new wrx sti

Home  \  Asian Imports  \  new wrx sti

I want to know peoples thoughts on the new sti

posted by  lamboluver

Lets just say the older body style looks better. This new one may be faster, but the older one looks classier :2cents:

posted by  99integra

i personaly dont like the new body style either

posted by  lamboluver

If GM wasn't taking more charge of Subaru their vehicles wouldn't be getting uglier (all started with the B9 Tribeca, or Subaru Trailblazer). After the B9 they decided to put the hideous grill on the new WRX STi and WRX. Bad move, stop obeying GM, Subaru!

posted by  thunderbird1100

Not a fan of the snub nose

posted by  PontiacFan27

i think the new sti is an all around bad ass car but i still like the skyline better :2cents:

posted by  skyline7042

Well no one said "what do you like better, an STI or a Skyline" now did they

posted by  99integra

So you'd rather have a G35 coupe over an STi? Interesting choice. I would probably take the G35 over the STi too.

posted by  thunderbird1100

300 horsepower, 0-60 in under five seconds...definately nice figures, but the hood looks different...not bad, just different. I like the old look better, but I'd take this one too :hi:

posted by  chris_knows

Who cares about 0-60 when dealing with an Evo (for any car for that matter). Give me some real world figures here! Slalom? Skidpad? 1/4 Mile? Nurburgring time?

posted by  thunderbird1100

Well, it gets 69 miles on the slalom, with .90 g's on the 200 foot skidpad, ,runs 14.5 psi boost, couldn't find a quarter mile time, but probably low 13's, she goes for about $33,000, weighs 3351 lbs, and a somewhat respectable 18 city, 24 highway :hi:

posted by  chris_knows

The 2004 runs 13.8. I dont think the extra 3 horspower mader much of a difference for 2005.

posted by  PontiacFan27

The STi isnt that slow. I've seen the 2004-2005's do low 13s no problem. I forgot which place did this but they tried to get the BEST run possible with a stock 2004 STi and did like 30 runs down the 1/4 mile. The only mod was icing the intercooler. Their two personal bests were 12.75 and 12.79. Granted the average of most of the runs was 13.0-13.1. Now these guys were definatley the best drivers for the car. But I've even seen at the track STi's go 13.30s no problem. You'd have miss a shift or two to run 13.8 in one. Even a 99-04 Mustang GT can do a 13.8, barely, but it can.

posted by  thunderbird1100

Hhhmmm, let me think....
:2cents:
This
http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/roadtests/comp arison/2003/lancer.vs.wrx/04.subaru.wrx.sti.bdg.500.jpg
(Flawless beauty)

+

This
http://www.autogaleria.pl/tapety/img/subaru/subaru_b9_tribeca_2005_02_s.jpg
Ugly ass luxury Trailblazer and ugliest truck since the Aztek
=
This
http://idata.over-blog.com/0/05/15/92/voitures/asie/subaru/impreza-wrx-sti- 2006-3.jpg
Hideous face with beautiful performance.


I dont know about you guys, but Im pissed :banghead: :cussing: !!!

posted by  elchango36

The new WRX STi isnt that bad, the only really change in style, as I look at it, is the front end.

posted by  nsupra27

i like the new body style better than the old one looks cleaner

posted by  mx3_monster

Is it just me or did the hood scoop get smaller too?

posted by  thunderbird1100

its just you. drugs are bad, mkay?


i dont like the new looks of the wrx..... not that much at least. looks like.... an alpha romeo maybe....

posted by  Inygknok

I like the new style better, the front of the old one was a little too bug-eyed for me.

posted by  hondaman

When I first saw the new STi, I thought it was hideous. But the more I look at it, the more I like it. Smae thing happened with the last gen too. Go figure

posted by  jedimario

Sorry you didnt catch the joke. I was saying that to show how they are making it look weaker to go more in line with what GM wants from them (first putting the B9 Tribeca grill on it). Should of put some smiley face or something I guess after that, oopppsss :mrgreen:

posted by  thunderbird1100

I like it...if i could afford it, it would be in my driveway :thumbs:

posted by  GonnaDie4TheGov

Another thing, If there wasn't that bulge in the middle of the grille and the whole grille folowed the lines of the outside of it, I think this car would be absolutey stunning in the looks department. Could someone trythat on photoshop, or is taht something you can't do with it?

posted by  jedimario

ANOTHER thing-why is this in asian imports?

posted by  jedimario

ok, looks like u didnt get my joke about your joke....

posted by  Inygknok

cuz subaru is a japanese company?

posted by  Inygknok

Looks like you didnt get my joke after your joke after my joke. :laughing:

posted by  thunderbird1100

I got World of Wheels magazine, and there's an article on the Scooby saying it's 230 hp, 235lb-ft torque, and 3,256 lbs, with 24/34 mpg...which numbers are right? :screwy:

posted by  chris_knows

ugly is only skin deep!
all the front end needs is some dressing up, in other words, the car has plenty potential.

posted by  behind_thewheel

Now if that ain't the line that only ugly people say I don't know what is.
What if that skin is 500 pounds and it crushes you

posted by  99integra

I like the new nose better than either of the last two. I like the central grill opening and teh hood lines that flow rearward from it. Of course, I liked that on Alfas, on BMWs, on Seats, and on dozens of other cars....

Funny thing is when the bug eyed version came out a few years back, everyone that was the fan of the then current Imprezza front called it hideous and a total disaster. When the LAST bodystyle was introduced, everyone said it was hideous and a total disaster, and why did they have to change the classic round headlight look? Now this one comes out, with it's Alfa inspired grill and much more agressive headlights, and most people say it's hideous and a disaster and why couldn't they leave the attractive nose it had on it?

Next facelift and you guys will bitch about that and wish they left THIS one on it. Just like every time it gets updated!

posted by  ChrisV

I was pretty sure that they're Australian...

posted by  jedimario

Funny I always thought they were Korean or Vietnamese...but a quick search on google shows it's Japanese :laughing: :doh:

posted by  chris_knows

actually Subaru's website says it's parnet company, Fuji Heavy Industries, is Japanese. I'm still pretty sure that Subaru was originated in Australia

posted by  jedimario

jeeze the outback guy on those old commercials has you all brain washed!

posted by  behind_thewheel

Actually, they did make the hoodscoop smaller, says MPH magazine.

http://www.mph-online.com/mag/spins/0038

posted by  PontiacFan27

So I guess I was right Inygknok...

"The folks at Subaru also slapped on a lower-profile hood scoop (no airflow was injured during the process) that allows for better visibility and less offensive styling."

bwhahahahahaaaaaaa

:mrgreen:

posted by  thunderbird1100

Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!


No.

http://vivioman.stormloader.com/history.html



Of course, I have to question this, as Nakajima did NOT design the Zero. It and Mitsubishi competed for the design contract with the Japanese government, but Nakjima felt the requirements were impossible to meet, and Mitsubishi ended up designing and building it.

Subaru's first car, the 1500:
http://www.subaru.at/geschichte/imgs/img_1954.jpg

posted by  ChrisV

bah, fine, you win. but only this time!!! :banghead:


anyhow, on a serious note. im quite sure that it will be just a matter of time until people get used to the new style. its already growing on me... a bit at least.

i say give it 6 months until its roaming the streets enough for people to notice it and get to appreciate it.

posted by  Inygknok

Thanks for the info Chris

posted by  jedimario

No probs. Just looking to inform. ;)

posted by  ChrisV

I'll never appreciate anything style wise with a GM front :mrgreen:

posted by  thunderbird1100

ok so theres alot of complaints on the new sti. my :2cents: is that its actually pretty cool. but thats just my opinion. and for the 99 integra prick shut ur mouth everybody has there right to speak there opinion on somethhing and mine was that i do like the new sti but i like the skyline better your welcome to present ur opinion on another car to if u would like so stop being a dick ok. late

posted by  skyline7042

Mmk pumpkin lemme just say reframe from callin me a prick and or a dick and I'll accept your opinion

posted by  99integra

well i will stop calling you those names wen u start accepting every 1's :2cents: but until then i will not so if u show me respect i will show u respect. laters

posted by  skyline7042

Hey everyones opinion is valid here so I didn't say I didn't like your opinion, he just asked if anyone liked the new STI and you just tied in something that wasn't important

posted by  99integra

well my opinion is important to me so if u dont like it o ****ing well get over urself.

posted by  skyline7042

I didn't say that I didn't like your opinon :screwy:

posted by  99integra

ok my bad but u did say it wasnt important and i happen to think it is so dont say stuff about peoples opinion ok. later

posted by  skyline7042

I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT YOUR DAMN OPINION! I just basically said it was out of context, christ :banghead:

posted by  99integra

well im sorry it was out of "context". and dont go getting mad now you might get a migrane, im not sure if thats how u spell it and i dont really care but watever. late

posted by  skyline7042

Hell right now I don't have any big expectations for your spelling :screwy:

posted by  99integra

its not like im asking you to, but thats ur opinion and ill respect that. take some advice.

posted by  skyline7042

it's not a GM front. And why take pride in being that closed minded. Hell, you haven't even SEEN everything with a GM front enough to say "never."

Why should anyone respect an opinion that prides itself on being closed minded and intentionally prejudgemental?

posted by  ChrisV

The front end is from the B9 Tribeca, which GM basically built (or ordered the building of), built off the Trailblazer, or another GM SUV.

I guess you didnt pick the sarcasum in that....hence the :mrgreen: on the end. IF something i s pretty it's pretty if it's like ass, it's well ass. And IMO the new STi's front grill is ass B9 Tribeca GM ugly :2cents:

posted by  thunderbird1100

Sarcasm.... haha! Who's right now biatch?!

posted by  Inygknok

Actually, I thought the front end was designed by someone who worked for Alfa Romeo, hence the AR looking front?

posted by  ThirdeYe

I have no idea where you are pulling that from but im not so sure. The new Subaru corporate face seems to have the Alfa look which is coming from their new head designer. Also, the Tribeca is hella uglier than the STi front, look at this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/2005_Subaru_B9_Tri beca_front.jpg/250px-2005_Subaru_B9_Tribeca_front.jpg vs http://www.cars101.com/WRX06blksdnfnt1.gif

IMO the new STi face is very nice. Additionally, MT did a 06 STI vs 06 MR and the STI won for a change.
Finally, Toyota is taking over GM's share in FHI. So expect some Subayotas :p

posted by  importluva

looks nicer and more aggressive then the older ones.

posted by  silvia_star

The B9 was ALSO designed by Andreas Zapatinas, the Alfa designer that did the Impreza, as well as most of the modern Alfa sedans and hatches. If you paid more attention to cars like those (which we don't get in the US) you'd know it.

http://www.cardesignnews.com/news/whoswhere/020402subaru-zapat.html

Check out the similarities to various Alfas...

http://us.autos1.yimg.com/img.autos.yahoo.com/i/nctd/q/06s-b9-1.jpg

http://www.autotrend.com/pic/Alfa_Romeo_Visconti.jpg

http://www.madle.org/kamal.jpg

.........................
http://clabedan.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/subaru_b9_tribeca.JPG

http://www.supercars.de/data/alfa%20romeo/2003kamal/480/001.jpg

http://www.carpages.co.uk/alfa_romeo/alfa_romeo_images/alfa_romeo_147_rear_ 12_03_05.jpg

posted by  ChrisV

I dont see how there is no denying the STi front grill area looks like the B9 Tribeca, you must be blind. The same exact ugly center grill and the side grills on the STi are just shortened versions of the B9's. I dont think you can ever pull a clear winner out of the STi vs. Evo. Everyone knows the EVO handles a little better while the STi is a little faster. They each have their own winning attribute per buyer choice. IF I were to pick a clear cut winner though I';d pick the EVO simply because they offer a base version (the RS) for $5000 less than the STi and it has nearly equal performance. That's the STi's shortcoming it has no "base" STi model (Stripped model) to compete. Would be nice if Subaru offered the $24k WRX a $28k-$29k base STi and then the $33k STi. Going up nearly $10k from a WRX to an STi is a healthy jump.

posted by  thunderbird1100

I see, but doesnt GM own Alfa too>?

posted by  thunderbird1100

i thought Fiat did?

posted by  Inygknok

Damn I'm confused as hell now. I thought all euro companies were owned/partially owned (Stock wise) by a major company EXCLUDING BMW & Ferrari. MB I know is Daimler Chrysler, Porsche - VW, Jag/Land Rover - Ford..etc.

posted by  thunderbird1100

You shouldn't be confused. You said the B9 and the WRX used a GM designed body. Both were designed by the former Alfa designer, following very obvious Alfa cues. Yes, GM owned both Alfa and Subaru, but, Andreas was designer for Alfa before GM, and GM merely helped him transfer to Subaru when the Alfa leadershipo decided hey wanted a differnt direction for teh new range of sports cars.

GM did not influence Alfa design, nor did they influence Subaru design with Andreas.

As to the rest, Porsche is not owned by VW. Ferrari is owned by Fiat (as are Lancia and Maserati, and shortly Alfa again).

.......................

I also do not think the B9 tribeca is a successful design, but not due to the center grille. For me it's the headlight placement. Had the headlights been next to the side grilles or right above them instead of way up high, it would have been more conventional and looked more like the Alfa sedans. That's why I like the WRX. The headlights are more agressive, and their placement at teh grille sides is more "normal." The center grille opening doesn't bother me as there are a LOT of cars I've liked over the years with that sort of central grille bulge, from my '73 RX3, to the BMW 6 series.

posted by  ChrisV

I thought VW had a lot of Porsche stock? Hmmm, oh well. Why did VW and Porsche did the joint venture with the Cayenne/Toureg?

posted by  thunderbird1100

Porsche has worked with VW on a LOT of stuff over the years. Considering both companies were started by building vehciles from Porsche... But that's as far as it goes. Porsche is an independant company, partnering with others occasionally.

Remember, Ford and VW partnered making the Galaxy/Sharan minivan in Europe, but Ford and VW have no ownership or merger status...

posted by  ChrisV

Wait, I thought Ferdinand Porsche helped design some of the earlier VW's

posted by  99integra

He did. After Porsche's success, the German government asked him to design a cheap version so that ordinary folk can afford one. Hence the early beetles, and their resemblence of a squished up porsche. This is what i heard, im not sure if its completely true.

Audi is owned by VW though right? Wait, what about MG Rover? Who owns them?

posted by  aerith

:banghead: that's what I SAID!!!!!!!

Both companies started out by building vehicles by Porsche/ Porsche de3signed teh Beetle, then used custom Beetle parts to make teh first Porsche prototypes after the war.

BUT

The Beetle was started in the '30s. Dr. Porsche had designed a few inexpensive cars that he thought were more important than the Mercedes race cars he had engineered up to that point. Hitler was looking for a cheap, rugged car to get the German people on the road. They were introduced and in '37, Porsche created the first prototypes. Production however, never really got going as the war took over the factory.

AFTER WWII, the British rebuilt the bombed VW factory, and created the company now known as Volkswagen, turning it back over to the Germans in a couple years. in '48, Ferdinand Porsche and his son created the first Porsche sports car from VW parts. That car evolved into the Porsche 356 and the start of the Porsche company. A SEPARATE entity from VW.

posted by  ChrisV

Not even close. IN fact, it's reversed, as I described above.



Audi is part of VAG (the VW/Audi Group). MG Rover was owned by BMW for a short time, then split up, with a private company (Phoenix) owning the car portion and Ford getting the truck division.

In July of this year, MG Rover Group was sold to Nanjing Automobile (Group) Corporation

http://www.ukmediacentre.pwc.com/content/detail.asp?ReleaseID=1544&NewsArea ID=2

posted by  ChrisV

Damn I was just asking and I found no evidence of your saying that so could you please show me where?

posted by  99integra

the post directly above the one where you asked, dumbass! Almost a half a f*cking hour before you posted!

"Considering both companies were started by building vehicles from Porsche... But that's as far as it goes"

posted by  ChrisV

Actually it's the other way around.

http://www.porsche.com/usa/aboutporsche/pressreleases/pag/?pool=internation al-de&id=2005-10-07

posted by  vwhobo

Comes up saying this.

http://www.porsche.com/Error/500.htm

posted by  thunderbird1100

Holy shit Chris calm down, I was also wonderin if his name WAS Ferdinand Porsche

posted by  99integra

All im saying is STI front looks better than the B9 front. I also said the new Subaru corporate face (ie, all their new products) have the alfa look thanks to their new head designer.

I also said what MT concluded after they tested the 06 MR vs 06 STI all categories inclusive, not just handling or acceleration. Its nice that the STI is getting recognition after 2 years of shunning from the mags.

posted by  importluva

I dont see how any magazine "Shunned" the STi when they did an Evo/STi comparison... Almost every single review I've read has said "there is no clear cut winner, they each win in their own ways".

posted by  thunderbird1100

Driving's the real winner.... :orglaugh:

posted by  windsonian

Thank god GM just sold thier 20% of Fuji Heavy Industries.

I think the new STI (they capitalized the last letter now..) sucks. Yes, you heard STIMan, SUCKS! Ok, maybe thats a little harsh... lol. I really dont like the new looks, dont like the fact that the engine hasnt changed (its a great engine, dont get me wrong, but it should get boosted), dont like the fact that its 0-60 times are .6 secs slower (2005- 4.5 secs (R&T); New one- 5.1 secs (C&D) dont bust my balls for the different mags, I am ranting and wont look up C&D's 2005 :laughing: ), and most certainly dont like the fact that the new Evo (a great car) is quicker, and considered better by C&D. I think Subaru screwed up, I just hope they can fix it soon... :oops:

Ugg.............

posted by  StiMan

Thats funny. MT went with the STI as the winner. Hmm...now what does that say about mags?

Also, i may be wrong but i believe the EJ internals are now forged? If so then it should be able to bring some serious competition to the 4G63.

posted by  importluva

I personally dont like the front of the new one and I am certain it wont grow on me.

posted by  Sgt. Pepper

There's one thing the EJ can never compete with the 4g63T at. Turbo lag. The EJ has noticeably more lag when you get higher and horsepower cranking the boost. I've been in a stock turbo 400awhp Evo VIII and it exhibited very little lag compraed to a very midly modded STi I know of. You can thank all that lag due to the extrenously long exhaust manifold (and bendy) the STi has (and most aftermarket pieces are just as bad).

posted by  thunderbird1100

I can't comment, never ridden an Evo, only modded STis.

posted by  importluva

So you noticed the turbo lag. I mean when you have THAT long of an exhaust manifold or exhaust turbo-header with that many bends it really makes the turbo lag...

http://store.yahoo.com/mauromotorsports/headers.html

posted by  thunderbird1100

I hardly noticed any turbo lag...the STI has some mad torque down low that was real nice to feel, a fat power band, no turbo lag that i can remember. If i remember correctly, turbo lag is more of an issue with the previous Evo8 shrug.

posted by  importluva

You must of never shifted out of first. Because I'm not the only one that can easily notice more turbo lag with the much LONGER BENDIER exhaust manifold STi than the Evo. The EVO easily had the least amount of turbo lag of any stock turbo car I've driven in years (Such a tiny turbo and pretty good exhaust manifold for quick spool time). It just makes sense the STi would have more turbo lag with the boxer engine design and long bendy manifold.

posted by  thunderbird1100

I don't give 2 sh!ts about the differences in turbo lag. If its such an issue, why do people buy STis? The biggest issue between the two are the manufacturers. Subaru > Mitsubishi forever. Mitsu has a history of dishonesty and cheating their customers; they deserve no pity, no loyalty, and no respect. End of story!

posted by  importluva

Yeah not a big fan of Mitsubishis :banghead: Subarus are much better :thumbs:

posted by  Sgt. Pepper

Can you buy a turbo/AWD Suby for $5000? I didn't think so... that's why Mitsu people are generally diehard about it. They're cheap, they're fast, and you can beat the crap out of them if you stay on top of your maintenance.

posted by  Bino

This obviously shows everyone how much I kno about them :banghead: I stand corrected on the affordability stand point but on the looks I'm sticking with Subaru :thumbs:

posted by  Sgt. Pepper

Way to completely dodge everything by that statement...And making no point whatsoever.

Since when has Mitsubishi been DISHONEST to its customers. Around both the areas I have lived in it has been this way: EVO > STi. I swear I see 3-4 Evo's for every STi. Why do you think Mitsubishi is dishonest, or "Cheating" its customers? Last I checked they are offering deals Subaru wishes they could match (price deals and gas for a year). I've met many more Mitsubishi loyalists than Subaru loyalists. Hell, Subaru didnt even become popular here in America until the late 90s Impreza and then really took off with the WRX in 2002. Mitsubishi has been making great performance vehicles since the 80's with the turbo RWD Starion, then came the AWD Eclipse, AWD Galant VR4, AWD 3000GT VR4 and nowadays the AWD EVO. Mitsubishi is in more of a finanical hurt than Subaru right now but that's about it. Both Mitsubishi and Subaru have sold out to Domestic car companies (Subaru - GM, Mitsubishi - Mopar). But Mitsubishi definatley got the better end of that (joint DSM venture...). What has GM given Subaru>? The B9 Fuglyribeca and a new front grill for the Impreza that makes Michael Jacksons nose look attractive.

posted by  thunderbird1100

You can buy a turbo AWD mitsu for $2500 if you look around hard enough, Galant VR-4.

http://www.galantvr4.org/img.asp?id=23049&width=400

posted by  thunderbird1100

Oh, for 30 years or co, covering up problem after problem, and finally having a scandal when the decades long coverup came to light.

http://www.autosafety.org/article.php?scid=93&did=946

http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosinsider/0406/21/e03-186452.htm

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/03/30/024025.html

It started out as a case over one type of vehicle, but it became major, and a lot of top execs lost their jobs and ended up in jail.

Kinda makes a bit of hp overrating seem unimportant...

posted by  ChrisV

What major company hasn't has one scandal or another in their life? All major corporations have their loonies at the top and bottom. Just a matter of time before they are caught with their secretary in the office after hours and holding some guys retirement plan in his sock. If the Mistusbishi case was worse then all the others how come it never gets brought up? Not even in the news.

posted by  thunderbird1100

Actually it was brought up in the news, in every major automotive mag, and around the web on automotive forums. It isn't new. Most "scandals" for automotive companies don't end up with the president of the company in jail. You can bury your head in the samd or make light of it all you want, but the underlying fact is that Mitsu screwed the pooch for decades, and while you wonder where Mitsu ever lied to their customers, that is precisely what they were and were accused of for years.

posted by  ChrisV

I've never seen any Mitsubishi case brought up in the news in recent years...so this must have been a thing of the past. Which, welcome to present, no one really cares now.

Oh, I could name a nice long list of corporate presidents in jail once in their life...

If Mitsu screwed some people over (just like every other auto manufacturer has at one point or the other), then they are guilty, but just as guilty as the rest of them. Like Mazda continuly coming oput with overrated horsepower figures, Honda coming out with faulty automatic trannies, Ford coming out with a potential "exploding" car, almost all of GM's vehicles needing a new water pump way sooner than most...it's all on different levels but all auto manufacturers have screwed the public over at one point or another. I'm not trying to say Mitsu is better than any company, but I am trying to say making them out to be the worst company is just plain hypocritical. Just my opinion though.

posted by  thunderbird1100

Oh, yeah, YOU don't rememebr it, so massive amounts of links to it wont' matter.

You did say "Since when has Mitsubishi been DISHONEST to its customers" SO I responded. YOu were talking about Mitsus back to the 80s, but no you want to restrict the comments to BRAND NEW cars? Riiiiight.




Dude, you asked since when Mitsu lied to their customers. You were implying that they were f*cking saints. Quit the dance, you're just trying to justify a bullshit position that was proven false.




Yes, you were trying to make them better than Subaru and others. That's the f*cking statement you made by responding to importluva like that, by acting like they never lied to their customers.



*I* never said they were the worst company, either. I was only countering your statement of them not lying to the customer. Unfortunately, you seem to be incapable of handling that.

posted by  ChrisV

I'd just like to say that Fuji Heavy Industries (Subaru's parent company) had only 20% to GM at one point and since then GM has sold all of its shares. The only things that really came from that partnership were SAABs that were rebadged Imprezas etc. :2cents:

But continue bickering....

posted by  StiMan

Okay, yadda yadda blah blah. Enough junk.

I wasn't implying Mitsu is a perfect company and even said they are just like the rest of them... So how you derived that is beyond my math.

HE was making it out to be mitsu RECENTLY (What would matter, today) screwed its customers over. I acknowledge the fact they F'ed up decades ago, but WHY does that even matter TODAY? That's my point. Who gives a shit what some company did in 198x. If he's going to make such a huge case out of something that happened decades ago then that's his problem, not logical thinking if he hates mitsu because of that today, but oh well. Calm down Chris.

posted by  thunderbird1100

GM still had some say in the Subaru division though, that was the point. Any company would if they owned 1/5 of the comapny.

posted by  thunderbird1100

yeah, within the last couple years.



No, they ****ed up over the course of decades, not decades AGO. The scandal hit them hard not more than a few years ago and is still affecting them today. Did you even READ the dates on the links?




Then why bring up how "good" their cars were then? YOU did. If they don't matter now, then you sholdn't have brought them UP.

posted by  ChrisV

Ok I'm a Mitsu and Subi fan. The new Subaru doesn't look all that great in the front but it does perform a tad better than the new evo MR. Also the evo is a bit more expensive than the STI but if your willing to pay a bit more for the beautiful body style of an evo than go for it.

posted by  Spanky2324

Thanks chris for having the energy to bring him up to speed. Seems like he has been living in a box for a number of years now. And for the record, i said mitsu has a "history" of cover ups that was all over the news and forums, but like was mentioned these guys did some major crap for years and years (Yikes!)

Either way, the point is Mitsu management sucked monkey balls and in my eyes have ruined their company's reputation. I will be hesitant at the least to buy any mitsu.

posted by  importluva

I said they made ONE good car in the 80's (late 80's at that), the Starion (never said anything about how the comapny was back then, just what they MADE). They really didnt pick up performance buyers until the Eclipse (1990 model year), Evolution (1992 model year, 2003 here) Galant VR4 (1991 model year) and 3000GT (1991?). So really, I was saying they took off in the 90s (with performance cars). Just didn't say it directly.

I ackowledged they have been in finanical hurt for YEARS, just didn't know RECENTLY they have been caught in scandals. I really could care less though, I'll buy something if it's good.

posted by  thunderbird1100

Hardly living in a box....But enough with the petty insults.

I have REALLY paid attention to the news very closely for probably 3-5 years now and never saw a case brought up that was such a huge scandal for mitsubishi. Sorry if I missed it 15 years ago when I still hadn't hit 10. That's your choice not to buy it, I dont care that much what happens up top, they make a superior vehicle I'm all over it (New Eclipse leaves much to be desired). Anywho, Mitsubishi will have to get saved by someone, and I dont think Daimler Chrysler can do it...

posted by  thunderbird1100

Actually the Evo can be cheaper (Evolution RS) the same price (Evolution IX) or more expensive (Evolution MR), than the STi.

posted by  thunderbird1100

Hardly, IIRC it was in the last few months at most, definitely this year, the news headlines that is. Mitsu is struggling mightily, but the Mitsubishi group is rich and powerful (especially that bank), they bailed MMC out already.

posted by  importluva

Same here. OF course, I think more cars are good than most people. I just hate teh hypocracy. Japanese companies have had a history of covering up defects and issuing "quiet recalls" where the cars would get teh updated fixes whenver they were sceduled for other service. All the major japanese makes did that. While Ford, GM, and Chrysler were getting bad public opinion for issuing public recalls, the Japanese had people convinced that their cars never needed recalls, since they never (or rarely) issued any. That's changing, as we now see a spate of Honda and toyota recalls for fire or potential crash issues. The cars really haven't gotten worse. they just can't get away with silent recalls anymore.

posted by  ChrisV

Again, the dates on the links show that it was the years 2000 to 2004, not 15 years ago.

posted by  ChrisV

that is the ugliest car i have ever seen..... looks like the b9 tribeca

posted by  lamboluver

So I may have missed an hour of the news?

posted by  thunderbird1100

Wise men admit when they were wrong, you were wrong. Be wise.

posted by  Pythias

I did admit it, I said I missed it!

posted by  thunderbird1100

Well said. Ignorance is bliss.

posted by  importluva

no news is good news...

posted by  windsonian

Your Message