I'm a proud owner of a 2018, looks just like yours. Be warned: WRX tickets
It's bitten me this year!
It's bitten me this year!
Finally found one New car SUB WRX pics
- Thread starter EvanD
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by MCompact
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Palut
. . . . Be warned: WRX tickets . . .
I don't doubt it. No one buys a WRX because they're looking for a fuel-efficient automobile. Difficult to stay under the radar in a WRX; [golly-darn] impossible in an STi.
. . . . Be warned: WRX tickets . . .
I don't doubt it. No one buys a WRX because they're looking for a fuel-efficient automobile. Difficult to stay under the radar in a WRX; [golly-darn] impossible in an STi.
I daily a c6 corvette currently. I am used to a cop magnet.
Manual of course[size:23pt][/size]
Manual of course[size:23pt][/size]
Originally Posted by EvanD
I daily a c6 corvette currently. I am used to a cop magnet.
Manual of course[size:23pt][/size]
My Jeep was more a magnet than my z06, ws6, or 370z.
I daily a c6 corvette currently. I am used to a cop magnet.
Manual of course[size:23pt][/size]
My Jeep was more a magnet than my z06, ws6, or 370z.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by MCompact
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
How can a CX-5 be quicker than an STi?
THe 2.4 FA only puts out 260HP. Obviously they "could" get it to 350HP but the demand would not be worth it.
Originally Posted by MCompact
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
How can a CX-5 be quicker than an STi?
THe 2.4 FA only puts out 260HP. Obviously they "could" get it to 350HP but the demand would not be worth it.
Originally Posted by Al
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by MCompact
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
How can a CX-5 be quicker than an STi?
THe 2.4 FA only puts out 260HP. Obviously they "could" get it to 350HP but the demand would not be worth it.
Because the STi is laggy AF. After 60mph, or if the STi owner launches with a clutch drop, obviously the STi will win. Otherwise, the CX5 is posting better 5-60 and off-idle acceleration to 60, if motortrend and car and driver are to be believed.
The 2.4 is a better engine. Turn up the boost, tweak the internals, use an intelligent turbo design, presto!
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by MCompact
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
How can a CX-5 be quicker than an STi?
THe 2.4 FA only puts out 260HP. Obviously they "could" get it to 350HP but the demand would not be worth it.
Because the STi is laggy AF. After 60mph, or if the STi owner launches with a clutch drop, obviously the STi will win. Otherwise, the CX5 is posting better 5-60 and off-idle acceleration to 60, if motortrend and car and driver are to be believed.
The 2.4 is a better engine. Turn up the boost, tweak the internals, use an intelligent turbo design, presto!
Last edited:
gathermewool
Site Donor 2023
Ascent vs FXT (WRX) turbo: I have this in my notes:
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by MCompact
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
Why I did not see this coming!
Originally Posted by MCompact
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
Why I did not see this coming!
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by MCompact
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
Why I did not see this coming!
Because lag.
But really, I was surprised and found it funny.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by MCompact
I almost bought a new STI back in 2015. It was an outstanding car, but to me it felt a lot like my lightly modified Mazdaspeed 3 and I was looking for something a bit more different- and with RWD. Don't take that as a knock on the WRX; it's a tremendous performance bargain.
The STi is way too dated, imo. 310hp and 23mpg highway...also, llllaaaaaagggggg. My cx5 is faster 5-60 because dat lag, at least according to car and driver. I didnt get to race my friend's yet.
The WRX loaded out, imo, is a much more livable car than the STi loaded out. Still, I think subi will nail it when they redesign it and put the 2.4 from the ascent in there, along with the new interior.
Why I did not see this coming!
Because lag.
But really, I was surprised and found it funny.
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Ascent vs FXT (WRX) turbo: I have this in my notes:
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Doesn't even need to be twin scroll. There are other ways around it. Regardless, the current STi has a nearly 2 decade old motor. I have no idea who at Subaru has been asleep at the wheel, but the car veered into the cow field about 10 years ago.
Ascent vs FXT (WRX) turbo: I have this in my notes:
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Doesn't even need to be twin scroll. There are other ways around it. Regardless, the current STi has a nearly 2 decade old motor. I have no idea who at Subaru has been asleep at the wheel, but the car veered into the cow field about 10 years ago.
gathermewool
Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Ascent vs FXT (WRX) turbo: I have this in my notes:
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Doesn't even need to be twin scroll. There are other ways around it. Regardless, the current STi has a nearly 2 decade old motor. I have no idea who at Subaru has been asleep at the wheel, but the car veered into the cow field about 10 years ago.
Are there any options that are cheaper? I always assumed Subaru chose a twin-scroll turbo, which I assume costs more, because they needed to reach a power level and knew mainstream Forester buyers considering the FA20DIT wouldn't accept EJ-level turbo lag. Same goes for ALLOWING 87 AKI fuel.
I'm not very familiar with how a hot and cold turbine size and geometry can be designed to provide high levels of power AND not lag.
As-is, the twin-scroll in my FXT is about as close to lag-free as I've ever experienced, especially at highway speeds.
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Ascent vs FXT (WRX) turbo: I have this in my notes:
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Doesn't even need to be twin scroll. There are other ways around it. Regardless, the current STi has a nearly 2 decade old motor. I have no idea who at Subaru has been asleep at the wheel, but the car veered into the cow field about 10 years ago.
Are there any options that are cheaper? I always assumed Subaru chose a twin-scroll turbo, which I assume costs more, because they needed to reach a power level and knew mainstream Forester buyers considering the FA20DIT wouldn't accept EJ-level turbo lag. Same goes for ALLOWING 87 AKI fuel.
I'm not very familiar with how a hot and cold turbine size and geometry can be designed to provide high levels of power AND not lag.
As-is, the twin-scroll in my FXT is about as close to lag-free as I've ever experienced, especially at highway speeds.
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Ascent vs FXT (WRX) turbo: I have this in my notes:
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Doesn't even need to be twin scroll. There are other ways around it. Regardless, the current STi has a nearly 2 decade old motor. I have no idea who at Subaru has been asleep at the wheel, but the car veered into the cow field about 10 years ago.
Are there any options that are cheaper? I always assumed Subaru chose a twin-scroll turbo, which I assume costs more, because they needed to reach a power level and knew mainstream Forester buyers considering the FA20DIT wouldn't accept EJ-level turbo lag. Same goes for ALLOWING 87 AKI fuel.
I'm not very familiar with how a hot and cold turbine size and geometry can be designed to provide high levels of power AND not lag.
As-is, the twin-scroll in my FXT is about as close to lag-free as I've ever experienced, especially at highway speeds.
Mazda has a pretty neat design with my cx5. It literally has no lag. 310 pounds of torque by 2000rpm. Basically, they restrict airflow through the manifold to the turbo at low rpm to increase flow velocity. Also, they maintain cylinder temps with a cooled EGR and header scavenging, which means not dumping tons of fuel for cooling, and the ability to run 10.5:1 compression and still push 17psi on 87 octane, safely, hence why I am getting 27-29mpg in daily commute and 28mpg on road trips with the same horsepower and a lot more torque and a 6 speed auto vs your cvt, and forester 2.0xt owners I know are getting a few mpg less, cvt not withstanding.
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Ascent vs FXT (WRX) turbo: I have this in my notes:
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Doesn't even need to be twin scroll. There are other ways around it. Regardless, the current STi has a nearly 2 decade old motor. I have no idea who at Subaru has been asleep at the wheel, but the car veered into the cow field about 10 years ago.
Are there any options that are cheaper? I always assumed Subaru chose a twin-scroll turbo, which I assume costs more, because they needed to reach a power level and knew mainstream Forester buyers considering the FA20DIT wouldn't accept EJ-level turbo lag. Same goes for ALLOWING 87 AKI fuel.
I'm not very familiar with how a hot and cold turbine size and geometry can be designed to provide high levels of power AND not lag.
As-is, the twin-scroll in my FXT is about as close to lag-free as I've ever experienced, especially at highway speeds.
Mazda has a pretty neat design with my cx5. It literally has no lag. 310 pounds of torque by 2000rpm. Basically, they restrict airflow through the manifold to the turbo at low rpm to increase flow velocity. Also, they maintain cylinder temps with a cooled EGR and header scavenging, which means not dumping tons of fuel for cooling, and the ability to run 10.5:1 compression and still push 17psi on 87 octane, safely, hence why I am getting 27-29mpg in daily commute and 28mpg on road trips with the same horsepower and a lot more torque and a 6 speed auto vs your cvt, and forester 2.0xt owners I know are getting a few mpg less, cvt not withstanding.
gathermewool
Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Ascent vs FXT (WRX) turbo: I have this in my notes:
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Doesn't even need to be twin scroll. There are other ways around it. Regardless, the current STi has a nearly 2 decade old motor. I have no idea who at Subaru has been asleep at the wheel, but the car veered into the cow field about 10 years ago.
Are there any options that are cheaper? I always assumed Subaru chose a twin-scroll turbo, which I assume costs more, because they needed to reach a power level and knew mainstream Forester buyers considering the FA20DIT wouldn't accept EJ-level turbo lag. Same goes for ALLOWING 87 AKI fuel.
I'm not very familiar with how a hot and cold turbine size and geometry can be designed to provide high levels of power AND not lag.
As-is, the twin-scroll in my FXT is about as close to lag-free as I've ever experienced, especially at highway speeds.
Mazda has a pretty neat design with my cx5. It literally has no lag. 310 pounds of torque by 2000rpm. Basically, they restrict airflow through the manifold to the turbo at low rpm to increase flow velocity. Also, they maintain cylinder temps with a cooled EGR and header scavenging, which means not dumping tons of fuel for cooling, and the ability to run 10.5:1 compression and still push 17psi on 87 octane, safely, hence why I am getting 27-29mpg in daily commute and 28mpg on road trips with the same horsepower and a lot more torque and a 6 speed auto vs your cvt, and forester 2.0xt owners I know are getting a few mpg less, cvt not withstanding.
If YOUR CX-5 was available when I got my FXT, I might not have gotten my FXT. With that said..........visibility.
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Ascent vs FXT (WRX) turbo: I have this in my notes:
Ascent: Honeywell MGT22 turbo
FXT: 14411AA881 Garrett Honeywell (AR 60)
- Garrett MGT2259S
//
I doubt the next STI will have a laggy single-scroll snail. The twin-scroll in my FXT is freaking awesome!
Doesn't even need to be twin scroll. There are other ways around it. Regardless, the current STi has a nearly 2 decade old motor. I have no idea who at Subaru has been asleep at the wheel, but the car veered into the cow field about 10 years ago.
Are there any options that are cheaper? I always assumed Subaru chose a twin-scroll turbo, which I assume costs more, because they needed to reach a power level and knew mainstream Forester buyers considering the FA20DIT wouldn't accept EJ-level turbo lag. Same goes for ALLOWING 87 AKI fuel.
I'm not very familiar with how a hot and cold turbine size and geometry can be designed to provide high levels of power AND not lag.
As-is, the twin-scroll in my FXT is about as close to lag-free as I've ever experienced, especially at highway speeds.
Mazda has a pretty neat design with my cx5. It literally has no lag. 310 pounds of torque by 2000rpm. Basically, they restrict airflow through the manifold to the turbo at low rpm to increase flow velocity. Also, they maintain cylinder temps with a cooled EGR and header scavenging, which means not dumping tons of fuel for cooling, and the ability to run 10.5:1 compression and still push 17psi on 87 octane, safely, hence why I am getting 27-29mpg in daily commute and 28mpg on road trips with the same horsepower and a lot more torque and a 6 speed auto vs your cvt, and forester 2.0xt owners I know are getting a few mpg less, cvt not withstanding.
If YOUR CX-5 was available when I got my FXT, I might not have gotten my FXT. With that said..........visibility.
Originally Posted by gathermewool
If YOUR CX-5 was available when I got my FXT, I might not have gotten my FXT. With that said..........visibility.
Stock Mazda 6 2.5T (couldnt find cx5T, but aside the awd, which only kicks in when needed, its identical to the 6. They seem to have floored it at 2.5k instead began measuring off idle.
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2019/08/full-20020-35332-mazda_6_turbo_dynograph_1024x530.jpg "[Linked Image]")
Stock FXT dyno
Notice mazda manifold pressure vs rpm. Zero lag.
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2019/08/full-20020-35350-screenshot_20190814_190232_chrome.jpg "[Linked Image]")
If YOUR CX-5 was available when I got my FXT, I might not have gotten my FXT. With that said..........visibility.
Stock Mazda 6 2.5T (couldnt find cx5T, but aside the awd, which only kicks in when needed, its identical to the 6. They seem to have floored it at 2.5k instead began measuring off idle.
Stock FXT dyno
Notice mazda manifold pressure vs rpm. Zero lag.
Last edited:
This is the Subaru Ascent.
Notice peak torque several thousand rpm lower, and notably more HP and torque than the FXT/WRX (that is a Mustang dyno, to boot!). The 2.4L engine is an excellent one for Subaru, and I think we WILL be seeing a variation of it in the new STi. That torque and hp curve look super useful and not a hint of lag.
Notice peak torque several thousand rpm lower, and notably more HP and torque than the FXT/WRX (that is a Mustang dyno, to boot!). The 2.4L engine is an excellent one for Subaru, and I think we WILL be seeing a variation of it in the new STi. That torque and hp curve look super useful and not a hint of lag.
Last edited:
gathermewool
Site Donor 2023
Thanks for all of the dyno graphs and vids.
I think there's a consensus that the FA24DIT will be the STI's next engine...In 2022
I think there's a consensus that the FA24DIT will be the STI's next engine...In 2022
Originally Posted by gathermewool
Thanks for all of the dyno graphs and vids.
I think there's a consensus that the FA24DIT will be the STI's next engine...In 2022
Yep, not sure on the year, but yeah, and the Outback interior will be similar to what the WRX/STi interior gets. All that's left to the imagination is the exterior at this point, and whether or not Scooby will get some real power out of that 2.4. There is no reason they can't, but...will they? It needs 400hp in the Sti to make sense, when you have 460hp Mustang GT's rolling around for $30K and the Ford Focus RS of yester-year pumping out 350/350. Just my .02
Regardless, right now, I think OP did best buying a loaded out WRX > STi, and that's having driven both cars.
Thanks for all of the dyno graphs and vids.
I think there's a consensus that the FA24DIT will be the STI's next engine...In 2022
Yep, not sure on the year, but yeah, and the Outback interior will be similar to what the WRX/STi interior gets. All that's left to the imagination is the exterior at this point, and whether or not Scooby will get some real power out of that 2.4. There is no reason they can't, but...will they? It needs 400hp in the Sti to make sense, when you have 460hp Mustang GT's rolling around for $30K and the Ford Focus RS of yester-year pumping out 350/350. Just my .02
Regardless, right now, I think OP did best buying a loaded out WRX > STi, and that's having driven both cars.
- Status