Ask the Car People.SM


2008 Subaru Impreza WRX - READ ONLY

1480 messages,  Last post on Jul 06, 2009 at 5:52 PM

You are in the Future Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum.

This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Future Vehicles Host for Directions! discussion.

What is this discussion about? Subaru Impreza WRX STi, Subaru Impreza, Future Vehicle, Sedan

Messages Page 36 of 148

#351 of 1480 Re: I'm sorry Bob [dino001] by stevecebu

Jul 06, 2007 (7:27 am)

Replying to: dino001 (Jul 06, 2007 5:09 am)
To be brutally honest, I'm not sure Subaru leaders and engineers really do have what it takes and they probably know it - hence their "bouncey" attempts from infamous upscale-schmapscale move, to inconsistencies in their lineup.
 
I agree but you need a leader with a vision, publicly held or not someone has to have a clear vision for the future of the company. I don't think the leadership at Subaru has that. Some new blood and forward thinking might help that but Ferrari doesn't sell many cars compared to many other auto makers but everyone knows what a Ferrari is. Subaru needs to head in that direction rather than in the direction of Toyota. The Baja was a mistake but it could have been swung around with the right people doing the job. Re-creating the BRAT didn't work for a ton of reasons and combining it with the Chevy Avalanche, another mistake. The Tribeca, well, I didn't keep on top of that one. I don't think a better interior is going to sell the WRX and considering what they took out and if it's not such a big deal then just leave it in. But the car was de-contented from before regardless of the consumers knowing it and the bland looks. This makes as someone on here said the base impreza to be a much better deal by far. You get everything but the turbo and the sport suspension well I can't say how different that is but my guess is you can add a turbo and remap the ECU and get gobs more power which enthusiasts do anyway. The suspension bits, no idea but it seems you pay too high a premium for a few more HP and almost everything else is the same.
This is NOT The way to sell higher volume. Make a full line of Rally type cars, get one on a TV show and make everyone want to buy one and keep pushing the cars abilities. Hey I owned a 1969 Charger General Lee style and it was a good car, looked great, but mine was brown, and cost $800
Still that orange car became an Icon the KITT car from Knight Rider was just a Camaro and Selleck had the 308 Ferrari in Magnum, The Mustang in Bullit etc... Subaru needs an aggressive look and aggressive performance at a good price. Put it on TV in some sort of action show and of course do a lot of stunts with it. But looking like it does it's not going to impress.
Subie does have to be careful as they are small but at some point you have to make the move to go for it or be left behind. Total unit 2008 sales will tell a better story. But I don't think the profit margin will be that much greater. So maybe better than 2007 but by how much? Enough or Wow what a great year! Time will tell.

#352 of 1480 Re: Evo/Caliber [ateixeira] by aaykay

Jul 06, 2007 (7:29 am)

Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 06, 2007 7:08 am)
The Saab 9-2x had ZERO input from GM, since that was an existing Subaru product (pre-08 Impreza) in existence, prior to GM's acquiring a stake in Subaru's parent (thank goodness ! ).
 
But as a major share-holder (part owner), who intended to make a killing from their investment (a company like GM does not do investments for charity reasons ), even without any other synergies, they almost certainly would have prodded Subaru into severely cutting costs to increase their margins, wouldn't they ? Why would they not ?
 
Any new products in development (like the 08 Impreza), would have been BULLS-EYE in General Motor's cross-hairs, I would venture. Thus when people speculate that the new 08 Impreza is not what it should have been, they are not being merely mean, are they ? Removing a component like the rear LSD or Aluminium hood or replacing Aluminium with Plastic etc are obvious changes that are visible....what other changes have happened under the surface of the car, that are not as easily visible or not that obviously noticeable ?

#353 of 1480 Re: Evo/Caliber [ateixeira] by lilengineerboy

Jul 06, 2007 (7:30 am)

Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 06, 2007 7:08 am)
And now it a chunk is owned by Toyota, who doesn't make a sports car, doesn't make a turbo car, makes very few manual transmission cars, etc.

#354 of 1480 Re: I'm sorry Bob [stevecebu] by lilengineerboy

Jul 06, 2007 (7:32 am)

Replying to: stevecebu (Jul 06, 2007 7:27 am)
Still that orange car became an Icon the KITT car from Knight Rider was just a Camaro
 
Pontiac Trans Am (Firebird), not Chevrolet Camaro, but we get the idea.

#355 of 1480 Re: Evo/Caliber [aaykay] by stevecebu

Jul 06, 2007 (7:42 am)

Replying to: aaykay (Jul 06, 2007 7:06 am)
People might also point out the fact that during the core development of the new 08 Impreza, General Motors had a 20% stake in FHI (Subaru's parent company) and was the single largest shareholder and most of the design direction of the new products from Subaru (including the new Impreza), probably had GM's prodding behind them. Cutting corners, eliminating the more expensive Aluminium components, cutting out things that people would not notice right away etc., probably with an eye to using the Impreza platform as the basis for their next generation Chevy Cavalier or Aveo.
 
Now that really WOULD explain a lot of things.
The Aveo is a 2 year old Suzuki Sprint and we have the new sprints here and they look great but Chevy is buying old cars from Suzuki! I posted a pic of the new Suzuki Swift to the Fit forum and it's an eye catcher but of course GM doesn't want that! Chevy makes good trucks and the Corvette and that's it! You can keep everything else including any Camaro's or Trans Am's or anything! Ford doesn't make a single car I'd own except for a fleeting thought about the Ford GT. But I'd rather have a Porsche GT3 over that so.... not one Ford.
US car makers have lost the plot and apparently they helped Subaru to lose their vision as well.

#356 of 1480 Re: Evo/Caliber [aaykay] by stevecebu

Jul 06, 2007 (7:50 am)

Replying to: aaykay (Jul 06, 2007 7:29 am)
Any new products in development (like the 08 Impreza), would have been BULLS-EYE in General Motor's cross-hairs, I would venture. Thus when people speculate that the new 08 Impreza is not what it should have been, they are not being merely mean, are they ? Removing a component like the rear LSD or Aluminium hood or replacing Aluminium with Plastic etc are obvious changes that are visible....what other changes have happened under the surface of the car, that are not as easily visible or not that obviously noticeable ?
 
Was I just being mean? I didn't think so and I think you've summed up what I've been saying pretty well.
GM is all about maxing profit while killing quality and reliability. Imagine if GM bought BMW, how long before the company's sales tank and it becomes second place to the Vette, which of course they would do that since nothing is allowed to surpass the Vette.
If only I had enough dosh for a Porsche 911 S....

#357 of 1480 Re: Evo/Caliber [stevecebu] by lilengineerboy

Jul 06, 2007 (8:26 am)

Replying to: stevecebu (Jul 06, 2007 7:50 am)
I thought we were talking about the WRX?

#358 of 1480 Re: Evo/Caliber [aaykay] by ateixeira

Jul 06, 2007 (9:17 am)

Replying to: aaykay (Jul 06, 2007 7:29 am)
All speculation, besides, the synergy never happened, that's why the whole GM-Subaru partnership never worked at all. Subaru refused to be just another generic GM division.
 
If GM had even half the influence you imply they had, the 08 Impreza would have a transverse engine and we'd be seeing FWD models in the lineup.

#359 of 1480 Re: Evo/Caliber [ateixeira] by stevecebu

Jul 06, 2007 (10:11 am)

Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 06, 2007 9:17 am)
If GM had even half the influence you imply they had, the 08 Impreza would have a transverse engine and we'd be seeing FWD models in the lineup
 
I don't think so GM is pretty heavy handed in the way they deal with things. Use the 900 lb. Gorilla analogy if you like. I can see this happening which would explain a lot to me about why Subaru did some of the things it did. But yes, it's not provable so it remains speculation but very believable. Cost cutting is alot different than radical changes which Subaru would severely object to. Cost cutting is a GM thing as well as Ford. Low budget the car I mean look how long it's taken for GM to give the Corvette a decent interior. How many years was it? Most of them? Is an interior that expensive? No it's to save every penny they can.

#360 of 1480 Re: Evo/Caliber [stevecebu] by ateixeira

Jul 06, 2007 (12:22 pm)

Replying to: stevecebu (Jul 06, 2007 10:11 am)
I still don't think the Corvette interior is that good...
 
GM was very different to Isuzu vs. Subaru. With Isuzu, they gobbled up their diesel technology, starved them of new product, then eventually used Isuzu dealers to sell more GMC trucks.
 
They really didn't do that at all with Subaru. Well, Japan got the Subaru Traviq (actually an Opel), and Saab got the 9-2x, and Chevy even sold a Forester in India. But we just didn't see them control Subaru they way they did to Isuzu.
 
If anything, Subaru has accelerated new product launches. Look how quickly the Tribeca came out and was revised.

Messages Page 36 of 148

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement