Originally Posted by ditchmyster
(Post 11576350)
Many moons ago there was a test done by the motoring press of petrol and diesel variants of a Mondeo, break even point was 100k for the diesel variant.
Enough said.:thumb: mpg wise the diesels are far cheaper to run as we all know 30 mpg is around average for a wrx and a bit lower for an sti. diesels run around mid 40s to 50s on everyday driving and the cost per gallon is the same. maintenace is hardly cheap on an impreza and they do require repairs as much as the next car. |
Originally Posted by fat-thomas
(Post 11576353)
on buying a new car yes,second hand no.
mpg wise the diesels are far cheaper to run as we all know 30 mpg is around average for a wrx and a bit lower for an sti. diesels run around mid 40s to 50s on everyday driving and the cost per gallon is the same. maintenace is hardly cheap on an impreza and they do require repairs as much as the next car. |
Originally Posted by WRXrowdy
(Post 11576297)
I beg to differ. We have had our car for seven years, touch wood the only thing that has gone wrong mechanically is a tiny hole in the top rad hose, and then a hairline fracture in the top of the rad itself.
Can you honestly tell me a golf the same age (and I have had three) would be as reliable and not cost a fortune in repair bills. You can't just plug a fault code reader in a vag car, has to go somewhere that has vag com diagnostics to deal with that. Mate of mine has got a 1.9 Passat, it is newer than our scoob, and the dashboard is lit up like a Christmas tree. He changed the abs unit, but can't even bleed the brakes without getting it connected to vag com and have that tell the Ecu the unit has been changed, and to turn the fault light off.
Originally Posted by ditchmyster
(Post 11576317)
Well I like to drive and have fun in my car when it's appropriate, I don't generally tear arse about the place during day to day driving, I tend to stick pretty close to the speed limit and don't see the point in spunking fuel if I'm only going to the shops, I save it for those times when I'm in the mood for a blast and go do the coast road or some other back roads where there's not many cars about or people trying to cross the road doing their shopping.
I wouldn't have a modern diesel as they are crap and end up costing more in repairs than you save on fuel as well as the fact that diesel is more expensive as are the cars, false economy unless your going to do more than 100k in 3yrs and my days of doing that sort of milage are long gone thankfully.:thumb: The WRX is poor on fuel, attracts high maintenance costs and is not particularly insurance friendly. Most owners who run these cars will see mid-20s for fuel consumption at the very best. If you don't like your diesels - I do - then go for one of the multitude of other cars available out there, maybe something like a 1.6 Focus. It'll still be vastly more economical and a generally better place to be when making your way from A to B than driving an Impreza turbo with a glass of water balanced on your head to achieve your 36mpg. If you're buying a car that's designed to be driven quickly I think it's wrong to worry about the amount of fuel it uses. If you're worried about that, buy something more economical, whatever it may be. |
Mine does 36mpg sticking between 70/80mph with the odd squirt here and there, 28mpg is achieved by sticking to the speed limit.
As for a focus being a better place to be.:lol1: |
Why is it that if some gets a service from RCM everyone goes crazy and talks about how much of a waste of money they are and where the cheapest place to get oil is or tyres etc but someone wants to save a bit of fuel and they've got the wrong car :wonder:
|
Originally Posted by Carnut
(Post 11576400)
Why is it that if some gets a service from RCM everyone goes crazy and talks about how much of a waste of money they are and where the cheapest place to get oil is or tyres etc but someone wants to save a bit of fuel and they've got the wrong car :wonder:
|
i wasnt worried, i onlu put this thread up to see of it was about right as this is my first impreza i just wasnt sure
|
Thenewgalaxy
You can sling mud coz I drive a wrx if you want, but just under 30mpg average isn't too bad, certainly doesn't worry me. My Volvo diesel needed over a grand spent on it in repairs in the first month I owned it, the Subaru well under half that in seven years. The impreza is also cheaper for me to insure if it was on the same policy as my Volvo diesel. But I don't think this thread is about swapping a wrx for a diesel anyway! |
Originally Posted by WRXrowdy
(Post 11576480)
Thenewgalaxy
You can sling mud coz I drive a wrx if you want, but just under 30mpg average isn't too bad, certainly doesn't worry me. My Volvo diesel needed over a grand spent on it in repairs in the first month I owned it, the Subaru well under half that in seven years. The impreza is also cheaper for me to insure if it was on the same policy as my Volvo diesel. But I don't think this thread is about swapping a wrx for a diesel anyway! If you want a car that achieves respectable fuel economy, don't drive a turbocharged Impreza. |
Originally Posted by WRXrowdy
(Post 11576480)
Thenewgalaxy
You can sling mud coz I drive a wrx if you want, but just under 30mpg average isn't too bad, certainly doesn't worry me. My Volvo diesel needed over a grand spent on it in repairs in the first month I owned it, the Subaru well under half that in seven years. The impreza is also cheaper for me to insure if it was on the same policy as my Volvo diesel. But I don't think this thread is about swapping a wrx for a diesel anyway! |
Tubs, the op was on about economy on a wrx, the fact that ditch and myself spoke out about diesels (and I own one) or over rated vag cars (and I own one of these too), led TNG to mention us wrx owners in a less favourable light.
|
Originally Posted by fat-thomas
(Post 11576193)
I used to get 18mpg then changed the arb and crank pulley now I get 65mpg.....
Now where's my crack pipe?? Something for WRX owners hitting google who have been made to feel they made the wrong choice - this thread is an eye opener. STI owners do not read on. WRX V STI which is quicker to 60 mph a WRX or STI? can a WRX beat an STI that has 100bhp more? STI envy What are the differences between an STI and WRX Is it true a WRX is faster than an STI Is the 5 speed WRX gearbox weak? is the wrx the wrong choice best subaru impreza ever made wrx ppp wrx blobeye wrx hawkeye wrx hatch wrx saloon JDM wrx classic wrx newage wrx Why does the WRX use less fuel than an STI? Do I need to forge my internals Is it true a WRX will always keep up with an STI that has 20% more power Benefits of 6 speed subaru Impreza STI box? WRX V STI gear ratios why the wrx is better for launching 6 speed STI box unusable what do I need for 450bhp which is faster with the same power STI or WRX Are STI transmission losses more than a WRX? Can a WRX beat an STI Why do STI owners hate the WRX so much? which is the best car to mod sti or wrx which is the best car for the drag strip WRX or STI post your wrx sti timeslips stock wrx sti performance why is the wrx faster than an sti? why should I buy an sti is the WRX good value? best gearbox for subaru |
Originally Posted by ditchmyster
(Post 11576389)
Mine does 36mpg sticking between 70/80mph with the odd squirt here and there, 28mpg is achieved by sticking to the speed limit.
As for a focus being a better place to be.:lol1: At 70-80 the MPG drops to around 25mpg, I don't know if it's due to my compression losses or what. I stick to 60mph on the Motorways so getting good MPG is deffo a compromise at times.
Originally Posted by WRXrowdy
(Post 11576480)
Thenewgalaxy
You can sling mud coz I drive a wrx if you want |
Originally Posted by RS_Matt
(Post 11576710)
Lol you've upped the WRX hate campaign now you've lost your partner in crime.
|
Originally Posted by RS_Matt
(Post 11576713)
On a flat road run to Bridlington I can just about hit 40mpg sticking religiously to 50mph
At 70-80 the MPG drops to around 25mpg, I don't know if it's due to my compression losses or what. I stick to 60mph on the Motorways so getting good MPG is deffo a compromise at times. Ignore the STI fanboys, I've proved time and time again that the WRX is a far far better car in the real world. |
Originally Posted by angel1368
(Post 11576725)
I don't do track days or anything like that so as a daily driver have I made the better choice by buying a wrx over the sti in your opinion
i have driven both back to back for a couple of years and if you want performance handling and braking get the sti. if you want a car that looks a bit like an sti but with none of the perfomance benefits get the wrx. |
Originally Posted by fat-thomas
(Post 11576718)
sad trolling attempt to try and link me to some weird peado for the record he was a wrx owner like yourself
...though my car is only 11 years old, you filthy Mechanophile. |
Originally Posted by angel1368
(Post 11576725)
I don't do track days or anything like that so as a daily driver have I made the better choice by buying a wrx over the sti in your opinion
|
Originally Posted by angel1368
(Post 11576725)
I don't do track days or anything like that so as a daily driver have I made the better choice by buying a wrx over the sti in your opinion
Originally Posted by RS_Matt
(Post 11576731)
Yes and in my estimation by some way.
|
Originally Posted by kevfawcett
(Post 11576779)
You're off your nut
Faster to 60 Faster to 100 at similar power levels Faster 1/4 mile at 350hp even if STI has up to 20% more power. Less transmission losses and rotational mass More subtle interior Far better MPG Less drag Less weight Cheaper to insure Cheaper to fix Cheaper to maintain Doesn't need forged internals to run 11 second drag runs. Easier to drive at increased power levels (STI drivers get more spin and hit the limiter) |
What a fag
|
Originally Posted by RS_Matt
(Post 11576801)
Cheaper to buy
Faster to 60 Faster to 100 at similar power levels Faster 1/4 mile at 350hp even if STI has up to 20% more power. Less transmission losses and rotational mass More subtle interior Far better MPG Less drag Less weight Cheaper to insure Cheaper to fix Cheaper to maintain Doesn't need forged internals to run 11 second drag runs. Easier to drive at increased power levels (STI drivers get more spin and hit the limiter) |
Originally Posted by RS_Matt
(Post 11576801)
Cheaper to buy
Faster to 60 Faster to 100 at similar power levels Faster 1/4 mile at 350hp even if STI has up to 20% more power. Less transmission losses and rotational mass More subtle interior Far better MPG Less drag Less weight Cheaper to insure Cheaper to fix Cheaper to maintain Doesn't need forged internals to run 11 second drag runs. Easier to drive at increased power levels (STI drivers get more spin and hit the limiter) No brembo brakes Comedy suspension Weak engine Weak gearbox No avcs heads No big spoiler that all the wrx box's want As for faster that's only in your opinion remember I did 12.8 standing quarter with a passenger and 260 ish bhp,can't deny it you were there ;) |
Originally Posted by fat-thomas
(Post 11576827)
No dccd
No brembo brakes Comedy suspension Weak engine Weak gearbox No avcs heads No big spoiler that all the wrx box's want As for faster that's only in you're opinion remember I did 12.8 standing quarter with a passenger and 260 ish bhp,can't deny it you were there ;) 350bhp WRX humiliates 450bhp STI. Comedy suspension is better for comedy UK roads. WRX brakes are 2nd to Fred Flintstone's brakes. |
Originally Posted by RS_Matt
(Post 11576837)
It's widely accepted the Engine (and gearbox) in WRX handles 350bhp, Arguably the Engine in STI handles 450bhp.
350bhp WRX humiliates 450bhp STI. Comedy suspension is better for comedy UK roads. WRX brakes are 2nd to Fred Flintstone's brakes. Is humiliation ;) |
Originally Posted by angel1368
(Post 11576040)
just curious if this is about right in a blob wrx
|
Originally Posted by fat-thomas
(Post 11576843)
But 12.8 with passenger at 260 bhp in my sti vs 12.6 with 330 bhp in your wrx
Is a lie ;) So far 430bhp, 265bhp, 260bhp and 256bhp has been stated! I think your 2013 comment of an STI need over 400bhp to get into the 12's gives the game away. 400bhp in a WRX and you'd be pushing mid 11's lol. |
Originally Posted by RS_Matt
(Post 11576853)
How many max power levels did you mange in that infamous June 2012 Santa Pod run?
So far 430bhp, 265bhp, 260bhp and 256bhp has been stated! I think your 2013 comment of an STI need over 400bhp to get into the 12's gives the game away. 400bhp in a WRX and you'd be pushing mid 11's lol. |
Originally Posted by RS_Matt
(Post 11576853)
How many max power levels did you mange in that infamous June 2012 Santa Pod run? So far 430bhp, 265bhp, 260bhp and 256bhp has been stated! I think your 2013 comment of an STI need over 400bhp to get into the 12's gives the game away. 400bhp in a WRX and you'd be pushing mid 11's lol. |
Originally Posted by scoobyJim2
(Post 11576861)
Maybe he should change his name again to billy bullsh!t (tubby tommy,fat Thomas) billy bullsh!t suits better lol
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:09 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands