Don't believe everything you see on tv,or any journo's that write crap in mags and papers.All car mags seem to be pro German cars,they probably would lose their commission if they did not make them look good.Anyway I think the plan is to make a WRX diesel,and scrap the petrol engine version altogether.

aaahhh, bless, there's always one :D

I've not driven the new wrx or the golf but my octavia vRS has the golf gti engine (and chassis) and it's a peach, pulls really well from low down the rev range right up to the red line, and has bags of torque, mines not even run in at 2000 miles but it doesn't feel much (if at all) slower than my old uk turbo. Cornering is a different matter it understeers like a bitch, so the new wrx must be a shocker if the golf corners better.

The Golf is set up differently to your Octavia, like all VAG group cars each manufacturer uses their own settings. The Octavia while a fine car doesn't drive half as well as a Golf. Didn't you test drive both?

Was it a DSG or a manual ? I reckon the DSG is worth 2 secs a lap, i had a DSG golf and it was bloody effective with the perfect changes using the paddles....it was also bloody boring :lol1:

see how much quicker it is here

YouTube - DSG vs 6spd manual

Manual, the DSG would have been even quicker, as you say though it takes some of the fun out of driving.

Get a proper driver to do the test not old squeeler then see the difference.

Yeah, then the Golf would win by even more!!

Good handling will beat power and even extra grip. You only need the grip if it's wet or a lose surface, and power should be balanced to match the handling whereas a great many Scoobs have more power than the chassis and suspension, and particularly the driver can cope with. Both cars had 4 pieces of rubber touching the track surface, and if one made better use of that rubber to utilise its available power then it wins, simple as.

I wish I could invent a time machine for all you “enthusiasts”, then you could live in the past all the time. So Subaru water down the WRX so as it appeals to another demographic, then a TV program race it against the VW performance model. The WRX has changed, who cares what the result was. If you want performance and a Subaru then buy the STi, its fantastic.
So when Mitsubishi bring out their new Prototype S hatchback Lancer with 230BHP to go head to head with the WRX will you still be going to the dark side, or is that the EVO now rubbish, as VW are bound to make a car that can beat that too.:(

I've done a new GTi in my Standard Blobeye WRX :norty: Although admittedly not by very much...

Why does the new WRX have 500 more cc, 9 more bhp and is 0.5 seconds to 60 and 14mph top end slower than my car :wonder:

Weight?! :wonder:

MY03 WRX 1385kg MY08 WRX 1395kg

Not that much difference really :wonder:

Could be that and the 2.5. Mind you, they're completely different animals.

Aerodynamics, weight, engine, torque delivery......

Aerodynamics - won't make any difference up to 60.
Weight - little in it
engine - may deliver more power across the rev band but I doubt that's it.

Gearing - is this any different? are the new ones longer geared, would explain a lot.
Also are there any traction control gizmos sapping power etc.?

I cant understand it ok i'm no expert with vehicle dynamics but the Scooby had more power, better grip and certainly more traction yet the Golf beat it with less bhp and fwd, to me the golf looked like it understeered to buggery!!!

Why did it have 'better grip'? Traction and power for sure. Perhaps the Golf is far better at dealing with transitions than the WRX which would have to be a factor on a relatively twisty circuit. Maybe it was more effective under braking.
Or perhaps the WRX is just not a very good car for track driving.

The track was damp - or seemed it surely a 4wd would have better grip on a damp track?

Having never owned a new Scooby, could it be possible that the engine was too new and therefore tight. I know that VAG products take some time to loosen up, is it possible here?:wonder:

the Golf may have had a few miles on it!

Think about it, how can 4WD increase grip? Traction for sure but grip has nothing whatsoever to do with how many driven wheels a car has.

Good point.

or.....Heat soak:D

Well like i said i'm no expert in vehicle dynamics but my Scoob could always go around a wet corner faster than a lot of hot hatches, whether this has to do with grip, traction or whatever i dont know - all i know is it was quicker than most cars in the wet!:thumb:

These shootouts are always done with a flying lap start, does VBH always pass the start line at the same speed or is it just at whatever speed she happens to be going at ?
If the cars all started from a standing start it might be a better indicator of speed for the lap times.

I still won't be byeing one of these Kia Impreza's though, even if I could afford it, the new Impreza 08 model should of been a saloon and this hatchback should of been a brand new car in the Subaru range.

windyboy.

This is true. My first impreza didn't feel quick for the first few thousand miles.

I think the report was totally subjective and, as such, was meaningless.

However, the new wrx looks absolutely awful and, on that basis alone, it should have lost. Nobody is going to buy one anyway!

In my opinion the reason for that is the increased traction and vehicle balance rather than any increase in grip. The only way I can see grip being increased over another vehicle is either tyres or the dynamics of the suspension. I guess in the old days the fully independent rear suspension of the Impreza gave it quite an advantage over hot hatches with a torsion rear beam in terms of keeping grip.
I'm no expert either but I'm certain 4WD confers no advantage whatsoever in terms of grip. Perhaps part of the reason why we often see threads on here with mystified Impreza drivers wondering why they binned it in the snow.

Wether it's true or not the damage has been done now. I agree it's another nail in the coffin. I suspect that the emissions and car tax will be the final one.

I don't have a problem with the looks per ce and I accept the need to move on and get into other markets, but as others have said, the opposition is better and in some cases cheaper.

How embarassing.

It seems not only does it look like a dogs dinner it drives like one too!!

Crap!!

G

RIP WRX and Hi GTI! No one's going to get a WRX if they are in the Hot Hatch market after seeing this..........every time some one asks what you drive they will throw this back at you, not good in the pub!! :( And the Golf looks good VW design and the WRX looks like a Dog.

It's a sad day indeed.

Some of the explanation will be due to the fact that the Golf only has 2wd and hence lower transmission loss. So even though it has lower flywheel power when you factor in the relative transmission losses of the two cars, it may actually have a power advantage over the Impreza.

Maybe if you wanted a hot hatch you could buy the new STi. No that would be too simple. Subaru tone down the WRX and market it as more family friendly, then they make the STi even faster. The STi cost about 2 grand more than a VW GTI and knocks the crap out of it in every department, including looks. The guy in the pub would have to be pissed to think the new STi is the same as the new WRX. So everybody’s happy. No it’s the end of the world; the toned down WRX (not even classed as a hot hatch) was beaten by the hot hatch class leader. The model has changed guys, it happens.:wonder: