I've had Subarus since 1978 but have recently been test driving other cars including the TS auto.
Given that the TS auto has 165 hp, where does it all go. This car is really gutless compared to even a 130hp 2003 Corolla auto, and the new Mazda3 with 160 hp blasts past them both (and incidentally is loaded with stuff and handles really well too).
So is the Subie's 165 hp not calculated the same way, or is it all eaten up by the AWD system, or what?
In a collision, Subaru will show who has the real guts. They are heavy cars.
No kidding....don't try to duplicate this guy's experience in a Corolla, I think you'll end up with more than "a black eye and scratches".
Steve
It's the automatic transmission. It's pretty weak, try test drive a standard transmission one, you'll like it a lot better.
¦b¶l¥ó news: snipped-for-privacy@news.netidea.com ¤¤ ¼¶¼g...
Steve-O,
Helps to wrap your links.
Damn, what a wreck.
TBerk
In article , Da Gel-Meister...
Indeed...but the "I walked away with a black eye and a few scratches" is the testimony to the "ring-shaped reinforcement zones" that Subaru advertises. If he used a different posting name, he might have gotten an offer from SOA, lol.
Verifiable by the local news link, too.
Wrap em? Who needs em wrapped...what kinda steenkin' newsreader ya using, that don't highlight URLs anyway?
Steve
The 165 HP is achieved by revving the engine to 6500(?) RPM. I've noticed a decided lack of low end torque in my '01 OBW auto unless you let the engine rev up. The car is heavy and the AWD carries a power penalty too.
Mike
Yeah but the wrapped portion gets strung out on a new line buuuuudy.
TBerk
The Subaru 2.5 engine has *huge* amounts of low end torque. I couldn't be happier with mine. All you have to do is feed it sufficiently high octane fuel so that the computer doesn't have to retard the ignition to hell and back to stop it from pinging.
Try to economize with cheap fuel, and yeah, you'll get no low end power at all.
-- Bruce
In my (limited) experience driving an auto WRX I found it was a matter of dropping the selector into the next lower gear to keep the revs up (or at least from dropping too low) and the fun can be had.
This is in a context of driving in hilly curves, for fun.
The 2.5, being both naturally aspirated AND larger in displacement sounds like it would have that much more 'grunt' down low. (Before the turbo would kick in.)
Besides the heavier chassis/running gear there is also things like gearing to consider re: perceptions of acceleration.
TBerk
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required