SI VS WRX

hondabuildquality

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Threads
4
Messages
69
Reaction score
32
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
Honda Civic
performance wise Wrx wins over even a Mugen RR.
I'm skeptical of this statement.

First, why would you say "even the Mugen RR?" There is no current generation Mugen RR Civic is there? The new Civic Type R is much quicker.

A quick Google search reveals the new Civic Type R lapped the Nurburgring in 7:50: http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-car...type-r-destroys-fwd-nurburgring-world-record/

The WRX STI's record is 7:55, and that wasn't even for a production version of the STI: http://www.caranddriver.com/features/2011-subaru-impreza-wrx-sti-sets-nurburgring-lap-record

So based on that quick Google search, the Civic Type R is actually much faster than the WRX STI.

I'll readily grant you in dirt, gravel, rain and snow and 0-60 times, the WRX STI is faster.

I'm not sure about the last generation Mugen RR. I couldn't find an official time in a quick search, but it is surely a moot point on the Civic 10th Generation Forum

But if your argument is that a WRX is quicker than 'even the fastest of the Civics,' that's wrong :)
Sponsored

 

Design

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2015
Threads
28
Messages
3,329
Reaction score
2,903
Location
Southern California
Vehicle(s)
09 MS3, 17 ABM Si Sedan
Country flag
I had a 2015 STI, currently drive a 2016 WRX, have had 02 and 2012 wrxs. Wife has a 2014 Foz and I've had 3 Si models 10, 12, & 13.

From my experience wait for the Si. Downgrading from the STI to WRX makes me wish I would've just gotten a 9th gen Si again. The car is nice, drives smooth, low end torque is great; but, I've been having boost cutout issues, the stereo is garbage, the interior is boring/cheap and exactly the same as my wife's forester, and the engine noises suck compared to a vtec car. The FA20DIT doesn't have the signature subie rumble as it has a twin scroll turbo with equal length manifolds.

I really regret buying this car and should have just ditched cable to offset the cost of keeping the STI or just gotten an Si. Really not impressed.

I've also had a ton of issues with my wife's forester. Different engine but it's always in for warranty work. Can't wait for that lease to end.
I think you bring up a good point in that those wanting a fun daily don't need gobs of power. Don't get me wrong, I agree that driving a 300+ HP car is fun. But the novelty seems to wear off pretty quick.

I imagine those choosing the Si over the Type R (or even the WRX/STi) are doing it because they believe they can't afford the MSRP + markup. Or they want less "race car" and more "practical car." Ironically, the single biggest dealbreaker for me on the CTR will be the absence of a sunroof lol. I miss it here with the So Cal weather (most days). :cool:
 

alphaghost

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Threads
0
Messages
19
Reaction score
7
Location
I'll-noise
Vehicle(s)
2001 Is300-daily 1993 prelude vtec-my baby
I think you bring up a good point in that those wanting a fun daily don't need gobs of power. Don't get me wrong, I agree that driving a 300+ HP car is fun. But the novelty seems to wear off pretty quick.

This is so true, I had a mr2 turbo over 300whp, fc turbo II as well. Fast cars are fun for awhile, but it will get old especially if its a dd. I now prefer the fun to drive vehicle over the hp queen. don't get me wrong, you can have both which will cost you a premium.
 

Snoopyslr

Senior Member
First Name
John
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Threads
23
Messages
1,916
Reaction score
2,248
Location
Fenton, Michigan
Vehicle(s)
2016 Honda Civic EX-T, 2016 Ford F-150, 2003 Subaru Impreza WRX
Vehicle Showcase
1
Country flag
I'm not really sure where you guys are getting this "Subaru is unreliable" stuff from. Everybody I know with a high milage Subaru doesn't have to put anything into it. I have an 03 WRX with 149k on it and I've put no money into it besides general maintenance and performance mods.

My WRX is so much more fun than my 2016 Civic EX-T, but that is to be expected. If you want to compare current gen WRX to the SI, that's anybodies game. Subaru has taken a very crappy turn in my opinion. The WRX has to be at least 35% larger than they were 10 years ago. I would compare the Civic SI and TypeR to the new Ford Focus ST and RS. Those are fun cars
 

takemorepills

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2015
Threads
9
Messages
703
Reaction score
310
Location
Seattle
Vehicle(s)
1987 Prelude Si
Country flag
I'm not really sure where you guys are getting this "Subaru is unreliable" stuff from. Everybody I know with a high milage Subaru doesn't have to put anything into it. I have an 03 WRX with 149k on it and I've put no money into it besides general maintenance and performance mods.

My WRX is so much more fun than my 2016 Civic EX-T, but that is to be expected. If you want to compare current gen WRX to the SI, that's anybodies game. Subaru has taken a very crappy turn in my opinion. The WRX has to be at least 35% larger than they were 10 years ago. I would compare the Civic SI and TypeR to the new Ford Focus ST and RS. Those are fun cars
You have the old 2.0 motor. That motor has less issues than the 2.5. It is not uncommon for the 2.5 to need new head gaskets and a turbo rebuild before 90k miles.
My wife had a 2008 Impreza lease car, at the end of it's lease, at 42k miles the head gasket was leaking.
Then there's the ring land issues on the STi motor. And the FA20DIT has been known to grenade itself, with or without a tune.

Would I worry that my new WRX was "unreliable"? Probably not. Statistically speaking the aforementioned issues don't cause a breakdown on the road (well the grenading FA20DIT would). But since our non turbo 2.5 in our Impreza met the same fate as the turbo 2.5, I'm not so sure about Subaru's reliability.
 


SpartanSi

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Threads
2
Messages
116
Reaction score
77
Location
Michigan
Vehicle(s)
Acura MDX and Honda CR-V
Country flag
I agree that Subaru leaves a lot to be desired in terms of reliability, but cannot agree about Toyota being more reliable than a Honda. To be fair, reliability as far as engines and transmission are about equal, but in terms of interior components, plastics, fabrics, etc, its not even close. If two separate customers come in to trade a 10 year old Accord and Camry, the Honda's interior almost always holds better. Even brand new, you look at a Camry vs Accord or Civic vs Corolla, the difference in interior quality is very apparent (Camry XSE seats and panel material is abysmal).

Having worked for a Lexus/Toyota dealer, and a Acura and Honda store, I would say this. Lexus builds a better luxury car overall than Acura. Honda builds a better car overall than Toyota.

Back to the Subaru, I have a friend who worked for years as a mechanic for Subaru...too many oil issues with their engines. Whether its burning oil or leaking, the reliability is just not there. Even Consumer Reports touched on this in July. Its almost like BMW in a sense that you will either get a good one or a bad one.

How important is reliability to you? For me, its huge. There's no perfect car, but its a fact that a Honda breaks less than any other brand.
With Honda moving to turbo engines, I am anticipating these engines to have some mixed long term reliability issues. The challenge that every manufacturer has who puts turbo engines into lower cost cars has.......is the people buying these lower cost cars do not #1 understand how turbos work and #2 understand what is required to maintain a turbo car. These two things will contribute to lower durability scores and is why Honda has long stayed away from putting turbos in their cars. When you increase the compression of an engine, you will always have pressurization issues, oil issues and high cost damage issues that impact quality ratings. When you combine this with lower cost buyer....it brings a type of customer who does not realize how to break in an engine or understand the impact of stomping on the accelerator when the engine is cold. This combination will undoubtably impact Honda's reliability. Matching the turbo with the CVT reduces some of the risk as it allows the turbo boost and torque to build smoothly with the wide ratio CVT transmission thus minimizing the strain on this drivetrain. I gotta believe that these concerns are also why Honda delayed the 6 spd tranny with the turbo engine. Think about what will happens when someone who does not understand torque, gets into a new Civic and drops the clutch under heavy boost.......does anyone really believe that the Civic is not going to have cylinder pressure, oil leakage, oil burn or transmission/drive train issues? As much as I am excited about the new more powerful engines, I too am realistic to know that durability and lower quality ratings are going to accompany this group of engines and transmissions, especially at the price point and with the type of customer buying this vehicle.
 

GearGrind

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Threads
0
Messages
13
Reaction score
2
Location
Canada
Vehicle(s)
15 WRX 6mt ISM, 13 BRZ (Vortech S/C) 6mt
Its very odd to me how many Subaru have issues.

My family and myself have owned over a dozen Subaru, none of which have the headgasket issues (Ie. phase 2 EJ25) engines.

One key thing a lot of people forget, especially the turbo engine is to maintain regular good quality synethic oil change and ensuring the oil level is in proper levels. Subaru dip sticks are tricky. The simplest thing yet people does not seem to follow.

That being said, if you want 99% reliability, go with a Honda. :)
Sponsored

 


 


Top