2024 WRX TR spec

[carsebuco]

Originally Posted by dwf137

For real, or are you just mocking me?

Because I went out and bought another 300 hp turbo 6spd car to drive around in when I want to have fun... Subaru could have had that money... but nope.

I talk with money, like Pre noted. VW then BMW have followed my Subie, because there's no subaru that interests me - they alienated me as a customer. First, the VW was bought because I wanted a hatch. Second the BMW was bought because I wanted a 2+2 rwd car, but the offering from subaru was pathetically underpowered in the test-drive I gave it. The wrx is a joke. I don't quite understand who they're selling it to. I mean good for subaru for actually being able to sell these things, but the car has turned into a complete joke.

"but mah 450whp with a tUuUnnEE?!.?" if I wanted a fast, boring car I'd buy a Tesla, not a VB WRX. At least the Teslas aren't bumfuk ugly.

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

[D-Rodman]

https://youtu.be/Q2GTJcUKHNk?si=XCCEC4MxtliJRl3a

Sent from my iPhone using NASIOC

[samagon]

the future is getting closer.

Prius vs GTI – Can tires help the Hybrid be a Hot Hatch? | Everyday Driver - YouTube

Prius vs GTI – Can tires help the Hybrid be a Hot Hatch? | Everyday Driver - YouTube

[Sid03SVT]

Originally Posted by samagon

the future is getting closer.

Prius vs GTI – Can tires help the Hybrid be a Hot Hatch? | Everyday Driver - YouTube

Wait until the Prius Prime has available AWD (there are space/packaging limitations for the extra batteries in the PHEV that restrict it to FWD currently as that's where the rear motor goes in the AWD HEV version).

I enjoyed this EDD video; the premise/title/initial statements are immediately responded to, it's not click bate or useless conjecture, and they explain that although a set of wheels & tires on the Prius brings it closer in line to the GTI from a handling standpoint, it still doesn't feel as good or as enjoyable to drive, because that's not what the Prius was designed to do from the factory; however, they are impressed with the massive improvement a set of wheels and tires made, as well as how little it impacted fuel economy based on their real world experience with the car before and after.

Their experiment/findings support that TIRES are still one of the best bang-for-buck upgrade you can make to your car, brake pads & fluid are also relatively cheap consumables that will yield real-world improvements/results; lighter/wider wheels too, they can get pricey, but they also don't get replaced that often (says the guy who found a massive pothole the other day & is replacing an aftermarket wheel after only 2.5yrs of use)

From a numbers on paper standpoint "NPC" cars and enthusiast cars are converging.

"normal cars" are getting quicker & handling better despite being saddled with ~800TW eco-tires with 60k mile warranties. The side affects of having a chassis that is designed for crash safety & insulating the passenger cabin from the outside world is that they've gotten stiffer with better weight distribution. Combine that with continued advancements of drivers aides (eg. VSC) which most people leave on anyways (and some manufacturers don't let you turn off), and yeah the difference isn't that great on paper, especially in real world situations.

The counterpoint of course, is that even with all of that, an NPC car isn't going to be as enjoyable to drive as a car where one of the design goals was to be an enjoyable driving experience.

On the other side though, Enthusiast cars have to meet the same crash standards, also have fuel economy & emissions targets, with generally tighter development budgets, while most are being designed to be more approachable/more mainstream which means more creature comforts, more NVH consideration, while trying to use as much as they can from the parts-bin to keep costs down.

The Rav4 Prime hits 60 in 5.4secs and does the quarter in 14.0 seconds at 4,300lbs; an AWD Prius prime, would likely be 3,600-3,700lbs with similar output, would put up similar numbers to the GRC, while being rated at ~50mpg in HEV mode w/ ~40-50mi of EV range, for about the same money (or possibly less)

[fredzy]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

From a numbers on paper standpoint "NPC" cars and enthusiast cars are converging.

This has been true for a while. It's become one of my biggest 's .. the old "lol it must suck that your [insert enthusiast car here] is slower than a minivan/Camry lolol" when 1. Yeah they have 300hp now and 2. still aren't quite as fast usually, as if it matters.

it still doesn't feel as good or as enjoyable to drive, because that's not what the Prius was designed to do from the factory

This is the main thing that matters with cars like WRX. Focusing on the numbers of affordable enthusiast cars these days is a fools errand, it misses the point more than ever. Is Camry better than WRX because of its 300hp? Better than GTI? Elantra N? GRC? Not even comparable, who cares.

I'm sure Prius Prime is fun for a Prius.

The biggest risk to the WRX is how it's incrementing away enthusiast details one by one. This is why the redline keeps coming up for example. Death (to us) by a thousand cuts.

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by fredzy

The biggest risk to the WRX is how it's incrementing away enthusiast details one by one. This is why the redline keeps coming up for example. Death (to us) by a thousand cuts.

The biggest risk to us is consumer sentiment. Reality is, we are a dying breed. The VB with all of its pimples and flaws, is outselling the VA, which probably means outselling the older gens. The VB, as is, is what those people want...and they are buying it. Subaru is winning big time.

It's like the death of the manual. People (besides us) don't want it. So, it disappears.

Yes, there are toys like the GR, GTI, CTR, etc, but sales are still coming in. Hot and heavy.


...We have been left behind.

[Sid03SVT]

Originally Posted by fredzy

The biggest risk to the WRX is how it's incrementing away enthusiast details one by one. This is why the redline keeps coming up for example. Death (to us) by a thousand cuts.

That's part of my "converging" statement, NPC cars are improving on the performance front, but enthusiast cars are also getting worse from an enthusiasts standpoint (lower redlines, manuals going away, open diffs & relying on VSC/ABS, bloat in both weight & price, etc.).

Originally Posted by Snow Drift

The biggest risk to us is consumer sentiment. Reality is, we are a dying breed. The VB with all of its pimples and flaws, is outselling the VA, which probably means outselling the older gens. The VB, as is, is what those people want...and they are buying it. Subaru is winning big time.

It's like the death of the manual. People (besides us) don't want it. So, it disappears.

Yes, there are toys like the GR, GTI, CTR, etc, but sales are still coming in. Hot and heavy....We have been left behind.

Generally speaking, it's always been about profits. There may be passion in the team designing the enthusiast vehicle and even higher up the food chain who is spearheading the effort, but eventually, corporate/the board gets involved and they would rather sell more vehicles with a higher margin over fewer vehicles with a tighter margin.

[Pre]

Originally Posted by Snow Drift

The biggest risk to us is consumer sentiment. Reality is, we are a dying breed. The VB with all of its pimples and flaws, is outselling the VA, which probably means outselling the older gens. The VB, as is, is what those people want...and they are buying it. Subaru is winning big time.

It's like the death of the manual. People (besides us) don't want it. So, it disappears.

Yes, there are toys like the GR, GTI, CTR, etc, but sales are still coming in. Hot and heavy.


...We have been left behind.

But it isn’t that simple. Yes I agree with you that “new new” is a bet Subaru was willing to take. They did this with MY2015, axing the hatch. Willing to take that bet, dumping existing customer base for new customer base. With the VB, they just doubled down. Having an upgrade to the Crosstek in their lineup is a great example. Vanilla sells more for the squares.

The not so simple part is the enthusiasts. Their money, purchasing decisions, etc, got spread out big time. People who would have bought a new WRX or STi, left the brand. And their money got peppered across a litany of vehicles. Some went Golf R, Focus RS, the current GRC. Others went RWD. Others FWD with a GTI, CTR. And since the STi, per se, is gone, well the 2004/2005 buyer is older now and many of them are in more expensive enthusiast cars, moving up the ladder. Such as a Vette, Porsche, what have you.

Your point is valid however. It’s way worse on the motorcycle, specifically sportbike side. Sales of literbikes are a fraction of what they were. Younger people are more into that phone and idevices, so enthusiasts are dying. I mean it’s to the point where sportbikes whether 600cc or 1000cc are getting dropped from lineups. A major portion of that is the enthusiasts are not getting replaced because as I said, iLife. The other major contributing factor is Euro emissions compliance which is out of control. They keep pushing every year for even more stringent emissions requirements.

I saw this in the HT market as well. The middle, or bang for the buck section, is getting decimated. Younger people don’t care. Some chintzy soundbar at BB or Amazon or Costco is “good enough”. What remains is the high end, unaffordable to many. So the high end will remain whether HT gear or enthusiast automobiles. And so will the low end, chintz turf. The middle, going away. I think high end or more expensive enthusiast or performance cars will remain. Anything low end, that remains, will be a hybrid shortly, and the pickings will be slim.

[mcarb002]

Yup, VBs are selling because being an 18-30 year old man (or female but mostly males), didn’t stop being a thing with us. What has changed is the environment around us.

Young car buying enthusiasts don’t have much options. Back when we were getting into that game we had plenty more. Usually, purchasing power is less for said age bracket and thus the WRX is one of the more a logical options to get your first “performance” oriented vehicle. Specially if you’re looking for AWD it’s narrowed even more.

So VBs aren’t selling because of what the car offers, they’re selling because of circumstances.

[fredzy]

Originally Posted by Snow Drift

The biggest risk to us is consumer sentiment. Reality is, we are a dying breed. The VB with all of its pimples and flaws, is outselling the VA, which probably means outselling the older gens. The VB, as is, is what those people want...and they are buying it. Subaru is winning big time.

I was going to add something about this but I try to keep my posts trimmed down to focus on main points, and I think everyone is keen to this one anyhow. Yes, there must be tension somewhere within Subaru on deciding how much they cater to us, make us happy but sell fewer cars or keep softening the edges, piss us off but maybe sell more cars.

The what-if thought I keep coming back to is how might the VB have come out if they decided to axe the STI way earlier? You'd think a little more interesting. There could be something for us to look forward to before the end

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by fredzy

I was going to add something about this but I try to keep my posts trimmed down to focus on main points, and I think everyone is keen to this one anyhow. Yes, there must be tension somewhere within Subaru on deciding how much they cater to us, make us happy but sell fewer cars or keep softening the edges, piss us off but maybe sell more cars.

The what-if thought I keep coming back to is how might the VB have come out if they decided to axe the STI way earlier? You'd think a little more interesting. There could be something for us to look forward to before the end

I don't think an earlier demise of the STI would have helped the WRX as it is focused on a different demographic...

I think the VA and VB were designed (cable 6MT, super thick steering wheel, etc) to compete with the GTI/Si. The rally car segment died with the Evo and so the WRX had to become a FWD-alternative. If someone wasn't a 2002-2014 WRX guy, and they cross-shopped the GTI/Si, then the WRX probably felt too raw, too hard to shift. So, they made the shifter cable, offered a clutch-free experience and the rest is history.

The VB/VA are good WRXs, but they lost something that the GD/GR had. However, that isn't something that the current buyers wanted or needed.

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

That's part of my "converging" statement, NPC cars are improving on the performance front, but enthusiast cars are also getting worse from an enthusiasts standpoint (lower redlines, manuals going away, open diffs & relying on VSC/ABS, bloat in both weight & price, etc.).



Generally speaking, it's always been about profits. There may be passion in the team designing the enthusiast vehicle and even higher up the food chain who is spearheading the effort, but eventually, corporate/the board gets involved and they would rather sell more vehicles with a higher margin over fewer vehicles with a tighter margin.

Profits are very important, agreed. NPC cars are getting better (some worse, like the NA Subarus), and most people don't need or want differentials and are fine with electronic nannies. Most people don't know what a differential is.

There's a niche for enthusiasts and Subaru has decided to stop competing on the bleeding edge and instead market to majority. It's worked but it's not nearly as fun as the past when the cheaper WRX performed like an S4.

Originally Posted by Pre

But it isn't that simple. Yes I agree with you that "new new" is a bet Subaru was willing to take. They did this with MY2015, axing the hatch. Willing to take that bet, dumping existing customer base for new customer base. With the VB, they just doubled down. Having an upgrade to the Crosstek in their lineup is a great example. Vanilla sells more for the squares.

The not so simple part is the enthusiasts. Their money, purchasing decisions, etc, got spread out big time. People who would have bought a new WRX or STi, left the brand. And their money got peppered across a litany of vehicles. Some went Golf R, Focus RS, the current GRC. Others went RWD. Others FWD with a GTI, CTR. And since the STi, per se, is gone, well the 2004/2005 buyer is older now and many of them are in more expensive enthusiast cars, moving up the ladder. Such as a Vette, Porsche, what have you.

Your point is valid however. It's way worse on the motorcycle, specifically sportbike side. Sales of literbikes are a fraction of what they were. Younger people are more into that phone and idevices, so enthusiasts are dying. I mean it's to the point where sportbikes whether 600cc or 1000cc are getting dropped from lineups. A major portion of that is the enthusiasts are not getting replaced because as I said, iLife. The other major contributing factor is Euro emissions compliance which is out of control. They keep pushing every year for even more stringent emissions requirements.

I saw this in the HT market as well. The middle, or bang for the buck section, is getting decimated. Younger people don't care. Some chintzy soundbar at BB or Amazon or Costco is "good enough". What remains is the high end, unaffordable to many. So the high end will remain whether HT gear or enthusiast automobiles. And so will the low end, chintz turf. The middle, going away. I think high end or more expensive enthusiast or performance cars will remain. Anything low end, that remains, will be a hybrid shortly, and the pickings will be slim.

I hear you. Precision is not as important to today. Kids barely need cars. I have a 21 year old brother-in-law who doesn't have a drivers license...in the suburbs.

Originally Posted by mcarb002

Yup, VBs are selling because being an 18-30 year old man (or female but mostly males), didn't stop being a thing with us. What has changed is the environment around us.

Young car buying enthusiasts don't have much options. Back when we were getting into that game we had plenty more. Usually, purchasing power is less for said age bracket and thus the WRX is one of the more a logical options to get your first "performance" oriented vehicle. Specially if you're looking for AWD it's narrowed even more.

So VBs aren't selling because of what the car offers, they're selling because of circumstances.

Options are fewer, because people want CUVs, not sport sedans/hatches. So, I can't blame the OEMs as much as buyers.

I still think the VB offers a lot, for the money (although they get to $40k quick). The competition is similarly priced, before ADM. And you get AWD. I think of the niche customer who wanted a WRX in the past, this is there last chance.

[JustyWRC]

Originally Posted by fredzy

....The what-if thought I keep coming back to is how might the VB have come out if they decided to axe the STI way earlier? You'd think a little more interesting. There could be something for us to look forward to before the end

Different.

[samagon]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

an AWD Prius prime, would likely be 3,600-3,700lbs with similar output, would put up similar numbers to the GRC, while being rated at ~50mpg in HEV mode w/ ~40-50mi of EV range, for about the same money (or possibly less)

yes to all this, the only downside would be the extra 400lbs would suck for driver feedback, and whatnot.

on a bit of a snarky note, since everyone seems to think the cloth seats in the GR Corolla make it completely a waste of time, since Prius Prime comes with softex seats, which are the Toyota synthetic leather, I'd expect an AWD version to come with the same fake leather.

so an AWD Prius prime would presumably cost less, and have a 'nicer' interior.

[mcarb002]

Originally Posted by Snow Drift

Options are fewer, because people want CUVs, not sport sedans/hatches. So, I can't blame the OEMs as much as buyers.

I still think the VB offers a lot, for the money (although they get to $40k quick). The competition is similarly priced, before ADM. And you get AWD. I think of the niche customer who wanted a WRX in the past, this is there last chance.

Yes, that's the reason for the narrowing of total options in current production in the industry.
But I’m also talking about the market circumstances (amongst other things) that narrow the accessibility to those options even more for your average consumer. Specially those new enthusiasts trying to get in their first new ride. The ridiculous prices and waits, as well as limited productions and some like the Golf R I believe getting axed? The WRX is benefiting from this. Subaru still takes custom orders (unlike Toyota), don’t have to wait 25 years to get your car, and the pricing seems to fall in accessible territory. Before covid, circumstances weren’t this insane and you also had more options, I’m saying this is probably also a reason why it’s outselling previous gen. And yes sure, maybe the news that there’s no more STi so last chance for an ICE manual Subaru is legit a thing.

[samagon]

I'm glad the WRX still exists, and I'm glad it continues to sell well.

it signals to other manufacturers that there is life in the market for sporty, 4 door, smallish cars.

[samagon]

I'm glad the WRX still exists, and I'm glad it continues to sell well.

it signals to other manufacturers that there is life in the market for sporty, 4 door, smallish cars.

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by mcarb002

Yes, that's the reason for the narrowing of total options in current production in the industry.
But I’m also talking about the market circumstances (amongst other things) that narrow the accessibility to those options even more for your average consumer. Specially those new enthusiasts trying to get in their first new ride. The ridiculous prices and waits, as well as limited productions and some like the Golf R I believe getting axed? The WRX is benefiting from this. Subaru still takes custom orders (unlike Toyota), don’t have to wait 25 years to get your car, and the pricing seems to fall in accessible territory. Before covid, circumstances weren’t this insane and you also had more options, I’m saying this is probably also a reason why it’s outselling previous gen. And yes sure, maybe the news that there’s no more STi so last chance for an ICE manual Subaru is legit a thing.

There are fewer enthusiast cars, especially under $40k. Because of demand and will. Covid gave OEMs an excuse to drop high-cost low-volume products due to "constraints." We are in an age of appliances more than ever...and people love it.

[brandon]

I once again apologize for being slow to respond, but I have precious little time for posting these days and being old my typing skills are glacial.

Originally Posted by JustyWRC

These comparable vehicles you mention. I assume it was their AWD versions? And how many of those AWDs are operating 100% of the time while at city driving speeds? I just did a quick look at just the Pilot and Telluride. The AWDs are rated less. But, Subaru's CVTs have gained(minimal) MPGs since they came out as the cars got heavier.

Yes, all of the comparables I used were AWD versions. You can look them up on Edmunds and you’ll get the same thing yourself. I don’t know what you mean when you say “The AWDs are rated less”. The question of whether they are full time AWD or not is almost irrelevant. There is an internet myth that part time AWD is somehow meaningfully or substantially more fuel efficient than full time AWD. This is really not true, and I can explain why…

Manufacturers engage their part time AWD systems in different ways, but generally there is some type of clutch which allows slip between the front and rear (acting as a differential). The only energy used by these systems is to engage these “clutches”, and some waste heat generated as a consequence of the slippage. This is not a great deal of energy in the first instance, but is even less so when you consider that most of the time people are driving in a straight line, and thus the system isn’t engaged anyway. So most of the time the system is disengaged and in a very low energy requirement state. Similarly, full time systems have default low energy states. There are many different types of systems, but having a default engaged system could be as simple as adding springs to preload the “clutches”. The point is that the energy required for ENGAGEMENT or changing conditions is going to be similar, regardless as to whether it is part time or full time. The majority of the extra energy required for AWD is due to excess static and rotational mass, and friction in the supporting rotational bits. Static mass (weight) we can do nothing about (and is the same between part time and full time), but the rotational mass and excess friction we can. Many full time 4WD systems have locking front hubs for that reason. Disconnecting at the wheel hubs means you don’t have to accelerate another drive shaft, differential, and half shafts (everything between the transfer case and the brakes)… which means substantially better fuel economy. I am unaware of any mainstream AWD systems which have locking hubs. And the reason is obvious, because if you want your AWD system to react in milliseconds, and you’re travelling at 70mph on the highway, then you can imagine the force required to accelerate all those components almost instantaneously. I imagine it would make one hell of a clunk and probably upset the vehicle. I suspect that over the years people who’ve known 4WD vehicles get far better mileage when they’re in 2WD, have projected that assumption to part time AWD. But it is just not the same thing. I thought it was important to explain this in detail, but in short… it doesn’t matter all that much if the other vehicles were part time or full time. If the CVT can provide that much better mileage, part time AWD can’t be used as an excuse when comparing.

Originally Posted by JustyWRC

…I do know they have been committed to CVT for quite some time. They introduce the first(truly crappy) one in the US in 1989. During the mid 90s, they had a prototype DI engine mated to a CVT(not Lineartronic) shown at some auto show. Guess that "Non"-linear design wasn't ideal.
I understand you'd like a MT and some "performance"; but, if your wife likes the way they drive, why would the CVT be a deterrence?

With regards to my wife I’ll first point out that her vehicles are her decision, but she takes my recommendations seriously. I’m the Mechanical Engineer, she’s the Doctor, and we advise each other accordingly. I am the one who got her into Subarus in the first instance. Also she does not have much experience with newer Subarus, as our last was a 2009 Legacy Wagon (MT). I can only think of a single modern one she’s driven, which was a Forester we rented a few months ago (which neither of us liked). So we really don’t know that she would like the way the new ones drive or not, but would of course test drive some. For me, the deterrence of the CVT would be longevity and reliability.

In PRINCIPLE, I really like the idea of CVTs for an everyday commuter vehicle. It is the execution thus far which turns me off. From an engineering standpoint I find the idea of relying purely on friction for ratio change and drive to be… sketchy. There is no other transmission type which operates in this manner, and for what I believe to be a fairly good reason. Sure MTs have the main clutch and the sycros, and planetary automatics use friction to a degree to change which portion of the planetary setup is engaged. But, those frictional components are intermittent. They are meant to engage, then stop and hold, after which there is (hopefully) no more sliding/slipping going on. The CVT is different. There is ALWAYS frictional sliding/slipping happening, and under a great deal of pressure as well. Even when the CVT is not changing ratios, there is sliding/slip because of the way the chain (from an engineering standpoint if it has links it is a chain, not a belt) needs to curve around to meet the cones. When it is changing ratios (which should be most of the time around town), the chain is being forced under extreme pressure to slide up and down the cones. Although I’m sure manufacturers are careful about selecting abrasion resistant materials… ultimately it is my opinion that this will create uneven wear over the cones which would create problems (such as shuddering, noise, and hunting) down the line. And keep in mind that as loads and hp increase, so must the pressure increase in order to hold against the cones. In a way, the CVT is squeezing and grinding the chain with the cones in order to hold enough friction to create motion.

My wife and I tend to keep our vehicles for 8 – 10 years, put fairly high mileage on them, and all of them have trailer hitches which we tend to use. All of these factors would make me avoid current CVTs, or at least wait until they have a long term proven track record.

Brandon

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by JustyWRC

I thought I read somewhere "TR" stood for Track Ready. Not Tuner Ready.

Not sure if this video of the unveiling has been shared, but the SOA rep states that the 2006-07 was Tuner Ready and the 2024 is Track Ready.

WRX TR Reveal at Subiefest Florida! // Subiefest Florida VLOG// #2022wrx #wrx #subaru - YouTube

WRX TR Reveal at Subiefest Florida! // Subiefest Florida VLOG// #2022wrx #wrx #subaru - YouTube

[samagon]

Originally Posted by Snow Drift

Not sure if this video of the unveiling has been shared, but the SOA rep states that the 2006-07 was Tuner Ready and the 2024 is Track Ready.

WRX TR Reveal at Subiefest Florida! // Subiefest Florida VLOG// #2022wrx #wrx #subaru - YouTube

Track Ready?

here I thought it was Trash Ready!

[Straight6]

It will be curious to see how many of these TR models Subaru will bring over. These will hold their value very well. Hopefully we will see different color options too. That red looks incredible.

[JustyWRC]

Originally Posted by brandon

I once again apologize for being slow to respond, but I have precious little time for posting these days and being old my typing skills are glacial.



Yes, all of the comparables I used were AWD versions. You can look them up on Edmunds and you'll get the same thing yourself. I don't know what you mean when you say "The AWDs are rated less". The question of whether they are full time AWD or not is almost irrelevant. There is an internet myth that part time AWD is somehow meaningfully or substantially more fuel efficient than full time AWD. This is really not true, and I can explain why***8230;

Manufacturers engage their part time AWD systems in different ways, but generally there is some type of clutch which allows slip between the front and rear (acting as a differential). The only energy used by these systems is to engage these "clutches", and some waste heat generated as a consequence of the slippage. This is not a great deal of energy in the first instance, but is even less so when you consider that most of the time people are driving in a straight line, and thus the system isn't engaged anyway. So most of the time the system is disengaged and in a very low energy requirement state. Similarly, full time systems have default low energy states. There are many different types of systems, but having a default engaged system could be as simple as adding springs to preload the "clutches". The point is that the energy required for ENGAGEMENT or changing conditions is going to be similar, regardless as to whether it is part time or full time. The majority of the extra energy required for AWD is due to excess static and rotational mass, and friction in the supporting rotational bits. Static mass (weight) we can do nothing about (and is the same between part time and full time), but the rotational mass and excess friction we can. Many full time 4WD systems have locking front hubs for that reason. Disconnecting at the wheel hubs means you don't have to accelerate another drive shaft, differential, and half shafts (everything between the transfer case and the brakes)***8230; which means substantially better fuel economy. I am unaware of any mainstream AWD systems which have locking hubs. And the reason is obvious, because if you want your AWD system to react in milliseconds, and you're travelling at 70mph on the highway, then you can imagine the force required to accelerate all those components almost instantaneously. I imagine it would make one hell of a clunk and probably upset the vehicle. I suspect that over the years people who've known 4WD vehicles get far better mileage when they're in 2WD, have projected that assumption to part time AWD. But it is just not the same thing. I thought it was important to explain this in detail, but in short***8230; it doesn't matter all that much if the other vehicles were part time or full time. If the CVT can provide that much better mileage, part time AWD can't be used as an excuse when comparing.


With regards to my wife I'll first point out that her vehicles are her decision, but she takes my recommendations seriously. I'm the Mechanical Engineer, she's the Doctor, and we advise each other accordingly. I am the one who got her into Subarus in the first instance. Also she does not have much experience with newer Subarus, as our last was a 2009 Legacy Wagon (MT). I can only think of a single modern one she's driven, which was a Forester we rented a few months ago (which neither of us liked). So we really don't know that she would like the way the new ones drive or not, but would of course test drive some. For me, the deterrence of the CVT would be longevity and reliability.

In PRINCIPLE, I really like the idea of CVTs for an everyday commuter vehicle. It is the execution thus far which turns me off. From an engineering standpoint I find the idea of relying purely on friction for ratio change and drive to be***8230; sketchy. There is no other transmission type which operates in this manner, and for what I believe to be a fairly good reason. Sure MTs have the main clutch and the sycros, and planetary automatics use friction to a degree to change which portion of the planetary setup is engaged. But, those frictional components are intermittent. They are meant to engage, then stop and hold, after which there is (hopefully) no more sliding/slipping going on. The CVT is different. There is ALWAYS frictional sliding/slipping happening, and under a great deal of pressure as well. Even when the CVT is not changing ratios, there is sliding/slip because of the way the chain (from an engineering standpoint if it has links it is a chain, not a belt) needs to curve around to meet the cones. When it is changing ratios (which should be most of the time around town), the chain is being forced under extreme pressure to slide up and down the cones. Although I'm sure manufacturers are careful about selecting abrasion resistant materials***8230; ultimately it is my opinion that this will create uneven wear over the cones which would create problems (such as shuddering, noise, and hunting) down the line. And keep in mind that as loads and hp increase, so must the pressure increase in order to hold against the cones. In a way, the CVT is squeezing and grinding the chain with the cones in order to hold enough friction to create motion.

My wife and I tend to keep our vehicles for 8 - 10 years, put fairly high mileage on them, and all of them have trailer hitches which we tend to use. All of these factors would make me avoid current CVTs, or at least wait until they have a long term proven track record.

Brandon

Well, I won't buy 2WD. That MPG gain isn't enough for me to sacrifice AWD. SO, Subaru's AWD gets better MPG than it's competitors, with AWD....why would i get something else that is inferior at the price point? Which has been proven again and again.


You're worried about the CVT that has been out for over a decade now(long enough track record?) and has just gotten better......and is pretty much on equal footing for reliability as the 4EAT(then 5EAT) it replaced. The "problem" with the LCVT is that the guts of it are not serviceable by retailer techs and is replaced if indicated versus torn down and repaired. Which is costly......which SOA has helped out with with a longer warranty coverage. But, it's just as good/bad as the 4EAT with being much better on MPG considering the size of car it's moving versus what the 4EAT was moving. And towing more than any previous Subaru transmission.



You don't like it cause the way it feels? Fine. Don't dislike it cause you think it's not reliable.

Originally Posted by Snow Drift

Not sure if this video of the unveiling has been shared, but the SOA rep states that the 2006-07 was Tuner Ready and the 2024 is Track Ready.

WRX TR Reveal at Subiefest Florida! // Subiefest Florida VLOG// #2022wrx #wrx #subaru - YouTube

Thanks.






Dang it. wrong AWD talk in the improper thread again. Apologies.

[20WRX20]

I just can’t with the cladding.

This is due for a MCR for the 2025 model year. If it still has the plastic on it I am definitely going to another brand. I’ll consider another WRX if they remove all plastic cladding, but I just can’t do it as-is.

Part of ownership (especially as an enthusiast) is looking back at the car after you parked it. The VB with the cladding has the same visual appearance as a Crosstrek, meaning I’m parking the car and not looking back at it. The VA IMO looks sharp when stock and clean.

I thought about black or gray, but even in person it’s just not acceptable. I don’t know what Subaru was thinking with this design. If you look at the brochure for the VA it has the car on a racetrack in most photos. It is also marketed as a sport sedan.

The VB doesn’t need the plastic treatment - save it for the CUVs or maybe offer it as a WRX Wilderness/Forest Rally Edition or something. I toured Subaru Motorsports’ HQ recently and there were people there who said they wanted the new WRX but decided against it because of the plastic. It’s cheap, gaudy, and needs to go.

And yes, the TR = Track Ready. I don’t see it holding its value any better than a VA with performance package. Actually the VB appears to be depreciating twice as fast as the VA models. I’m not sure if that’s due to the price increase YoY but it’s what I’ve noticed when comparing values.

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by 20WRX20

I just can’t with the cladding.

This is due for a MCR for the 2025 model year. If it still has the plastic on it I am definitely going to another brand. I’ll consider another WRX if they remove all plastic cladding, but I just can’t do it as-is.

Part of ownership (especially as an enthusiast) is looking back at the car after you parked it. The VB with the cladding has the same visual appearance as a Crosstrek, meaning I’m parking the car and not looking back at it. The VA IMO looks sharp when stock and clean.

I thought about black or gray, but even in person it’s just not acceptable. I don’t know what Subaru was thinking with this design. If you look at the brochure for the VA it has the car on a racetrack in most photos. It is also marketed as a sport sedan.

The VB doesn’t need the plastic treatment - save it for the CUVs or maybe offer it as a WRX Wilderness/Forest Rally Edition or something. I toured Subaru Motorsports’ HQ recently and there were people there who said they wanted the new WRX but decided against it because of the plastic. It’s cheap, gaudy, and needs to go.

And yes, the TR = Track Ready. I don’t see it holding its value any better than a VA with performance package. Actually the VB appears to be depreciating twice as fast as the VA models. I’m not sure if that’s due to the price increase YoY but it’s what I’ve noticed when comparing values.

Used car market is being crushed right now with high interest rates. Hard to compare VA to VB at the moment. VAs have already had their major deprecation hit take place years ago.