Toyota GR Corolla: Automatic Transmission Set For 2024 Release Date

[Sid03SVT]

Originally Posted by FaastLegacy

How many people in the market for these cars are using reliability as their primary motivator for purchasing these cars?

Toyota reliability played a role when I bought my Lexus, but it wasn't the deciding factor, and had a wagon been offered in any of the vehicles I test drove I would have snatched that up instead.

Originally Posted by carsebuco

Many, just read the GRC forums. I, for one, if it weren't a Toyota or Honda (or Subaru) would probably not get one.

How can you believe that a turbo Subaru is reliable while simultaneously believing a turbo VW isn't? Head gaskets & ringlands shouldn't be maintenance items.

Neither Subaru or VW are historically as reliable as Toyota or Honda, I'd put them in the same general area as far as reliability is concerned, parts are just typically cheaper for a Subaru than a VW.

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

[heavyD]

Originally Posted by FaastLegacy

How many people in the market for these cars are using reliability as their primary motivator for purchasing these cars?

Lots of elderly who are paranoid about everyone trying to take their life savings. Visiting a Toyota dealerships in my part of the world is akin to visiting an old folks home with vehicles on display.

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

Toyota reliability played a role when I bought my Lexus, but it wasn't the deciding factor, and had a wagon been offered in any of the vehicles I test drove I would have snatched that up instead.




How can you believe that a turbo Subaru is reliable while simultaneously believing a turbo VW isn't? Head gaskets & ringlands shouldn't be maintenance items.

Neither Subaru or VW are historically as reliable as Toyota or Honda, I'd put them in the same general area as far as reliability is concerned, parts are just typically cheaper for a Subaru than a VW.

I've owned 6 Subarus since 2004. Only one had a reliability issue (2008 WRX needed new fork/slave cylinder covered by warranty, I didn't hurt it).

I have suggested Subarus to many family members/friends. No issues.

While my family has owned multiple Audis and a VW Scirocco, the overall view of German cars is that they have electrical gremlins, and are less reliable. Certainly, more expensive to repair.

I drive an Alfa, so clearly I am not worried about reliability in the past. She has been awesome for the past year.

I don't like Toyota because they tend to make boring cars, besides the 2JZ Supra and Celica All-Trac. I don't think Subaru is as boring (not that the CVT cars aren't getting sleepier as the years progress).

[godfather2112]

Had almost 80k miles on my 2012 GTI before I got rid of it. Only issue I ever had was a dead battery which was my fault. I didn’t exactly drive that car lightly either. Most of the people I know have been happy with their VW.

It’s somewhat funny how people hold into old quality / reliability from a damn long time ago and think nothing has changed. BMW makes some of the best engines and pretty damn reliable cars but still see people blast them like their late 90’s to early mid 2000’s quality and reliability.

[4S-TURBO]

People's experiences are different and they act accordingly. It really was a leap of faith to get back into a VW after my previous experience. Scrap owned an MK6 R and vouched for its reliability, so I thought why not I'll get back on the horse. Owned 3 more since.

And when I say my most reliable VWs were produced in Mexico, I should clarify: My most reliable cars EVER are Mexican produced VWs.

[samagon]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

You know what's ~10k more than a Core GR corolla? A 3.0 Supra.

If you're hell bent on an AWD hatch, Golf R is a better move than a marked up GR corolla. If you need four doors there are other options, but honestly the automotive landscape is pretty bleak right now and I don't think it's going to get better, at least from an enthusiasts standpoint. If you like jacked-up vanilla people movers with plastic cladding, there's plenty of those.

paper racing, not really looking at reality, imo.

with the Golf R you are also not getting out of a dealer without a markup, never mind they trickle in slower than the GRC does. let's pretend you do find one, by every review it's way more muted for steering feel than the GRC, and if you look at the results from the C&D article, the places that the Golf R really stood above the GR Corolla are features/amenities. so sunroof, leather, heated/ventilated seats. so if a muted steering, heavier, but more feature laden vehicle is what gets you, then go for the Golf R, it's a great car by any estimation, you need to find it first, which is harder than getting a GR Corolla. but if AWD and hatch are your primary deciders, then this is it for options. just know, if you are going new, the Golf R isn't going to be MSRP either, when I was in the market, every VW dealer in Houston was quoting 5k markup, and only 1 was doing MSRP on a first guy in the door gets the sale methodology.

the Supra has 2 seats, so if you need that second set of doors and seats, then that's a no go.

as far as the 'bleak enthusiasts landscape' from a 4 door sport compact at or under ~$50,000 kind of place, we are spoiled for choice, if the car can be found. some options you didn't list:

Elantra N, Kona N, Audi S3, Civic Type R, GTI, CT4V, and yes, even the WRX.

I know right now the WRX isn't the popular choice on this site, but they just had their highest February sales for WRX in the history of the car (not just YOY sales increase, but best February ever), so someone is buying them. maybe it's because not only are they at MSRP for price, but they are offering incentives as well.

[samagon]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

You know what's ~10k more than a Core GR corolla? A 3.0 Supra.

If you're hell bent on an AWD hatch, Golf R is a better move than a marked up GR corolla. If you need four doors there are other options, but honestly the automotive landscape is pretty bleak right now and I don't think it's going to get better, at least from an enthusiasts standpoint. If you like jacked-up vanilla people movers with plastic cladding, there's plenty of those.

paper racing, not really looking at reality, imo.

with the Golf R you are also not getting out of a dealer without a markup, never mind they trickle in slower than the GRC does. let's pretend you do find one, by every review it's way more muted for steering feel than the GRC, and if you look at the results from the C&D article, the places that the Golf R really stood above the GR Corolla are features/amenities. so sunroof, leather, heated/ventilated seats. so if a muted steering, heavier, but more feature laden vehicle is what gets you, then go for the Golf R, it's a great car by any estimation, you need to find it first, which is harder than getting a GR Corolla. but if AWD and hatch are your primary deciders, then this is it for options. just know, if you are going new, the Golf R isn't going to be MSRP either, when I was in the market, every VW dealer in Houston was quoting 5k markup, and only 1 was doing MSRP on a first guy in the door gets the sale methodology.

the Supra has 2 seats, so if you need that second set of doors and seats, then that's a no go.

as far as the 'bleak enthusiasts landscape' from a 4 door sport compact at or under ~$50,000 kind of place, we are spoiled for choice, if the car can be found. some options you didn't list:

Elantra N, Kona N, Audi S3, Civic Type R, GTI, CT4V, and yes, even the WRX.

I know right now the WRX isn't the popular choice on this site, but they just had their highest February sales for WRX in the history of the car (not just YOY sales increase, but best February ever), so someone is buying them. maybe it's because not only are they at MSRP for price, but they are offering incentives as well.

[Sid03SVT]

Originally Posted by samagon

paper racing, not really looking at reality, imo.

with the Golf R you are also not getting out of a dealer without a markup, never mind they trickle in slower than the GRC does. let's pretend you do find one, by every review it's way more muted for steering feel than the GRC, and if you look at the results from the C&D article, the places that the Golf R really stood above the GR Corolla are features/amenities. so sunroof, leather, heated/ventilated seats. so if a muted steering, heavier, but more feature laden vehicle is what gets you, then go for the Golf R, it's a great car by any estimation, you need to find it first, which is harder than getting a GR Corolla. but if AWD and hatch are your primary deciders, then this is it for options. just know, if you are going new, the Golf R isn't going to be MSRP either, when I was in the market, every VW dealer in Houston was quoting 5k markup, and only 1 was doing MSRP on a first guy in the door gets the sale methodology.

the Supra has 2 seats, so if you need that second set of doors and seats, then that's a no go.

as far as the 'bleak enthusiasts landscape' from a 4 door sport compact at or under ~$50,000 kind of place, we are spoiled for choice, if the car can be found. some options you didn't list:

Elantra N, Kona N, Audi S3, Civic Type R, GTI, CT4V, and yes, even the WRX.

I know right now the WRX isn't the popular choice on this site, but they just had their highest February sales for WRX in the history of the car (not just YOY sales increase, but best February ever), so someone is buying them. maybe it's because not only are they at MSRP for price, but they are offering incentives as well.

The GR Corolla isn't worth 10k over sticker, neither is the Golf R. For that money you can get a better performing vehicle with better underpinnings. Paying ADM only perpetuates ADM.

You may be spoiled with choices, but we are not.
I won't buy a FWD car which is why I didn't list them, my hierarchy is RWD > RWD based AWD > Rear-biased AWD. Every 5-10 years I give FWD another shot, every time I hate the test drive.

Just about everything under 50k is FWD or FWD based AWD: Elantra N, Kona N (that's a CUV BTW), Audi S3, Civic Type R, GTI. For the WRX to be considered it would have to 1.) be an STI 2.) cladding has to go away 3.) rear bumper design needs to be fixed.

The only reason I'm considering the Golf R & GR Corolla is because their rear axle can be overdriven in a manner to rotate the vehicle - Golf R does it differently by throwing 50% of available torque at one rear wheel vs. the GRC where the rear axle is overdriven.

RWD/RWD based AWD "under 50k":
CT4V - turbo 4 only, automatic only, curb weight of 3,600 (RWD) to 3,800 (AWD).
IS300/350 - turbo 4 or N.A. V6, automatic only, curb weight 3,600 (RWD) to 3,800 (AWD)
BMW 330i - turbo 4 only, automatic only, 3,600 (RWD) to 3,800 (AWD).

None of those are enthusiast cars to me, I own one & have driven them all (*ATS 6mt though, not CT4V 10A)

Anything RWD or RWD based AWD that is desirable is is some combination of ~4,000lbs, automatic only and 60k+; if you want to row your own you're looking at ~70k or more for a CT4V BW or M3, or ~100k for a CT5V BW; and I do want to row my own. I've had an auto for the past 3 years, I do not like it, and will not buy another ICE with an auto, which is why the IS500 & M340i are out.
CT4V BW is saddled with an engine I don't like; I didn't like it in the ATS-V, and although I haven't driven it in the CT4V BW, it's the same engine, just updated. the CT4 is a four door Camaro with Cadillac badges, and they stuffed the wrong engine in it.

2+2 RWD coupes are either underpowered (BRZ/86) or ~4,000lbs (Mustang, Camaro, M240i, etc.) I was/am considering one, the IS would just stay as my DD until I eventually replace it with an EV. The engine in the BRZ/86 is underwhelming, yes it's better than the 2.0, but that engine was abysmal; a D- is better than an F, but it's still not good enough.

2-seat coupes/convertibles are not something I'm seriously considering either, I used the Supra because it has much better underpinnings than the Golf R & GRC, and if someone is willing to pay 10k markup on a hopped up economy car they should look at their other options.

I'm a picky SOB, but that doesn't mean there are good enthusiast options on the market, especially when you want to row your own.

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

The GR Corolla isn't worth 10k over sticker, neither is the Golf R. For that money you can get a better performing vehicle with better underpinnings. Paying ADM only perpetuates ADM.

You may be spoiled with choices, but we are not.
I won't buy a FWD car which is why I didn't list them, my hierarchy is RWD > RWD based AWD > Rear-biased AWD. Every 5-10 years I give FWD another shot, every time I hate the test drive.

Just about everything under 50k is FWD or FWD based AWD: Elantra N, Kona N (that's a CUV BTW), Audi S3, Civic Type R, GTI. For the WRX to be considered it would have to 1.) be an STI 2.) cladding has to go away 3.) rear bumper design needs to be fixed.

The only reason I'm considering the Golf R & GR Corolla is because their rear axle can be overdriven in a manner to rotate the vehicle - Golf R does it differently by throwing 50% of available torque at one rear wheel vs. the GRC where the rear axle is overdriven.

RWD/RWD based AWD "under 50k":
CT4V - turbo 4 only, automatic only, curb weight of 3,600 (RWD) to 3,800 (AWD).
IS300/350 - turbo 4 or N.A. V6, automatic only, curb weight 3,600 (RWD) to 3,800 (AWD)
BMW 330i - turbo 4 only, automatic only, 3,600 (RWD) to 3,800 (AWD).

None of those are enthusiast cars to me, I own one & have driven them all (*ATS 6mt though, not CT4V 10A)

Anything RWD or RWD based AWD that is desirable is is some combination of ~4,000lbs, automatic only and 60k+; if you want to row your own you're looking at ~70k or more for a CT4V BW or M3, or ~100k for a CT5V BW; and I do want to row my own. I've had an auto for the past 3 years, I do not like it, and will not buy another ICE with an auto, which is why the IS500 is out.
CT4V BW is saddled with an engine I don't like; I didn't like it in the ATS-V, and although I haven't driven it in the CT4V BW, it's the same engine, just updated. the CT4 is a four door Camaro with Cadillac badges, and they stuffed the wrong engine in it.

2+2 RWD coupes are either underpowered (BRZ/86) or ~4,000lbs (Mustang, Camaro, M240i, etc.) I was/am considering one, the IS would just stay as my DD until I eventually replace it with an EV. The engine in the BRZ/86 is underwhelming, yes it's better than the 2.0, but that engine was abysmal; a D- is better than an F, but it's still not good enough.

2-seat coupes/convertibles are not something I'm seriously considering either, I used the Supra because it has much better underpinnings than the Golf R & GRC, and if someone is willing to pay 10k markup on a hopped up economy car they should look at their other options.

I'm a picky SOB, but that doesn't mean there are good enthusiast options on the market, especially when you want to row your own.

Another option. You can get a new Alfa Romeo Giulia Q4 (100% RWD until slip), for under $50k. ZF8 only, of course. It will out handle the others.

My Veloce was over $50k, and I think worth it for the upgrades over the lesser trims.

If it came in manual, I would be in love.

[Sid03SVT]

clipped it for you:

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

...I've had an auto for the past 3 years, I do not like it, and will not buy another ICE with an auto...

Originally Posted by Snow Drift

Another option. You can get a new Alfa Romeo Giulia Q4 (100% RWD until slip), for under $50k. ZF8 only, of course. It will out handle the others.

My Veloce was over $50k, and I think worth it for the upgrades over the lesser trims.

If it came in manual, I would be in love.

If the Giulia Q4 came with a manual I probably would have bought one 4-5 years ago (2nd or 3rd model year).

I've driven BMWs & FCA products with the ZF8, it's better than my Aisin box (AA81E) but it's still an auto. If stuck with an auto though, I'd probably go IS500 over Giulia Q4 - V8 noises are better & it's a Toyota so I don't have to worry about it mechanically, but like I said, no more ICE autos for me.

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

clipped it for you:




If the Giulia Q4 came with a manual I probably would have bought one 4-5 years ago (2nd or 3rd model year).

I've driven BMWs & FCA products with the ZF8, it's better than my Aisin box (AA81E) but it's still an auto. If stuck with an auto though, I'd probably go IS500 over Giulia Q4 - V8 noises are better & it's a Toyota so I don't have to worry about it mechanically, but like I said, no more ICE autos for me.

I hear you. I hate automatics. The Giulia is just better than the sum of it's parts, so she gets a pass. That being said, while I drive it in manual mode all the time, I dream of a stick/clutch version. I also want a manual next.

[samagon]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

The GR Corolla isn't worth 10k over sticker, neither is the Golf R. For that money you can get a better performing vehicle with better underpinnings. Paying ADM only perpetuates ADM.

I don't disagree with you there.

the thing of it is, paying a market adjustment is no different from taking advantage of a dealer incentive. would you walk into a dealer and say "no thanks, I don't want your dealer incentive, I'd rather pay MSRP, because that's what the manufacturer says the car is worth?" of course you wouldn't, anyone will be happy to negotiate a deal to buy something under MSRP. it just so happens that on some vehicles, certainly depending on demand and supply, if you want it, you are going to have to pay for it. that's how it all works.

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

You may be spoiled with choices, but we are not.
I won't buy a FWD car which is why I didn't list them, my hierarchy is RWD > RWD based AWD > Rear-biased AWD. Every 5-10 years I give FWD another shot, every time I hate the test drive.

sure, I hate FWD cars with a passion as well, I will never own one. so I get where you are coming from, but I can also tell you that while there are cars like the GR Corolla that are based on a chassis that is FWD, it doesn't act like a FWD car at all. if you ever owned a WRX or STI, the GRC is far more neutral through a corner (stock for stock) than any WRX or STI ever.

but yeah, I totally get you. with the limited time/money I have, I will never own a GTI, CTR, Elantra N, Kona N.

if I were ok with having a sedan again, and also ok with an automatic, I'd probably be in a S3 right now.

but we (you and I) have to realize what we (you and I) want isn't what most people are going to be OK with. they are absolutely ok with FWD because they are ok with the driving style that's required for that.

so you can drop it with the we as if you speak for everyone, cause you don't.

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

YouJust about everything under 50k is FWD or FWD based AWD: Elantra N, Kona N (that's a CUV BTW), Audi S3, Civic Type R, GTI. For the WRX to be considered it would have to 1.) be an STI 2.) cladding has to go away 3.) rear bumper design needs to be fixed.

as far as what the car looks like, and what class the vehicle is, from the perspective of options, it's not that important, if you don't like it, see above, you don't speak for a generation, your opinion is your own and not everyone is going to share it. sure the Kona N is a CUV, but it moves on a track and does what it needs to do to not be something that just looks the part.

anyway, give the 'FWD based' awd a shot, you might end up being surprised with what some computers can do to overcome, especially with the GRC. and honestly, if you want a manual transmission? like a car that was designed first for the manual transmission? you have 3 options (well 4).

BRZ
GR86
GR Corolla
Civic Type R

those cars are it that are designed from the ground up first and foremost to be driven with a manual transmission. every other car out there now (under, or over 50k) is designed first to be an automatic, and we're lucky if they ship it with a manual transmission, but rest assured, if you get the manual instead of the automatic, you won't be getting the full potential from the vehicle. the only exception to that is the new WRX, I'm sure it was designed for the SPT, but the SPT is just that bad that the manual still beats it even if it wasn't designed for it.

[chanomatik]

Are you saying the SPT is bad because you test drove it against the manual? Or do you just hate CVTs? Serious question. I haven't driven the VB WRX or the SPT, but in my mind I know which one I'd choose based on past experience.

Also I think the Kona N is dope. Again, in my head movie.

[samagon]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

Are you saying the SPT is bad because you test drove it against the manual? Or do you just hate CVTs? Serious question. I haven't driven the VB WRX or the SPT, but in my mind I know which one I'd choose based on past experience.

Also I think the Kona N is dope. Again, in my head movie.

it's slower than the manual.

every other car that comes with a manual and automatic, the auto is faster, this is because manufacturers these days build the drivetrain to favor the automatic, the manual, if it exists is a bone for us luddites that want more than 2 pedals.

if the Kona N came as a manual, and had AWD, I would have given it a serious look. I love the looks as well.

[chanomatik]

Originally Posted by samagon

it's slower than the manual.



every other car that comes with a manual and automatic, the auto is faster, this is because manufacturers these days build the drivetrain to favor the automatic, the manual, if it exists is a bone for us luddites that want more than 2 pedals.



if the Kona N came as a manual, and had AWD, I would have given it a serious look. I love the looks as well.

I get it. But, to be fair, is it "paper racing" to say it IS slower if it doesn't FEEL slower? This is the issue I've always had with the WRX vs STI debate. People would argue that the WRX is faster because it requires less shifting 0-60, but after owning both I can attest that I'd take the STI every single time. Most people aren't launching their car every moment they drive it. And most people, no matter how much they want to believe it, are not skilled enough drivers to utilize the perceived quickness.

I haven't seen a bad review of the SPT. Most people just prefer the manual, even if the engagement isn't that special. If the GT didn't cost so much then the electronic dampers would be the preferred setup for a daily driver since it makes the ride less harsh. Obviously Subaru got all weirdo with the options and trim levels in correlation with pricing, but I don't think that necessarily means their product is bad either.

It's like what was said about the GRC Core without diffs. Everyone says you have to have LSDs, but homie on here said you really won't miss not having them for your daily driver. WRX has existed with open diffs for years.

There's a scale here somewhere between passion, performance, practicality and final price that have to be considered that don't completely count out the extremes. Subaru definitely doesn't ever seem to care about 0-60 times, only with how their product makes you feel while driving it. If only they could figure out how to get people to want to be in the car.

Sent from my SM-F926U using Tapatalk

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

I get it. But, to be fair, is it "paper racing" to say it IS slower if it doesn't FEEL slower? This is the issue I've always had with the WRX vs STI debate. People would argue that the WRX is faster because it requires less shifting 0-60, but after owning both I can attest that I'd take the STI every single time. Most people aren't launching their car every moment they drive it. And most people, no matter how much they want to believe it, are not skilled enough drivers to utilize the perceived quickness.

I haven't seen a bad review of the SPT. Most people just prefer the manual, even if the engagement isn't that special. If the GT didn't cost so much then the electronic dampers would be the preferred setup for a daily driver since it makes the ride less harsh. Obviously Subaru got all weirdo with the options and trim levels in correlation with pricing, but I don't think that necessarily means their product is bad either.

It's like what was said about the GRC Core without diffs. Everyone says you have to have LSDs, but homie on here said you really won't miss not having them for your daily driver. WRX has existed with open diffs for years.

There's a scale here somewhere between passion, performance, practicality and final price that have to be considered that don't completely count out the extremes. Subaru definitely doesn't ever seem to care about 0-60 times, only with how their product makes you feel while driving it. If only they could figure out how to get people to want to be in the car.

Sent from my SM-F926U using Tapatalk

So, yes WRX vs STI is about what do you want. They are both quick, and fun, but the STI is a tool for the track, etc. For daily life, the WRX is a better application. I still want the STI, just because.

SPT vs Manual, it isn't about which is quicker. It's about the experience when you drive. Automatics are boring. I don't care if the auto is quicker (Golf R), I still want to row my own gears. Now, if this is your touring car, for everyday life and you also have a manual toy, fine. Get an auto and cruise relaxed. But, manual is more fun. I don't have the option of a manual, and that sucks. Paddles are only so fun.

GRC needs* the diffs because it doesn't have any at all. *We need/want it. No one actually needs it for daily life. I paid up to get a rear LSD on my Giulia, and as a RWD-biased car, it is awesome.

WRX has a center differential, so the front/rear diffs can be open for a commuter car. The 02-07 WRX (as you know) had a rear LSD, but it was VC and slow to react. The 08+ with VDC might be quicker to react than the VC. I don't know. Yes, of course, I prefer the STI w/ 3 differentials.

I think Subaru stopped focusing on 0-60 for two reasons: 1) as the cars have grown, they have gotten slower. 2) encouraging clutch dumps = warranty repairs. Which costs Subaru money if they can't 100% determine you caused the problem. Half the time they probably cave and give a good will replacement.

[samagon]

Originally Posted by chanomatik

I get it. But, to be fair, is it "paper racing" to say it IS slower if it doesn't FEEL slower? This is the issue I've always had with the WRX vs STI debate. People would argue that the WRX is faster because it requires less shifting 0-60, but after owning both I can attest that I'd take the STI every single time. Most people aren't launching their car every moment they drive it. And most people, no matter how much they want to believe it, are not skilled enough drivers to utilize the perceived quickness.

I haven't seen a bad review of the SPT. Most people just prefer the manual, even if the engagement isn't that special. If the GT didn't cost so much then the electronic dampers would be the preferred setup for a daily driver since it makes the ride less harsh. Obviously Subaru got all weirdo with the options and trim levels in correlation with pricing, but I don't think that necessarily means their product is bad either.

you're spot on actually. feel is important. if the SPT feels faster than the manual, that's more important than if it actually is faster. if the cable shifter in the VB feels as crappy as the cable shifter in the VA, then that's definitely a thing.

so yeah, proof that here too, even though the car is slower, Subaru still put their dollars into optimizing the platform for the automatic transmission vs the manual. if actually shifting manual in the VB feels as uninspired as it did in the VA, it's just further proof that the manual is an afterthought to placate a dwindling market.

just kind of goes back to the statement earlier, if you really, like, really want a manual trans, you have very limited options, anything outside of those are optimized for automatics, but the manufacturer gave the manual transmission cult an afterthought.

that doesn't change the fact that there are still more affordably priced fun cars available today than in the last 20 years, denying that because none of them fit your specific niche is silly (not you Chano, you aren't making statements like that)

Originally Posted by chanomatik

It's like what was said about the GRC Core without diffs. Everyone says you have to have LSDs, but homie on here said you really won't miss not having them for your daily driver. WRX has existed with open diffs for years.

There's a scale here somewhere between passion, performance, practicality and final price that have to be considered that don't completely count out the extremes. Subaru definitely doesn't ever seem to care about 0-60 times, only with how their product makes you feel while driving it. If only they could figure out how to get people to want to be in the car.

Sent from my SM-F926U using Tapatalk

if my GRC didn't have LSD I probably wouldn't notice on the streets unless I'm doing things that might be confused as unsafe. my BRZ, if it didn't have LSD, I absolutely would have known just going around a normal corner. lol.

that's with the stock tires though. on the BRZ, I put on some stickier tires and then magically it didn't need LSD either.

when it comes time to replace the tires, I'm going to option a more reasonably priced, and probably less grippy tire. at that point, the LSD will come in handy on the street.

but yeah, people are making the LSD thing out to be something that makes the car worthless without it, and the resale value will be tanked. that's some extreme thoughts there.

[Sid03SVT]

Originally Posted by samagon

I don't disagree with you there.
the thing of it is, paying a market adjustment is no different from taking advantage of a dealer incentive. would you walk into a dealer and say "no thanks, I don't want your dealer incentive, I'd rather pay MSRP, because that's what the manufacturer says the car is worth?" of course you wouldn't, anyone will be happy to negotiate a deal to buy something under MSRP. it just so happens that on some vehicles, certainly depending on demand and supply, if you want it, you are going to have to pay for it. that's how it all works.

That is some bad logic. Dealers selling vehicles at and below invoice still make money on a vehicle, ADM is greed driven.

Originally Posted by samagon

sure, I hate FWD cars with a passion as well, I will never own one. so I get where you are coming from, but I can also tell you that while there are cars like the GR Corolla that are based on a chassis that is FWD, it doesn't act like a FWD car at all. if you ever owned a WRX or STI, the GRC is far more neutral through a corner (stock for stock) than any WRX or STI ever.

I mentioned I'd give those two a shake if I can ever drive them, I was actually excited about the GRY & the GRC, but as more and more reviews come out, I don't think it's going to be what I want, the Golf R might be closer, but even then, may not be what I want.

Originally Posted by samagon

if I were ok with having a sedan again, and also ok with an automatic, I'd probably be in a S3 right now.

S3 is essentially a softer Golf R sedan, between the two I'd take the Golf R, manual, T.V. rear diff, bigger brakes & hatch trumps Audi interior improvements. Absolutely hate the haptic controls on the steering wheel in the Golf R, but VW is apparently moving back to buttons so that will hopefully be a non-issue.

Originally Posted by samagon

but we (you and I) have to realize what we (you and I) want isn't what most people are going to be OK with. they are absolutely ok with FWD because they are ok with the driving style that's required for that.

so you can drop it with the we as if you speak for everyone, cause you don't.

You said "we are spoiled for choice", you were speaking for everyone, I clarified saying you may be spoiled for choice, but we are not, being that I was part of the "we" in your statement; but obviously since you don't like/won't buy FWD either, your statement doesn't make sense from the get go.

The majority of non-car people are fine with open diffs, FWD, automatics/CVTs, low power (etc. etc.) CUVs; this is an enthusiast forum, people here are generally into cars and have more specific tastes that are contrary to a vehicle simply performing a mundane task like commuting or getting groceries.

Originally Posted by samagon

as far as what the car looks like, and what class the vehicle is, from the perspective of options, it's not that important, if you don't like it, see above, you don't speak for a generation, your opinion is your own and not everyone is going to share it. sure the Kona N is a CUV, but it moves on a track and does what it needs to do to not be something that just looks the part.

I wasn't speaking for everyone, you were, see above.
As to cars I choose - It's mechanical bits first, appearance second; form follows function for me. If there were an STI with a hotter DIT2.4 & ~3XXhp/tq a 6mt, DCCD, diffs front and rear, active dampers, brembos etc. even if it were as ugly as the WRX, I'd give it a chance, but we got a WRX with a cable operated 6mt, open diffs, no DCCD, active dampers only available with a CVT; it doesn't make the cut mechanically, so the bad styling is just a point of conversation.

I don't care if a Kona N can put up good track times, it's a FWD CUV; BMW CUVs put up great track times, you know what puts up better track times? cars; lower to the ground, lighter cars with the same, or even less power., but track numbers don't weigh highly for me in a street car; a Civic Type R will destroy most if not everything in it's price bracket on the track, but it's FWD so it's a no-go. How a vehicle feels to drive is weighted higher than it's numbers on paper or ability on track, but I've got some minimum requirements as far as performance is concerned; Miata's are very engaging & fun to drive on narrow twisty back roads once they are up to speed, but I don't like "momentum cars" aka. underpowered cars that handle well, I want something with enough power to upset the chassis/break the tires loose when I feel like it; but I don't want to neuter a cars handling with eco-tires just to break the tires loose, or drive a land yacht just to get something with power (Charger Scat Pack for example).

BRZ/GR86 - more power & bigger brakes would be a fun second car, but as it comes from the factory, I'll get bored with it real quick
GR Corolla - I'll test drive one, out of the box it might have enough power to get me through the warranty period before I feel the need for more, same goes for the Golf R; AWD is just not a selling point for me like it is for most people on a Subaru forum, whodathunkit. The advantage to the GRC & Golf R over a BRZ/86 is that it can be a daily/primary car I can haul the family around in, where as a BRZ/86/Mustang/Camaro would be relegated to a second car; rear facing car seats are a PITA, and I've got a bit more time with one. I think my first child was 4 when we switched him to forward facing, my youngest is only 2, so he's got at least a year or two left rear facing, which makes the BRZ/86 a 3-seater & the Mustang/Camaro a 4-seater as long as the passenger is short enough.
Civic Type R - FWD, not going to bother, I gave the GTI a shake before I bought my current car, a MY19 or 20, yep it's still very much FWD. I know the CTR has more sophisticated suspension than a GTI does, but it still puts power through the front wheels.

Originally Posted by samagon

those cars are it that are designed from the ground up first and foremost to be driven with a manual transmission. every other car out there now (under, or over 50k) is designed first to be an automatic, and we're lucky if they ship it with a manual transmission, but rest assured, if you get the manual instead of the automatic, you won't be getting the full potential from the vehicle. the only exception to that is the new WRX, I'm sure it was designed for the SPT, but the SPT is just that bad that the manual still beats it even if it wasn't designed for it.

I don't care about giving up a couple tenths to 60 by choosing a manual over an auto, again, I care more about the driving experience than numbers on a page. I've been living with an auto for ~3 years now, I do not like it, no more autos in an ICE car for me.

[JustyWRC]

Originally Posted by Sid03SVT

.....Neither Subaru or VW are historically as reliable as Toyota or Honda, I'd put them in the same general area as far as reliability is concerned, parts are just typically cheaper for a Subaru than a VW.

Then how is it that percentage wise, Subaru tops them with longevity? You know the ad.....sing it with me.... "97% of Subarus sold in the last 10 years are still on the road". Legacy is longest lasting in it's category. Beating Accord AND Camry(and everything else really). Forester is in it's category(RAV4, CR-V, etc...). What are you using for "...historically as reliable...."?

Originally Posted by 4S-TURBO

People's experiences are different and they act accordingly. It really was a leap of faith to get back into a VW after my previous experience. Scrap owned an MK6 R and vouched for its reliability, so I thought why not I'll get back on the horse. Owned 3 more since.

And when I say my most reliable VWs were produced in Mexico, I should clarify: My most reliable cars EVER are Mexican produced VWs.

I can see why it would be hard to want a car again if there was a bad experience. I've talked to customers over the years that had bad experiences; but, loved the car enough to try again. Just had one the other day that called her first one a lemon; but, couldn't get it labeled as such(making it even worst an experience) and lost money trading for another model. Still really loved it and why she said she stuck with Subaru. Been happy since.

I cannot fault anyone, though, that would refuse to come back if they had a bad experience, even though I would think they would have a better experience with a different car.

Originally Posted by samagon

it's slower than the manual.

every other car that comes with a manual and automatic, the auto is faster, this is because manufacturers these days build the drivetrain to favor the automatic, the manual, if it exists is a bone for us luddites that want more than 2 pedals.

if the Kona N came as a manual, and had AWD, I would have given it a serious look. I love the looks as well.

Like Chano was saying, I think this is paper racing(with pros as back-up). I have yet to see any video of a HTCVT losing to a manual. And the SPT is better(certainly stronger). I won't argue the "feels" when it comes to wanting a MT over a auto. I have certainly never factored shifting into my "fun" assessment with driving. Actually would more likely label it as bad with the occasional missed shift or killing the car on takeoff than a positive thing. And I'll remind that I've had a MT uninterrupted since I started driving and will likely always have one with my Sambars.

It's just not important to me and more an annoyance now. IF it's the only option on what I buy(was ready for that when the STI was released); but, if there's an "equal"(not 2009 Impreza GT), then I'll be getting the auto.

But, like I think I mentioned somewhere here, there ARE those just dead set on a MT that they are willing to wait 6 months for their sold order base model Impreza Sedan 5MT!! Good for them.

[murrdogg24]

whoever pays ADM on this tarted up econobox needs to have their head checked

[FaastLegacy]

Originally Posted by Snow Drift

I've owned 6 Subarus since 2004. Only one had a reliability issue (2008 WRX needed new fork/slave cylinder covered by warranty, I didn't hurt it).

I have suggested Subarus to many family members/friends. No issues.

While my family has owned multiple Audis and a VW Scirocco, the overall view of German cars is that they have electrical gremlins, and are less reliable. Certainly, more expensive to repair.

I drive an Alfa, so clearly I am not worried about reliability in the past. She has been awesome for the past year.

I don't like Toyota because they tend to make boring cars, besides the 2JZ Supra and Celica All-Trac. I don't think Subaru is as boring (not that the CVT cars aren't getting sleepier as the years progress).

I haven't owned a Subaru in almost 20 years but my parents still buy them religiously. The past two they've owned(2011 Outback and 2014 Outback) have been pieces of junk. They've poured a buttload of money into the 2011 in particular and it only has 75k miles on it.

Subarus being reliable is an antiquated myth to me just as are VWs not being reliable.

I know right now the WRX isn't the popular choice on this site, but they just had their highest February sales for WRX in the history of the car (not just YOY sales increase, but best February ever), so someone is buying them. maybe it's because not only are they at MSRP for price, but they are offering incentives as well.

I'm curious how much supply is driving that. You can't find any sporty compact cars on the dealers lots anywhere except for the WRX. I live in the Phoenix area and I can't find GRCs, CTRs, S3s, Golf Rs, not even a damn MT BRZ/GT86 twin(but plenty of autos). Yet, all of the local Subaru dealerships have a buttload of WRXes on the lot. The dealership 10 minutes from my house is showing 24 of them in stock right now and it's been this way for months now.

That being said, I wonder how many people want something else but just end up defaulting to the WRX because it's what's available. I know I almost did that.

It's somewhat funny how people hold into old quality / reliability from a damn long time ago and think nothing has changed. BMW makes some of the best engines and pretty damn reliable cars but still see people blast them like their late 90's to early mid 2000's quality and reliability.

Seriously.

I'd still be driving my wife's old Mexican built 2008 Jetta as a beater if someone ******* hadn't run a red light and totaled it. My Mexican built 2017 GTI was bullet proof as well. I feel like the internet becomes an echo chamber where people just keep repeating the same nonsense because they've seen it enough times without any personal experience.

The dealer with the red Core and the $10k markup reached out to me again today to see if I was still interested. I guess no one has taken them up on the $10k markup yet, which makes me optimistic for the market as a whole. It seems like the market for first adopters willing to pay a king's ransom in ADM has dried up fairly quickly and I still haven't seen one in the wild yet.

[Kostamojen]

YouTube (Short URL)

YouTube (Short URL)

[Snow Drift]

Originally Posted by FaastLegacy

I haven't owned a Subaru in almost 20 years but my parents still buy them religiously. The past two they've owned(2011 Outback and 2014 Outback) have been pieces of junk. They've poured a buttload of money into the 2011 in particular and it only has 75k miles on it.

Subarus being reliable is an antiquated myth to me just as are VWs not being reliable.



I'm curious how much supply is driving that. You can't find any sporty compact cars on the dealers lots anywhere except for the WRX. I live in the Phoenix area and I can't find GRCs, CTRs, S3s, Golf Rs, not even a damn MT BRZ/GT86 twin(but plenty of autos). Yet, all of the local Subaru dealerships have a buttload of WRXes on the lot. The dealership 10 minutes from my house is showing 24 of them in stock right now and it's been this way for months now.

That being said, I wonder how many people want something else but just end up defaulting to the WRX because it's what's available. I know I almost did that.



Seriously.

I'd still be driving my wife's old Mexican built 2008 Jetta as a beater if someone ******* hadn't run a red light and totaled it. My Mexican built 2017 GTI was bullet proof as well. I feel like the internet becomes an echo chamber where people just keep repeating the same nonsense because they've seen it enough times without any personal experience.

The dealer with the red Core and the $10k markup reached out to me again today to see if I was still interested. I guess no one has taken them up on the $10k markup yet, which makes me optimistic for the market as a whole. It seems like the market for first adopters willing to pay a king's ransom in ADM has dried up fairly quickly and I still haven't seen one in the wild yet.

I don't keep cars long enough to really have a problem (besides that 2008 WRX).

I am glad to see people aren't paying ADMs for everything anymore. That will help the overall market find a natural price point. I've got a year before I need another car, if I don't just buy-out my lease.

[samagon]

Originally Posted by FaastLegacy

The dealer with the red Core and the $10k markup reached out to me again today to see if I was still interested. I guess no one has taken them up on the $10k markup yet, which makes me optimistic for the market as a whole. It seems like the market for first adopters willing to pay a king's ransom in ADM has dried up fairly quickly and I still haven't seen one in the wild yet.

were they offering it for no ADM, or were they just seeing if you were still interested?

this map still shows the average markup is $9500.
https://www.motoringobsession.com/stock/gr-corolla

which is a $500 drop from where it has been (and I think the max it would show was $10000).

you don't mention it, but I bet that car your salesman is calling you to come buy is without the performance pack (no LSD) and while it really doesn't matter, the people who are willing to pay, aren't willing to pay for it without LSD. so if it isn't LSD, it might be a good opportunity to get one for a good price. (or at least the people willing to pay a markup for the non LSD cars is a much smaller pool).

anyway, the car is still only trickling in, buyers are still pouncing on the car within days of allocation availability. as an example, there are 3 within 500 miles of Houston on the Toyota website. all 3 are 'sale pending' 2 have 'contact dealer for price', and one shows the MSRP (which may or may not be their asking price). so yeah. Toyota needs to ramp production significantly before you can hope to call a dealer that has an allocation and snag it at MSRP. from what I've seen just refreshing the Toyota website every few weeks, Houston area has received less than 20. that's insane for 1/3 of the year. if that is par, then there will be less than 60 total in the Houston area?

just don't make no sense for hopes of not paying ADM.

I'm pulling for anyone on the MSRP or bust hype train though.

[FaastLegacy]

Originally Posted by samagon

were they offering it for no ADM, or were they just seeing if you were still interested?

this map still shows the average markup is $9500.
https://www.motoringobsession.com/stock/gr-corolla

which is a $500 drop from where it has been (and I think the max it would show was $10000).

you don't mention it, but I bet that car your salesman is calling you to come buy is without the performance pack (no LSD) and while it really doesn't matter, the people who are willing to pay, aren't willing to pay for it without LSD. so if it isn't LSD, it might be a good opportunity to get one for a good price.

anyway, the car is still only trickling in, buyers are still pouncing on the car within days of allocation availability. as an example, there are 3 within 500 miles of Houston on the Toyota website. all 3 are 'sale pending' 2 have 'contact dealer for price', and one shows the MSRP (which may or may not be their asking price). so yeah. Toyota needs to ramp production significantly before you can hope to call a dealer that has an allocation and snag it at MSRP. from what I've seen just refreshing the Toyota website every few weeks, Houston area has received less than 20. that's insane for 1/3 of the year. if that is par, then there will be less than 60 total in the Houston area?

just don't make no sense for hopes of not paying ADM.

I'm pulling for anyone on the MSRP or bust hype train though.

It was originally an allocation while they were still waiting on the car. They were taking deposits for a $10k ADM. I politely told them I wouldn't be paying an ADM and that was a few weeks ago.

He pinged me yesterday wondering if I was still interested and the car was on property. I'm not sure what the status of the ADM is given that he hasn't replied to me.

I'd like to believe they're having problems finding takers for that $10k ADM. Or maybe they had someone on the hook and they backed out. I dunno. It seems rather interesting to me that he'd ping me on it when I told him in no uncertain terms that I wasn't paying ADM.