cobraman

iTrader: (1)

Well I have decided my next car will either be a Subaru Impreza which will replace the Honda Civic Type-R I currently have. The fact that it has four doors pleases the wife plus I was sick and tired of keeping clean the black paintwork and the fact that it is so soft that it has new swirlmarks after each wash (trivial I know but something that got my goat).

Okay. So now the debate begins - do I go for a WRX or STi? I have a budget of £8.5 and would like a 2003 onwards car (not the bug-eye). I am happy with reasonably high mileage cars (65,000 miles is fine) plus I want something that is standard as possible.

The only thing that scares me is the running costs. Don't worry - I have had people telling me not to buy a Scooby if I am scared of the running costs but I am happy shelling out on regular servicing and tyre bills. It's the fuel bills I am a little wary of.

Currently I get the following in my CTR and would ideally love it if some of you owners could post a similar thing regarding your WRX's and STi's:

260 miles to a £50 tank of normal unleaded (town driving)
325 miles to a £50 tank of normal unleaded (motorway driving)

So what I really need to know is what you peeps get in the Scooby. I don't want MPG figures but just a breakdown like above so I can compare the fuel consumption more easily.

Many thanks for all the help.

Brun

The quick answer is that £50 of unleaded at todays prices would get you anywhere between 185 miles and 250 miles in a Scoob.

Turbo2

Yeah, and if it's top-quality paintwork you're interested in, I'm afraid that the Subaru stuff is as thin as it comes! Still saves weight I suppose

cobraman

iTrader: (1)

Thanks guys - does that fuel consumption figure apply to an STi or WRX though?

I've also taken the chance to do a quick search and found this from someone:

Well I like mine mate. It does about 240 miles (normally) to 300 miles (motorway) per tank (just under £60). Makes me smile when I floor it too.

Does that sound about right for a WRX or is he talking about an STi?

vash

Hi

I had an STI Type UK from 2003 - 2006 .. I then had a modified 2004 Civic Type R until March this year and now I am back in a 2006 JDM Impreza .

Running costs.. I MISS MY CIVIC !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Costs about £62 to fill up my tank and I will get about 200miles of normal driving a round and a little playing.. or if I'm going on a really long Motorway drive about 260-300 ..

Servicing costs are about the same really but the parts are a lot more..

Replacing discs on my civic was about £120 a corner... with STI's you are looking at double that..

Also for your budget your not going to get a great example MY03 Blob STI, but you will get a decent WRX .. Which will be "slightly" more economical on petrol and parts.. but still not like your Civic...

Also Road Tax is going to be ALOT higher than what you are paying.

Would I got back to my Civic ... No... I love my Scooby too much.. and I have the money spare to keep it running.. for now!

Civic R's are great... But Scoobs are a different animal.

If you are currently finding you have spare cash left at the end of the month to burn.. then yes get a Scooby.. if you don't.. DON'T :P

Vash

Brun

In fairness, the figures i gave would apply to either.
Back in the day, i had a Classic Scoob which used to get 19-21mpg on the stock 215 bhp engine. Fast forward a few years and many mods later, i had towards 320bhp and would then get anywhere between 22 and 26mpg

Flaps

iTrader: (1)

I was talking about a WRX mate

The paint is crap though. Leave some bird poo on it for two days and a mark is there for ever.

T1000

something that hasn't been mentioned yet is that scoobs should also only be run on super unleaded, which is a bit annoying. My classic which has 260bhp can return around 30mpg when not driving it hard and little over 20mpg otherwise.

Brun

Super Unleaded ain't essential but wise. In my experience, the extra fuel consumption i gained from using Super outweighed the extra outlay. As my car was mapped on Esso 97 it was a bit of a pain sometimes when the nearest gararge was a BP

s70rjw

iTrader: (2)

Standard UK cars can run on 95 RON. £60 fill up gets me around 270 miles, 300 on a long run. Thats on a Blobeye WRX with PPP.

Blueblaster

I've had both a CTR and a MY05 STI. I got rid of the STI in part because of the fuel consumption. I changed back at the start of 2006. At this time it took £40 to fill up the CTR and I'd regularly get 280 miles out of a full tank. Most of the journies were 20 miles or less. Then I bought the Scoob. I was then putting in £50 to travel 230 miles. The type of journey was unchanged. Now those numbers might not sound that bad, but they basically mean I was paying 25% more to travel 25% fewer miles. Almost the minute you drive out of the petrol station the fuel needle has moved away from full and that really started to get me down.

Where the CTR was great was you could drive it normally or absolutely hammer it and it didn't affect the economy that much. I'd regularly get 30mpg+ in the CTR and the worst I ever had was 20mpg during a sustained 140mph cruise on the Autobahn for 200 miles. In contrast, when you put your foot down in the Scoob the turbo makes a sound similar to an auxilliary, high flow fuel pump kicking in and I could almost see the £ signs disappearing.

In the end this is going to come down to how many miles you do and whether paying for a car whose performance you can't use most of the time is worth it for those odd moments on sliproads when you can floor it. Be under no illusion that the Scoob is much faster than the CTR, but that means you have to travel so much faster to get the same sensation of speed and the same amount of fun. That was really confusing me so I decided to really go for it on a country lane and was going so fast so quickly it was bloody dangerous and I still wasn't having any fun.

What I tell everyone is to look at how many miles you did in the last year. Then work out how much the fuel you used cost you. Take that money out of your bank account. Also take a few hundred quid for insurance and couple of hundred for road tax. Then see what your account looks like. If you can live with it and still believe power+huge traction = fun then maybe it's the car for you. For me, the CTR was better in every way other than speed.

HTH

cobraman

iTrader: (1)

There seems there are so many variants between the fuel figures and I guess this all comes down to whether I will be going for a 221bhp, 265bhp or 305bhp.

So if we are talking about a standard car (no remapping at all) and driving spiritedly on occasions am I right in thinking the below is correct:

WRX = 221bhp = Normal Unleaded = 250ish miles from £60 fill up
STi = 265bhp = Normal Unleaded = 200ish miles from £60 fill up
STi PPP = 305bhp = Normal Unleaded = 180ish miles from £60 fill up

Another question for someone who has experience both the CTR and WRX/STi - is there much difference in power output? I mean is the Scooby noticeably quicker than a CTR?

Brun

Great post Blueblaster

Brun

Not driven a CTR but regardless of how fast a Scoob actually is compared to a CTR, i would assume that the Scoob will always "feel" quicker due to the turbo kicking in

Brun

Can't say if the above is right or wrong, but like i said in post #9, i had better fuel consumption with 320bhp than 215

Brun

...look at me being a post *****

cobraman

iTrader: (1)

Thanks Blueblaster - you pretty much answered the questions to my last post.

The figures you gave for your CTR as per how many miles you could get out of a full tank is basically what I am getting now. The CTR is surprisingly remarkable on economy for what it is and people are still surprised when I let them know what figures I get - especially with the performance it puts out.

The Scooby is very tempting as four doors appeals plus the fact that it has great performance for a reasonable price tag. I'd also like to know whether the performance is noticeable between the Scooby and CTR to justify buying a WRX - does the fact that the turbo in the Scooby comes into play faster than the i-VTEC does in the CTR make it a different animal? I guess it does?

I wish I had a Scooby WRX for a week just to compare fuel figures for myself and to see if I could justify the cost output. Anyone fancy lending me their WRX?

lordretsudo

Not much to add really, as there have already been good informative replies. I get around 200 miles from £50 of super unleaded, and that's in a 305bhp STI. I don't drive it especially hard, and it's mainly motorway driving. People who claim to be able to get 30mpg in an STI amaze me, I've never got near to that in 4 years of driving one.

I've driven a friend's Civic Type R (and my wife has an S2000 which is a very similar engine), and would say that the Scoob feels quite a bit quicker due to the turbo kick. The other thing though is that the Scoob feels much safer (if that's the right word), or more planted, when driven hard, than the Type R, which feels more manic and less secure on the road. I guess this is mainly due to the AWD. I certainly prefer the Scoob, but I do like the Type R a lot too...

I would have thought that running costs will be quite a bit more than for the Type R. Servicing, parts, insurance, tax and fuel will all cost you more.

MikeCardiff

iTrader: (2)

Its hard to specify real mpg as it will depend on how much you are revving the car ( the more revs, the more petrol is used ) so hard driving will see your mpg plummet compared to motorway cruising.

TBH if you are really worried about the running costs, then the Impreza probably isnt for you, or buy one as a second car and get something cheap and sensible for daily commuting. The fun of having a performance car isnt really to see how many mpg you can get from it

Any sports / performace car is always going to be a money pit one way or another - insurance, fuel, modifications, repairs, servicing etc... all cost more than a sensible Mondeo or little hatchback.

Blueblaster

I have a reputation for being very negative towards Scoobs. However, my negativity comes through my experience so I am prepared to argue all day, and frequently do . Your earlier post listing the mileage achievable from £60 is a perfect illustration of how people kid themselves into thinking the fuel costs are manageable.

I'm trying to remember the capacity of the CTR and STI fuel tanks. I think the STI had a 12 gallon one. I think that's right. The average price of Superunleaded passed the £6/gallon mark last week. So £6 x 12 gallons is £72 to fill up. Not £60. And it looks like it is going to get worse. Now, I'm sure someone will come on here we'll argue about a £1 here and a £1 there, but in the end what your early analysis has shown is that you are already underestimating the true running costs.

If you regularly use the VTEC and you think you're going to rev your Scoob in the same way then you need to be prepared for 20mpg at best. On long motorway trips you will get mid to high 20s and a few of the remapped cars do even better than that although no one can quite explain why. But they need to be long trips. 20 miles down the motorway is going to make bugger all difference. You need proper long motorway trip to get high 20s.

Just so you know, I earn a lot of money. But even with my salary I noticed the difference on my current account. If it helps the way I can best describe it is when I had the CTR I used to go into shops, see something I liked and would buy it. Easy peasy. When I had the STI I would think do I really need that? And invariably I'd say no. And we'd only be talking about something like a new game for the Xbox or something. The STI just took the shine off everything and that is very difficult to put into words, especially when you're arguing with someone who says their car puts a huge smile on their face every time they drive it.

I have an excellent pension, an investment property, cash ISAs, share ISAs, regular savings acounts. That is the sort of person I am. I like to set a firm foundation and then use what's left for fun. Other people are different. Many people on this site are happy living from one pay cheque to the next. I can't do that. Think what kind of person you are. Remember that interest rates are about to rise, house prices fall and most bills are about to go up. Take all that information together and be honest with yourself. If you don't you could find yourself with a car you can't sell and can't afford to run.

ATB

cobraman

iTrader: (1)

Thanks lordretsudo for your post.

I think if I do go for a Scooby it will more than likely be the plain WRX based on fuel economy as it seems it is fairly similar to what I am currently getting out of the CTR at the moment albeit only slightly lower which I would expect from a 2litre with a turbo strapped on.

Now I have never ever owned a turbo but have experienced driving a Seat LCR and I enjoyed the kick in the back when I went into boost (something the CTR fails to give you). I also like the fact that a turbo will come into play at lower revs as I hardly get a chance to VTEC much in the CTR as I have to be driving silly speeds to be in the range and when you get there you run out of revs very very quickly.

I'd just like to know if the feel for speed is vastly difference between the CTR and WRX though to justify the extra cost - I guess I'll only find out when I actually drive one for myself.

Just a quick thanks to all who have replied to my thread - this forum is absolutely superb in that I have been to a few other forums and the knowledge seems to come from 10 year olds. The replies from this forum have been very informative so thanks for that.

cobraman

iTrader: (1)

Bloody hell Blueblaster - your more of a realist than me.

TBH, the true running costs of the STi are beginning to scare me and I feel the WRX would be the way to go into Scooby ownership for me.

As for VTEC'ing, I rarely play with it at all simply due to the fact that I am always driving on normal roads and if you go into VTEC you cannot stay there for more than a few seconds without breaking the speed limit (even on a 50mph dual-carriageway). Just IMO of course. With that in mind, a turbo really does appeal as playtime is a little easier to come by.

I am going to do a little search on the net for the WRX and see what is available for £8k to see what kind of car I would be getting for the money I think. I can certainly live with 25mpg or thereabouts but falling into the teens is not really an option I can afford. Just wondering now whether the WRX runs on normal unleaded?

Brun

The WRX will run on normal ulp but i found that i got around 3 mpg from using super which out weighed the initial outlay of super.
IMO the running costs of an STi will not be a huge amount more than a WRX.
One thing to bear in mind is the power to weigh ratios.
Dunno which CTR you have but -

WRX = 158 bhp/ton
Old CTR = 155 bhp/ton
New CTR = 152 bhp/ton.
Taking the transmission loss of the awd Scoob into account, the CTR is more than likely the faster car!!!

Blueblaster

Ok, last post. Maybe . The WRX will not feel as fast because the power is more effortless and there is so much traction. They are an easy car to drive fast. Also remember that the reason you couldn't VTEC very much was because the car was very fast and not just because of the power delivery. What you'll find with the Scoob is that you'll be going at least as fast, but will have used fewer revs. If you want more involvement on normal roads then the answer is something smaller, lighter and, dare I say it, slower. I'm teaching myself about car mechanics on a Fiat Seicento Sporting. I can say without any doubt that I have had more fun in that car than at any time in the STI.

Last few points. Ask on this site if people have a suitable car for sale. Scoobynetters do seem to look after their cars. Take a good look at the boot on the Scoob. The rear hinges of all things are a monumentally crap design and really get in the way when the boot is full. You sound like practicality is high on your list so that might be an issue.

And finally, please, please, please run the numbers before you buy. Don't estimate. Work them out precisely. A couple of grand extra in running costs pays for a great Christmas, a nice holiday, a home cinema system or even, God forbid, some nice savings. It doesn't sound like much because cars are so expensive but in the context of everything else in our lives it is a significant chunk of change and has to be spent EVERY YEAR.

My work here is done.....

cobraman

iTrader: (1)

Thanks again.

I have the older CTR (2002 model) so the best one.

I used to own a Mazda MX5 (Mark I) for over 4 years and that is quite simply THE BEST CAR I have ever driven. Okay - it is not exactly fast and has an image problem but I used to smile everytime I got in and would go for a 20 mile drive just to fill it up with fuel. It was a case of any excuse to drive with the MX5. I would take that back in a heartbeat but cannot afford to run two cars and cannot afford to own it on its own as it simply isn't practical enough for me at this stage of my life.

So with that in mind the CTR doesn't make me want to drive it all the time and I am hoping the rush I get of the WRX on boost will tempt me back into the car to drive for the heck of it. And that is where the fuel economy crops up as a problem.

andythejock01wrx

Would imagine the CTR is similar to the Prelude 2.2 Vtec I had for 8 yrs (actually the CTR is a bit more powerful). The Honda Vtecs still give you a distinct "kick" as the cams change.

Very little difference in a straight line between the CTR and a 2.0 Newage WRX (hence I modded the WRX to over 300bhp - should have probably gone for an STi in the firstplace, lol !)

Andy

Flaps

iTrader: (1)

Cobraman, where are you based? Chances are there's someone on here that lives near by that will take you out for a run.

andythejock01wrx

Well, kind of. The Scoob has a 60 litre tank, but the warning light actually comes on when you still have 9 litres left (so says my manual), so most people will be putting fuel in at 50ish litres at the latest. With current (horrendous) fuel prices, I'm putting in about £60 of V-Power.

Having said that, your basic point stands, Scoobs are indeed quite a bit more expensive mpg-wise than Honda Vtecs (etc).

Personally though, I think it's worth it. Yes, it's a bit of a waste of money, but money of us waste money through our pastimes of choice (anyone here a drinker or smoker ??). So, I'm not an alcohloic, but my car is !

Andy

andythejock01wrx

Fair point - I noticed the improvement in useability re speed limits etc between Vtec and turbo.

magicgreg

With my 07 STi I fill up for around £64 and that will get me anywhere between 200-220 miles with urban driving and a bit of right foot.

I'll get around 250 miles with some motorway added into the equation.

Service costs are similar to CTR until you get into the higher mileage areas, cambelt time etc.

Like others have mentioned, pads and discs are expensive, especially when considering an STi with brembos.

G