Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Saturday November 1, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Subaru Models > Impreza Forum

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-07-2013, 09:56 PM   #3701
theoutbackdream
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 301179
Join Date: Nov 2011
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Mountain View, California
Vehicle:
2013 WRX Limited
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
everyone who is complaining. I am not one of them so i have lost track


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zauri View Post
I bought the car taking a risk on the MPG numbers, as stated much much earlier I am fine with averaging 26 mpgs. They could be better but I'm not going to kill myself over them.

The main reason I went with Subaru was because I wanted full time AWD and with projected MPG's and at the price I got this car for I figured it was a steal. I KNOW this car is full time AWD. Also the Fusion was only an option because it was the cheapest of the other 4. I didn't trust Suzuki's quality ad the Matrix was not a very comfortable test drive. Plain and simple. You coming on here and belittling people with the poorest of all points to be made is just mind numbing

All you have continued to say here is "This car is fulltime AWD you should expect horrible mpg numbers".. So no matter how many advancements in technology are made in the auto industry I am to always assume a full time AWD car will yield horrible fuel efficiency? That makes absolutely no sense..

Mind you.. folks here are not asking for HIGH mpgs. I think those with issues in regards to the impreza want mpg's just above 25/26... not even the advertised 36.. not 40.. not 50... why is that so hard for some of you to actually wrap your heads around?
Good for you, so whats the point of jumping on my ass, are you that butt hurt?

I am not belittling people, I am stating the facts, that Driver is a huge variable when it comes to MPG. Spdrcr5 seemed like a troll due to his username, speedracer, implying he likes to punch it.

Surely, technology will improve, but no matter what, AWD cars will in fact have worse fuel economy numbers compared to a 2wd car of the same class. This is why when you calculate WHP, 2wd generally have a 10% loss of power, and AWD generally has a 20% loss of power.

Some folks aren't and some are. My argument is that those who are complaining about NOT reaching the MPG noted on the window should understand that these numbers are a numerical value of "up to". Not "will get" or "exceed" which was in my very first post in this dumb argument. Also, there will be different variables that will account for a lower MPG. For example, any car will have a horrible MPG and not even near EPA numbers if the driver is some teenager who floors it to the firewall at each stop.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
theoutbackdream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 09:56 PM   #3702
Zauri
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333487
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: MD
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza 4DR 2.0
Limited DGM CVT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
Yep, and look at the EPA ratings. AWD's are lower than their 2WD equivalent:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ws/index.shtml#vehicle

Which means it is compensated for.
Don't do that. you'll start making sense and he might actually explode..
Zauri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 09:59 PM   #3703
ST Eye
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 73068
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: MD
Vehicle:
2008 STI Boost Wagon
2014 Honda Accord Hybrid

Default

I sense there is a lot of anger in this room. I am not the happiest with the mileage of this car, but it's a nice reliable car that is safe. Can I get the EPA numbers? Yes, but you really have to try and drive in the ideal conditions, but it is achievable. I believe I have done it twice in 11k miles. I do understand it is frustrating when it is tough to get the MPGs, but if you really think about it you're really not spending that much more money when you get 3-4 MPGs less.

So in the meantime, everyone calm down!
ST Eye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 10:05 PM   #3704
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy1100 View Post
i am averaging 27-28mpg now, and when good gas and warmer temps come back i should back up to 30-31 with my normal driving/commute
One thing the more feeble minded here continue to forget is that their 5 speeds don't have the same mpg problem as the CVT's.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 10:10 PM   #3705
Zauri
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333487
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: MD
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza 4DR 2.0
Limited DGM CVT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theoutbackdream View Post



Good for you, so whats the point of jumping on my ass, are you that butt hurt?

I am not belittling people, I am stating the facts, that Driver is a huge variable when it comes to MPG. Spdrcr5 seemed like a troll due to his username, speedracer, implying he likes to punch it.

Surely, technology will improve, but no matter what, AWD cars will in fact have worse fuel economy numbers compared to a 2wd car of the same class. This is why when you calculate WHP, 2wd generally have a 10% loss of power, and AWD generally has a 20% loss of power.

Some folks aren't and some are. My argument is that those who are complaining about NOT reaching the MPG noted on the window should understand that these numbers are a numerical value of "up to". Not "will get" or "exceed" which was in my very first post in this dumb argument. Also, there will be different variables that will account for a lower MPG. For example, any car will have a horrible MPG and not even near EPA numbers if the driver is some teenager who floors it to the firewall at each stop.
Makes a bit more sense when you don't come off as a jarhead simply barking off "The hell you buy this car for if you wanted good gas mileage, this car isn't a hybrid, shame on you for expecting this car to yield decent fuel efficiency"

Seriously not trying to argue but that in itself has all of no basis even in this discussion and was pulled out of your ass. Aside from that everything you have stated above is absolutely correct.

Dont know why that tweaked me so much but whatever. I acknowledge I went a bit overboard jumping all over you

Last edited by Zauri; 03-07-2013 at 10:26 PM.
Zauri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 10:12 PM   #3706
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ST Eye View Post
if you really think about it you're really not spending that much more money when you get 3-4 MPGs less.
Maybe that's part of the problem. By all rights, when comparing the car to equivalent mpg cars, it would get the same mpg as a car rated at 30 mpg highway, so it should be rated at that.

I plan(ned?) to keep the car for 200,000 miles. If, during that time gas averages $5 per gallon, the difference between 30 mpg and 36 mpg is well over $5,000. So I *will* be spending that much more.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 10:20 PM   #3707
PA452
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 346220
Join Date: Feb 2013
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Premium
MT Dark Gray Metallic

Default

So I'm trying to gauge the actual numbers here and get around the purse-swinging. Are the MTs actually doing better on average than the CVTs?
PA452 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 10:27 PM   #3708
theoutbackdream
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 301179
Join Date: Nov 2011
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Mountain View, California
Vehicle:
2013 WRX Limited
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zauri View Post
Makes a bit more sense when you don't come off as a jarhead simply barking off "The hell you buy this car for if you wanted good gas mileage, this car isn't a hybrid, shame on you for expecting this car to yield decent fuel efficiency"

Seriously not trying to argue but that in itself has all of no basis even in this discussion and was pulled out of your ass. Aside from that everything you have stated above is absolutely correct.
Sure, I admit I came off on the wrong foot, but coming in here and complaining (spdrcr5), isn't going to give you a miracle..


So what you said was not pulled out of your ass either? Interesting....

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
Maybe that's part of the problem. By all rights, when comparing the car to equivalent mpg cars, it would get the same mpg as a car rated at 30 mpg highway, so it should be rated at that.

I plan(ned?) to keep the car for 200,000 miles. If, during that time gas averages $5 per gallon, the difference between 30 mpg and 36 mpg is well over $5,000. So I *will* be spending that much more.
If you think about it, the $5,000 for gas is well worth it if you plan to actually keep the car to 200,000 miles. Sure $5,000 is a lot of cash, but the road trips/memories for the fuel are well worth it, especially for a car that can go through almost any condition.
theoutbackdream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 10:27 PM   #3709
Zauri
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333487
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: MD
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza 4DR 2.0
Limited DGM CVT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PA452 View Post
So I'm trying to gauge the actual numbers here and get around the purse-swinging. Are the MTs actually doing better on average than the CVTs?
From the looks of it yes. Though there are some folks with CVT's pull equal numbers if not better.
Zauri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 10:29 PM   #3710
Zauri
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 333487
Join Date: Sep 2012
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: MD
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza 4DR 2.0
Limited DGM CVT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theoutbackdream View Post
Sure, I admit I came off on the wrong foot, but coming in here and complaining (spdrcr5), isn't going to give you a miracle..


So what you said was not pulled out of your ass either? Interesting....

Oh it was, I completely overreacted plain and simple, I'll admit that. now let's kumbya and bury it
Zauri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 11:07 PM   #3711
BigFatHorse
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 328167
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Utah
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza MT PZEV
Silver

OMGHi2U

Quote:
Originally Posted by PA452 View Post
So I'm trying to gauge the actual numbers here and get around the purse-swinging. Are the MTs actually doing better on average than the CVTs?
Most of the people who are unhappy seem to have CVTs but I think it's hard to figure whether or not CVT owners are more likely to be unhappy than the 5MT folks because Subaru probably sells 20 CVTs for every 5MT. Also, I think 5MT owners are somewhat overrepresented in the forums because forum users tend to be car enthusiasts and enthusiasts seem more likely to drive 5MT.

Anyway, it's hard to get a firm grip on the numbers. But anecdotally most of the unhappy people in the thread seem to drive CVT.

I sometimes think about the psychology of driving 5MT vs. automatic. It seems like someone driving a manual is more likely to feel (subconsciously) like the performance of the car is their responsibility since a manual forces you into a position of great control. On the other hand, drivers of automatics could feel (subconsciously) that the performance of the car is the car's problem because they paid +$1000 for a fancy transmission. This could explain why, good mileage or bad, the drivers of the 5MT don't seem as unhappy as some of the CVT owners.

Note that I am not trying to cast aspersions on any CVT owners. I nearly bought a CVT myself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ST Eye
So in the meantime, everyone calm down!
Yes, this. There is so much butthurt in this thread.

Last edited by BigFatHorse; 03-07-2013 at 11:20 PM. Reason: Spelling errorz
BigFatHorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 11:34 PM   #3712
SleepNMnky
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 302491
Join Date: Nov 2011
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Buffalo, NY
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza 2.0i Pr
Dark Grey Metallic CVT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsteg View Post

You aren't calculating the miles driven on the tank by 14.5 every time are you?

Not trying to say you're stupid, just trying to rule out operator error because those are VERY low numbers!
If you used a calculator yourself before commenting you'd see NOT.
SleepNMnky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 11:34 PM   #3713
jsteg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329271
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lady's Island, SC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Limited
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ST Eye View Post
if you really think about it you're really not spending that much more money when you get 3-4 MPGs less.

So in the meantime, everyone calm down!
I made that point earlier in the thread. The difference between 30 and 36 mpg is only 87 miles per tank and that's only if you run it dry. Whoever it was insisted that it would still make him happy and those 87 miles were precious enough to him to matter. So be it but I don't see the big deal myself!
jsteg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 11:35 PM   #3714
jsteg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329271
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lady's Island, SC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Limited
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post

Maybe that's part of the problem. By all rights, when comparing the car to equivalent mpg cars, it would get the same mpg as a car rated at 30 mpg highway, so it should be rated at that.

I plan(ned?) to keep the car for 200,000 miles. If, during that time gas averages $5 per gallon, the difference between 30 mpg and 36 mpg is well over $5,000. So I *will* be spending that much more.
Yep...this is the one I was talking about in my previous post lol.
jsteg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 11:43 PM   #3715
jsteg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329271
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lady's Island, SC
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Limited
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Just a question no need to be a douche!!!
jsteg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 12:10 AM   #3716
cherryfan
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 321153
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Colo.
Vehicle:
2012 Premium CVT
Dark Cherry Pearl

Default

We CVT owners are less than happy with Subaru because we're not getting anything reasonably close to the EPA estimates. Our unhappiness is compounded by the knowledge that Subaru could, with a little effort, address at least some of the issues that eat into our mpg and improve our cars' efficiency.

Wouldn't it make sense for Subaru to reprogram the throttle response on CVT-equipped cars so that it would be easier to modulate throttle input, and reprogram the CVT so that it maximizes acceleration? The acceleration in, say, a 2011 Outback with the CVT seems much more efficient than in the 4G Impreza. How and why did Subaru make the Impreza's CVT worse?

The argument for a CVT is that, theoretically, it can always be operating at its most efficient. But using the paddle shifters during acceleration, it's obvious that the CVT isn't always getting the most from the throttle input. The fact that the manual is getting similar mileage to the CVT shows that, too. Surely Subaru can do better than it has to date.

Whatever it might cost Subaru financially to address this issue—and I bet it's not much— will certainly be repaid by the goodwill and word of mouth that would result. Not to mention the satisfaction of of future Impreza (and XV) buyers.
cherryfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 01:48 AM   #3717
stevehnm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza Spt cvt
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsteg View Post
Yep...this is the one I was talking about in my previous post lol.
I agree that we could do with a fresh start (again) but there are about three people here willing to continually cast aspersions on people who think the mpg of the CVT is not as advertised - like this "one". My position is based on the fact that the CVT drivetrain is literally an outlier in fuel economy based on real driving by professionals who show the CVT really should be rated at 30 mpg.

I think the 5MT's do get better mpg's - I don't think I've seen any complaints on them, while there are well over 20 people here who have complained about the CVT's, but the vast majority of them have been chased away like for notches in a gun by a few people. I'd rather get the message out myself than just go away though.

The drivetrain in the CVT has to be changed by the chip, probably not a big deal except for the fact it would no longer "get 36 mpg" on the synthetic process of the EPA tests for highway mpg (or changed as below). The CVT is a perfect candidate for a hybrid recharging system like the Prius etc. The way the engine revs while keeping the speed at exactly the CC set point makes it much different than a manual xmission, and putting the dash mpg monitor on instantaneous is a real eye opener if you have any hills on your drive. A small hill will take it to way under 10 mpg.

It would help a lot if it stayed for longer in "gear" when hitting the paddle shifter, but it takes two moves to make that shift. It will stay in manual mode when decelerating, but not when accelerating. Staying in manual mode when the paddle is hit while going uphill, just like the other direction when slowing, until speed is back would be a good thing. Then, "5th" is high enough to not notice, and really sucks the gas.

P.S. 87 miles is over $10, so yes, it does bother me to have to throw that away every fill up.

Time for a dedicated thread on this...

Last edited by stevehnm; 03-08-2013 at 01:55 AM.
stevehnm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 06:44 AM   #3718
Zeeper
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Albany NY
Vehicle:
2012 Sport 5MT
Green/Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PA452 View Post
So I'm trying to gauge the actual numbers here and get around the purse-swinging. Are the MTs actually doing better on average than the CVTs?
Well if you like theories provided with no evidence, latch onto that doozy!

I have no doubt that if I drove a CVT Impreza on a 125 mile road trip it would provide better mileage than my 5 speed, and the scientific reasoning to explain this would be the top gear ratio of the CVT vs the 5 speed and the resultant engine RPM's at 65 mph.

But as others have stated, 5 speed owners are more directly cognizant that how they drive the car affects resultant mpg's, than some CVT owners seem to be, and we certainly complain less.

By the way, look at Fuelly and see what you can determine about the cars that have the highest combined mpg's -- do they look like 5 speeds or cvt's?

Here is a clue, when the transmission is identified, the cars showing 30+ are nearly all CVT's.

But that certainly isn't as scientific as a disatisfied CVT owner, who dislikes that high speed driving isn't yielding the highest stated EPA Highway number, and likes to wow you with spreadsheets, promoting his now disproven 5 speed theory...

Last edited by Zeeper; 03-08-2013 at 08:30 AM.
Zeeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 08:14 AM   #3719
sgoldste01
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 322264
Join Date: Jun 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Webster, NY
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Sp 5sp
Obs Blk Prl/Drk Gray Mtl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehnm View Post
I plan(ned?) to keep the car for 200,000 miles. If, during that time gas averages $5 per gallon, the difference between 30 mpg and 36 mpg is well over $5,000. So I *will* be spending that much more.
This is an interesting mathematical exercise. In checking your math (which checked out correctly), I discovered something that I hadn't realized before. If you keep a car for 200k miles and pay an average of $5/gallon, you will have fed that car $27,780 worth of gas if the car gets 36 MPG, and you will have fed that car $33,335 worth of gas if it gets 30 MPG. Either way, I never realized that you will have paid more in gas than you paid to purchase the car in the first place!

Taking the exercise a bit further, the difference in amount paid for gas over 200k miles is $5555 when comparing a 36 MPG car vs. a 30 MPG car. If the average driver drives 15k miles/year, then the car is 13 years old when it hits 200k miles. Therefore, the owner would pay an extra $427/year for gas if he drove a 30 MPG car vs. a 36 MPG car. Breaking it down further, he is paying an extra $36/month to drive the 30 MPG car.

Is it worth an extra $36/month to drive an Impreza instead of driving a Civic or Corolla or Hyundai Accent or whatever? To me it is. After decades of driving Civics, I wanted to drive something with a different personality. I tried a VW TDI, which had a great personality when it wasn't leaving me stranded. So I dumped it and bought the Impreza because I liked the personality provided by the boxer engine and the AWD.

I don't regret my choice. For those of you who do regret your choice, do what I did with my TDI--sell it and find something that better meets your needs.
sgoldste01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 08:53 AM   #3720
aeoporta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334126
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: New York
Vehicle:
2013 5mt Sp Premium
Venetian Red & Dark Gray

Default

sell it and buy a hyundai/kia for cheap, they get good fuel economy
aeoporta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 09:28 AM   #3721
Dirt Bringer
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 340297
Join Date: Dec 2012
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cincinnati
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza 5sp Prm
Ice Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sgoldste01 View Post
This is an interesting mathematical exercise. In checking your math (which checked out correctly), I discovered something that I hadn't realized before. If you keep a car for 200k miles and pay an average of $5/gallon, you will have fed that car $27,780 worth of gas if the car gets 36 MPG, and you will have fed that car $33,335 worth of gas if it gets 30 MPG. Either way, I never realized that you will have paid more in gas than you paid to purchase the car in the first place!

Taking the exercise a bit further, the difference in amount paid for gas over 200k miles is $5555 when comparing a 36 MPG car vs. a 30 MPG car. If the average driver drives 15k miles/year, then the car is 13 years old when it hits 200k miles. Therefore, the owner would pay an extra $427/year for gas if he drove a 30 MPG car vs. a 36 MPG car. Breaking it down further, he is paying an extra $36/month to drive the 30 MPG car.

Is it worth an extra $36/month to drive an Impreza instead of driving a Civic or Corolla or Hyundai Accent or whatever? To me it is. After decades of driving Civics, I wanted to drive something with a different personality. I tried a VW TDI, which had a great personality when it wasn't leaving me stranded. So I dumped it and bought the Impreza because I liked the personality provided by the boxer engine and the AWD.

I don't regret my choice. For those of you who do regret your choice, do what I did with my TDI--sell it and find something that better meets your needs.
Most things in life are a compromise, and in this case, you compromised some fuel economy for a car that can actually do more than just roll around a city and oversteer through corners. It's a worthy compromise.
Dirt Bringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 09:35 AM   #3722
2012ISport
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 325924
Join Date: Jul 2012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeoporta View Post
sell it and buy a hyundai/kia for cheap, they get good fuel economy
I have seriously thought about doing this but after taking into consideration the hit I would take on depreciation and then paying sales tax of 8.75% for another vehicle this would end up being a poor financial decision.
2012ISport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 09:43 AM   #3723
myrt1987
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 323103
Join Date: Jun 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: toms river, nj
Vehicle:
2012 Limited 2.0i
Dreamy Gray Mistress

Default

So much drama right now. lol
myrt1987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 09:44 AM   #3724
sgoldste01
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 322264
Join Date: Jun 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Webster, NY
Vehicle:
2012 Impreza Sp 5sp
Obs Blk Prl/Drk Gray Mtl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2012ISport View Post
I have seriously thought about doing this but after taking into consideration the hit I would take on depreciation and then paying sales tax of 8.75% for another vehicle this would end up being a poor financial decision.
When I sold my TDI, I did a private sale rather than a trade-in. I sold it for $5.5k more than I could get in trade. This made it an easy decision for me. If the trade-in price for the TDI was the best I could do, I likely would have rolled the dice and tried to keep the TDI.

And that would have been a risky gamble.
sgoldste01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 09:51 AM   #3725
2012ISport
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 325924
Join Date: Jul 2012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirt Bringer View Post

Most things in life are a compromise, and in this case, you compromised some fuel economy for a car that can actually do more than just roll around a city and oversteer through corners. It's a worthy compromise.
If I wanted a car that sucked gas and had awd I certainly would not have looked at a little car like the Impreza. I normally drive a Mitsu Endeavor with awd and snow tires and my wife drives the Impreza. We prefer larger vehicles but need something fuel efficient so we sold the Integra and bought an Impreza. Now we regret the decision because we are stuck with a small car that sucks gas. My wife went from easily getting 27+ mpg on her commute in her Integra to getting under 22 in the Impreza with the same commute.
2012ISport is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Impreza owner, low mpg? stuffedcabbage Newbies & FAQs 34 09-25-2012 10:10 PM
2012 Impreza Reviewed - Whytecliff to Seymour brendan_mac Vancouver Impreza Club Forum -- VIC 16 12-23-2011 01:12 PM
NJ Impreza owners - sighting Dan G General Forum Archive 76 10-06-2000 12:24 AM
Md or Va Impreza owners - I have an Impreza related question. Snoopy General Forum Archive 1 06-05-2000 08:08 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.