However, for what it's worth, I would not trust the newer 2.5 lump - period.

What doing the homework will tell you is that many of these cars are modified beyond what the manufacturer designed them for, but without the job being done properly. I have had a string of 2.5 turbos none of them ever missed a beat but then I rarely put them on tracks and bounce off the limiter. If you go above about 330 bhp you need to change more internals. That never used to be the case with older Imprezas but the newer cars have different pistons, might be something to do with emissions (not previously a Subaru strongpoint, only a little better now).

I have a Cosworth. 400 bhp but with a very detailed list of upgrades. I've done 12k miles at warp speed with not any issues. My experience in numerous STI 2.5's without any problems at all cannot be luck. When you read what people do to upgrade their STI's, it does seem at least plausible that they are contributing to their problems (don't want to presume about others' experiences, can only be sure about my own)? That's of course their choice, but it doesn't seem to be right to blame the manufacturer if an owner chooses to change the product.

I'm not sure about your STI but I just don't recognise your ownership/driving experience from mine. I have never owned an EVO but driven a number over enough miles to compare (all later cars though). Build is not better, ride is not better (all IMHO), STI's do have an underlying trait of under steer compared with EVO's but overall it does not seem reasonable to dismiss the Subaru. I can see you won't be persuaded for your own reasons but I frankly, feel exactly the same.

Although STi's are often tracked, they are really road/rally cars, where under steer does not compromise the driving experience, especially with the diff and DCCD which eradicates the under steer mechanically (not very purist but the appeal of this genre is not like an M3).

I'll shut up now but overall I've had enough experience with Subaru and other brands (Jag, BMW, Porsche, Audi, Mercedes, Aston, Ferrari, etc.) to know that my good experience with Subarus over the years is not luck.

[ThePlanner]

Ali_T said:

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.

Are you sure you haved owned them? The my one I would give to the Evo is handling. Evo build quality is st. The FQ I looked a buying were shockingly bad. Interior on the impreza has moved on. Turbo lag hmm yes they ave lag but not as you suggest, you sure you were not lulling off in 3rd gear.

Rep mobile handling, the 330s I went out in was planted on the b-roads, not as precise as the Evo, but more compliant and inspired trust in the car. It was more forgiving than the Evo. It sound like you have been out in the entry WRX and not the 330s