My Take on the New 2022 WRX

JHZR2

Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
46,994
Location
New Jersey
I had a 2002 WRX which I think was the first year they were available in the USA. Car and driver got a 0-60 time of 5.4 with that car and I believe some other car magazines were getting 5.7 - 5.9.
So it seems not much if any improvement from what it was 20 years ago which is surprising.

It was far faster than needed then, and that’s no different now. Grow the dimensions, make emissions stricter, handling better, overall crash safety superior, and it’s a consistent vehicle. Needing to improve upon those numbers is ridiculous,

The MPGs are the weak point, not the rest.
 

Ws6

Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
4,216
Location
South Central US
It was far faster than needed then, and that’s no different now. Grow the dimensions, make emissions stricter, handling better, overall crash safety superior, and it’s a consistent vehicle. Needing to improve upon those numbers is ridiculous,

The MPGs are the weak point, not the rest.
And yet...the corvette went from 350 to near 500hp, the Z went from 300 to 400. The mustang went from 260 to 460. All while maintaining or even improving mpg in many cases. But here we have the WRX...in the last 20 years it's gained 45hp or so, and 400 pounds. Its mpg remains near the same depending on transmission options. I find this lack of progress abysmal.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2019
Messages
346
Location
STL, MO
And yet...the corvette went from 350 to near 500hp, the Z went from 300 to 400. The mustang went from 260 to 460. All while maintaining or even improving mpg in many cases. But here we have the WRX...in the last 20 years it's gained 45hp or so, and 400 pounds. Its mpg remains near the same depending on transmission options. I find this lack of progress abysmal.
Then please don't look at the other cars that the WRX competes against.
VW GTI: 200hp to 228hp
Civic SI: 197hp to 205hp
The WRX doesn't do too bad amongst it's peers.

Hell, a 4th gen F-body does 19mpg city, 31 highway. The current one does 22 city, 31 highway. How's that for progress?
 

Ws6

Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
4,216
Location
South Central US
Then please don't look at the other cars that the WRX competes against.
VW GTI: 200hp to 228hp
Civic SI: 197hp to 205hp
The WRX doesn't do too bad amongst it's peers.

Hell, a 4th gen F-body does 19mpg city, 31 highway. The current one does 22 city, 31 highway. How's that for progress?
I mean, it gained 100bhp, I'd call that just fine.

America totally got shafted with the Golfs we get here. If we can look at what the rest of the world gets, it's a different picture. The Scirocco is where I really think the Golf platform shines. Factory yes, it's not impressive, but it's very very easy to make it a total animal. The WRX dies like a dog without a longblock rebuild. That said, this is about factory cars, and presumably what we have here in North America, for the sake of this discussion.

No, I am not impressed with t he VW GTi stateside. Not at all. I'd bag on it, too, if there were a thread about it. The R is nice, sortof. It's a de-tuned S3, basically.


The Civic SI has always been a tarted up civic. Performance hasn't moved a bit, but the mpg has gone way up in the latest model, by something like 5mpg or so across the board improvement for this latest model. If the WRX managed that, I'd totally respect their horsepower stagnation, because the power would them be commiserate with the mpg. That's the mismatch here. A 270hp car getting only 20/27mpg and weighing 3400# or so. The power curve isn't even good. It's just...a terrible engine with terrible power delivery, low mpg, and no real tuning potential without a rebuild. It's trash.

If you could boost it to the moon...cool! If it got great mpg...cool! If it got solid OEM power...cool! but it's weak, slow, has janky throttle response/power delivery without a tune, and it gets worse gas mileage than my 2.5L turbo CUV with similar power. In short, it's probably one of the most horrible motors I can think of currently residing between the fenders of a halo car. Nope. It IS the worst.

What IS this!? Who tuned this car?
546b31b1a75b8_-_final-hpcomparo-lg.jpg


Seriously, if you can think of something positive about the engine Subaru is using, please share it. "It's weak because other manufacturers use weak engines [but also get way better mpg...]" is a very weak cop out.

GTI mpg: 29 city, 35 highway, horsepower

Also keep in mind the GTI is super underrated from VW. The WRX...is not.:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
13,579
Location
Colorado Springs
GTI is not only about hp. It is mature vehicle. It is not vehicle for teenagers or “lower lifestyle.” It is vehicle to take to work, drop kids to daycare and maybe go have fun at curvy roads or few times a year on track. It is made as probably being single vehicle in family in Europe. So it has to do a lot of things right. It is about overall package, it is about the fact that materials in Golf and built quality in 1987 Golf II GTI (pre facelift, after was better, not fair to compare) is better than current WRX and probably 2022 WRX. When I see WRX interior it is like “bring back 80’s.” Gaps in interior panels, that plastic that is on par Metra kits for aftermarket audio systems, is far cry from Golf. Only way to sell that product is hp, handling and racing pedigree. But that all is gone. Subaru was household name in racing world in 90’s. What now? They are not in WRC since 2008 I think. Their vehicles are basically Toyota’s with AWD and bit of clearance.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2019
Messages
346
Location
STL, MO
I mean, it gained 100bhp, I'd call that just fine.

America totally got shafted with the Golfs we get here. If we can look at what the rest of the world gets, it's a different picture. The Scirocco is where I really think the Golf platform shines. Factory yes, it's not impressive, but it's very very easy to make it a total animal. The WRX dies like a dog without a longblock rebuild. That said, this is about factory cars, and presumably what we have here in North America, for the sake of this discussion.

No, I am not impressed with t he VW GTi stateside. Not at all. I'd bag on it, too, if there were a thread about it. The R is nice, sortof. It's a de-tuned S3, basically.


The Civic SI has always been a tarted up civic. Performance hasn't moved a bit, but the mpg has gone way up in the latest model, by something like 5mpg or so across the board improvement for this latest model. If the WRX managed that, I'd totally respect their horsepower stagnation, because the power would them be commiserate with the mpg. That's the mismatch here. A 270hp car getting only 20/27mpg and weighing 3400# or so. The power curve isn't even good. It's just...a terrible engine with terrible power delivery, low mpg, and no real tuning potential without a rebuild. It's trash.

If you could boost it to the moon...cool! If it got great mpg...cool! If it got solid OEM power...cool! but it's weak, slow, has janky throttle response/power delivery without a tune, and it gets worse gas mileage than my 2.5L turbo CUV with similar power. In short, it's probably one of the most horrible motors I can think of currently residing between the fenders of a halo car. Nope. It IS the worst.

What IS this!? Who tuned this car? View attachment 71486

Seriously, if you can think of something positive about the engine Subaru is using, please share it. "It's weak because other manufacturers use weak engines [but also get way better mpg...]" is a very weak cop out.

GTI mpg: 29 city, 35 highway, horsepower

Also keep in mind the GTI is super underrated from VW. The WRX...is not.:
You don't really have to convince me. I'm not saying it is a great engine. In my previous post I was trashing on it for it's factory tuning blunders. I was simply comparing to it's rivals, and I still don't think it's that far off. Everything you pointed out with the GTI is unfortunately true as well. I think a big part of the problem here is that these companies are pumping R&D dollars into SUV platforms and drivetrains, because that is where their profit lies. Sport sedans/hatches are not kept around for their sales numbers alone.

That said, I was pulling low to mid 30s combined mpg out of a WRX during my limited time with it, which I found to be pretty impressive. My idea of impressive may be different from others.🤷
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ws6

555

Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
780
Location
New England
GTI is not only about hp. It is mature vehicle. It is not vehicle for teenagers or “lower lifestyle.” It is vehicle to take to work, drop kids to daycare and maybe go have fun at curvy roads or few times a year on track. It is made as probably being single vehicle in family in Europe. So it has to do a lot of things right. It is about overall package, it is about the fact that materials in Golf and built quality in 1987 Golf II GTI (pre facelift, after was better, not fair to compare) is better than current WRX and probably 2022 WRX. When I see WRX interior it is like “bring back 80’s.” Gaps in interior panels, that plastic that is on par Metra kits for aftermarket audio systems, is far cry from Golf. Only way to sell that product is hp, handling and racing pedigree. But that all is gone. Subaru was household name in racing world in 90’s. What now? They are not in WRC since 2008 I think. Their vehicles are basically Toyota’s with AWD and bit of clearance.
edyvw! Finally! I've been checking this thread waiting for you to comment. While I disagree with some of your points, I agree with others(interior build quality, more luxury feel).
Hope you are well.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
3,296
Location
utah
Ill say it again - what’s the problem with it? I don’t see anything wrong with it. It’s an improvement over the 2016 I had.

I legit don’t mind it. In fact, it’s almost Teutonic. I’d compare it with Porsche or BMW from a few years ago. Simple. Attractive. Functional.

Everything is a compromise with cars.

Subaru is known for their boxer engine, AWD system, build quality, being tough, resale value. They’re utilitarian. Always have been. But they’re still improving the cabins.

VW/Audi is known for their interiors.

You want nicer interior but less outright performance, buy a VW or Audi. You don’t get the horsepower or the track/mountain road performance of the WRX. But you can get plaid seats 🤣
View attachment 71443
Why are there two smaller screens instead one larger unit? So much blank wasted space that could be storage or screen. It’s not A deal breaker for the base model but it really makes you want the better trim. At $30k I expect a better center stack not something of an afterthought for those too poor to buy the big screen.
 

john_pifer

Thread starter
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
4,261
Location
Nashville, TN via Memphis
Why are there two smaller screens instead one larger unit? So much blank wasted space that could be storage or screen. It’s not A deal breaker for the base model but it really makes you want the better trim. At $30k I expect a better center stack not something of an afterthought for those too poor to buy the big screen.
Do you plan on buying one?

Is that what’s going to make your decision?
 
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
13,579
Location
Colorado Springs
Ill say it again - what’s the problem with it? I don’t see anything wrong with it. It’s an improvement over the 2016 I had.

I legit don’t mind it. In fact, it’s almost Teutonic. I’d compare it with Porsche or BMW from a few years ago. Simple. Attractive. Functional.

Everything is a compromise with cars.

Subaru is known for their boxer engine, AWD system, build quality, being tough, resale value. They’re utilitarian. Always have been. But they’re still improving the cabins.

VW/Audi is known for their interiors.

You want nicer interior but less outright performance, buy a VW or Audi. You don’t get the horsepower or the track/mountain road performance of the WRX. But you can get plaid seats 🤣
View attachment 71443
Have you ever heard about that joke among the track crowd about how added bonus to the challenge is avoiding Subaru's head gaskets laying around?
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2014
Messages
758
Location
Toronto
Have you ever heard about that joke among the track crowd about how added bonus to the challenge is avoiding Subaru's head gaskets laying around?
Yeah Subaru and being tough just don't sound right. The toughest piece they've ever built is probably STI trans, that thing can handle 800+hp

Also, if you are a car guy, you must've heard Subaru's head gasket, VW's check engine light and Mustangs running into a crowd
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ws6
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
13,579
Location
Colorado Springs
Yeah Subaru and being tough just don't sound right. The toughest piece they've ever built is probably STI trans, that thing can handle 800+hp

Also, if you are a car guy, you must've heard Subaru's head gasket, VW's check engine light and Mustangs running into a crowd
Yeah, wait until unsuspecting buyer asks to bump power to 800hp paired with CVT.
 

555

Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
780
Location
New England
I thought Scirocco production stopped years ago and in its last years was based on the old Golf platform even in Europe. It was a pretty car.
WRX/STI have a cult following so YouTube has plenty of uploaders trying to make a channel for themselves(petitions even, short lived fame). Every new Subaru design leaves some bile in the viewers mouth(2002 WRX, "bugeye") We just get used to it.
How much of a top-end charge has some influence on the bottom end of the power curve. Everyone wants that low end torque peak(think 1500 to 1750 rpm)but complains when their engine runs out of urge after 5000 rpm.
Lets not forget it is a Subaru. There are owners who will run a WRX/STI only on 87 octane and change the oil every 10,000 miles and expect it to be as trouble free as a base model Impreza. These buyers have a an influence on tuning that creates big safety margins and mediocre throttle response.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Messages
4,353
Location
Great Lakes
What’s your big issue with it?

I mean, my personal preference is for simple knobs for fan speed and temp, and no “automatic temperature control”, but no vehicle is perfect, right?

I find it to be an attractive setup, and in no way a downgrade from the 15-21 model.
I mean… they had all the space available for a few more buttons but all they give you for physical buttons is defrost and temp…. At least give the people a physical position and AC button as well, and maybe buttons that don’t look straight off a kids toy? The knobs in the older ones at least made it look like they put some effort into it in my opinion.

I do agree with Ws6 on the power though. It’s…. Adequate and quicker than most of the bland econoboxes on the road today, but c’mon they can surely do something… at least work on the turbo lag.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
17,078
Location
N.H, U.S.A.
I mean… they had all the space available for a few more buttons but all they give you for physical buttons is defrost and temp…. At least give the people a physical position and AC button as well, and maybe buttons that don’t look straight off a kids toy? The knobs in the older ones at least made it look like they put some effort into it in my opinion.

I do agree with Ws6 on the power though. It’s…. Adequate and quicker than most of the bland econoboxes on the road today, but c’mon they can surely do something… at least work on the turbo lag.
My Wife's BASE Outback has the two screen stack, the Premium model has a single screen. She detests the lack of knobs for HVAC.
Surely a cost savings, and likely limited supply of the large screens. If this bothers you on a performance car, its therapy time.
Dang millennials and their touch screens ! :)

Subaru's ridiculously over-sized hellish touch screen:
maxres.jpg
 

john_pifer

Thread starter
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
4,261
Location
Nashville, TN via Memphis
I mean… they had all the space available for a few more buttons but all they give you for physical buttons is defrost and temp…. At least give the people a physical position and AC button as well, and maybe buttons that don’t look straight off a kids toy? The knobs in the older ones at least made it look like they put some effort into it in my opinion.

I do agree with Ws6 on the power though. It’s…. Adequate and quicker than most of the bland econoboxes on the road today, but c’mon they can surely do something… at least work on the turbo lag.
It doesn’t sound like you’re very familiar with the 15-21 WRX. And you also haven’t read Subaru’s own press release about the new WRX. The current 2.0 WRX doesn’t have a turbo lag problem, because it has a twin-scroll turbo (as will the 2022 WRX). Boost is nearly instantaneous, especially when you’re at highway speed already.

But Subaru didn’t rest on its laurels - the new engine has a new electronic wastegate and air bypass valves to quicken response even more.

Read up here:

 
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
1,172
Location
Upper midwest
At the end of the day, all of them get smoked by a front wheel drive car at the track.

And *surprise* *surprise*, it's more reliable than any VW or Subaru.

DSC0860-1-610x405.jpg
Not always, once you match suspension closer, it is VERY hard to match the Honda Civic R sophisticated suspension design with common stamped steel cheapo hot hatch's designs.The Hyundai Veloster N would gain some with a high end Genisis suspension setup that is more like the Honda R's. So suspension disadvantage is still on the Veloster N. Match tires, and other things, it is not always the case.

Plus I think a properly setup track AWD car will beat a FWD car as it wil be better balanced and have the advantage of putting 40% to 50% power to the rear and let the front tire being able to steer and have better overall traction for the the 140 lb weight hit. We saw this here. There are many kinds of corners where AWD just dances out of where FWD even with an eLSD is hindered.

 
Last edited:
Top