They are all 3 great cars - each car could beat the others depending exactly on what you want. If I liked hatches I would probably get the Golf R - huge amount of room, great interior, and stock with DSG these things fly (tune is even better). Downside for me is that they are a hatch, they are a VW, and they have way too much chrome for my taste and look boring.

I'm not surprised the STI got a lot of hate in this article - but honestly that is what draws me to it. Lot of people say it is ugly but I love the looks. Lots of people hate the harsh ride and road noise but I love it - makes me feel connected to the road. Except for the horrible paint quality and crappy navigation system there isn't much on the STI I don't like.

 

I love the my STI for the same reasons. Honesty I think it just became trendy for the Journalists to rip on the STI, that too draws me too it.

 

Oh no... Not this thread again..

 

The thing with car comparison is why do ppl need to hate on a specific car. Just provide a review of the pros and cons of each car and let people decide what they want. "I never owned a VW.....", that's enough to call it pretty biased review. Don't knock it till you try it. The fair thing to do is conclude what each car has to offer to different people that's looking for whatever they want from their car.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 

im just hating on volkswagens lol...

 

the 5-60MPH is bad for the STi This is definitely improved with a tune, but man the acceleration does not looks good in every run (mph/different start and stop speeds).

 

but who accelerates in top gear? :rofl:

 

I'd agree; all great cars, and all for a little different personal preferences.





I wish they'd make the STi even more raw (like it was originally). Or even offer like a track pack cheap version, for those few people who don't want econo-luxury.

 

I wish they'd make the STi even more raw (like it was originally). Or even offer like a track pack cheap version, for those few people who don't want econo-luxury.

they actually do have that, they make rally ready sti straight from factory, but its only for japan market only...
Subaru Sells A WRX STI Rally Car From The Factory

 

People are ripping on the RS a LOT more than they are the STI because the RS was advertised to a be a LOT faster, and it isnt. The RS is faster from a roll?? LOL...who cares, even the new WRX's are faster than an STI from a roll LOL.

What matters here is that even the lastest most powerful domestic(well not really domestic because ford doesnt build the RS in on U.S soil ??), allwheel drive turbo 4 with the latest tech, 50 Ft lbs more torque and the latest ECU electronics, can't beat the 13 year old drivetrain in the STI from 0-60, 1/4 mile, or even 0-100. The simple fact is the STI does the same or in some cases MORE than the RS with less. They are also within 1 foot of eachother in braking and have both posted .98G on skidpads. The RS has simply caught up to what the STI has been doing for 13 years now, and so has he V.W (only with the DSG though). That statistic makes the STI a MUCH more impressive car. The V.W and RS cost more too :rofl: Get the STI and use the money saved on a 3" downpipe and tune and it will clobber these new rally car posers that would STILL cost more upfront.

 

complaining about going around a corner in 2nd gear at 5 MPH and then going WOT as not giving instant millenium falcon warp speed is just crazy though. /QUOTE]

5mph was referred to in relation to 1st gear. Come on now...

Me, and ALL the others who reviewed (read any review) a STi are saying the same thing. No low end tq. It's that simple. I am complaining about going 15-20 in 2nd gear, not 5. Trying looking down at your tach, and you will see you are not at 4000rpm (where tq is) in 2nd gong 15-20.

You are starting to sound like a fool. Since you have a V8 under the hood, go take a video showing you taking a turn at 15-20, and getting on it. That will shut you up.

You are defending nothing. The difference between you and me is that I accept the fact there is little tq down there, and nothing has changed since 04. I never once thought I was driving a tq monster when buying a STi.

The STi has a lot of other things going for it With the said, each year cars are getting better in terms of acceleration, and the STi hasn't, so there is that.

So wait, you are saying that your car doesnt pull hard going around a corner in 2nd gear at a 15-20 MPH start when going to WOT????? That simply does not sound normal. Again I never feel the need to have to downshift to 1st when going around a corner at a signaled intersection for example. Like I said before If I floor it in 2nd at 5-10 MPH at a corner like that (let alone 15-20 MPH LOL) in a scenario like that, I very quickly get to "pull me over officer" speed, and I have to let off because people turn their heads and it gets wreckless.

So again, we all get the advantages of direct injection twin scrolls higher compression yada yada yada, but the STI is absolutely NOT SLOW LOL in the Scenario you describe unless something is wrong, like bad gas or timing being pulled etc etc. Maybe it's my 3" perrin inlet allowing 300 RPM lower spool, and the 93 octane stage 1 tune, but even 100% stock I never felt the need to downshift to 1st in those scenarios.

If I wanted a low end torque monster I wouldnt be wasting my time with volkwagens or Mazda's either LOL....I'd get a used 05-06 GTO or a 2016 Camaro SS or Any SRT/8 product, or even a resto modded 60's muscle car. So to be clear I am not debating that the STI is a torque monster by any means.

 

Just read the article through. I find it not only lacking in objective data of any relevance, but also clearly biased. For one, what about taking weather into account? These aren't just fast cars, they are fast 4-wheel drive ones - the whole point of our cars is their ability to offer performance when conditions get bad.

Not to mention I cannot believe that the R is superior to the STI in cornering ability, no matter the conditions. More comfortable ride, sure; better cornering my ass.

 

I've owned a MK 6 GTI. Not near the same league as the golf R. But it had a DIT engine. The engine was great fun. But I was always in a hurry when driving in traffic because of the peak torque being down low. Traffic never moved fast enough. I called it my GTI rage.

Now in the STI I love it can be driven sedately through traffic but has a nice top end power for when the road is open. And everything they slammed the STI is why I love it. Hydraulic steering, road feel, port injection, its brashness. And everyone has an opinion when they see it.

I for one am not a fan of the DIT and low torque peaks. I see why manufacturers do it; gets good reviews. But in my experience with my personality I did not like living with it on a daily basis. Kind of sucks having a car feel fast through slow traffic.

I'm a bit surprised the RS isn't faster. All the hoopla would make you believe it was going to decimate all that come before it... Oh well, the STIs resale value should hold strong.

 

Car and Driver comparison tests:
2016 Ford Focus RS vs. Subaru WRX STI, VW Golf R


My thoughts on these cars.
I love the new STI and i think its the only proven performance car out of these three cars. STI is one of its kind, the fact thats its a practical performance sedan, boxer sound and the subaru cult is why i choose this car.
Now I really like the Focus RS, the exterior, interior and the fact that its built in germany so i assume it has great build quality, we'll see how itll handle aftermarket performance upgrades maybe i might get it somewhere in future.

Now for Golf R:
Garbage, i never owned a volkwagen and ill never buy one or audi which also now uses Volkswagens engine.
Volkwagen has sh!t build quality and the car doesnt really look that much different than base golf. All i know about them is theyre known for Check Engine lights and fallin apart in long run of ownership.

You are so narrowed minded that only you believe your own histories. Before I say anything let me say that I am on my third STI (Had a 2015 not long ago) had a WRX and owned a few VW (2 Cabrios, a Passat TDI, a Golf TDI a MKV GLI, a MKV GTI). We already determined that you haven't owned VW so....

Where are you getting the information about the CEL on the VW? falling apart in the long run? aren't most cars fall apart in the long run? aren't other car manufacturers also have CEL? My C63 AMG gave me CEL and it wasn't modded at the time, it happened while it still had less than 5000 miles.

The only engine that Audi and VW shares right now are the V6 diesel, the 2.0 diesels and the 1.8 and 2.0 turbos but Audi makes world class engines and cars so I just can't see why you wouldn't like Audis. Look on Google, Audi had a car made that was hitting 250 mph back in 1936....

The cult that you referred to in Subaru is all over in other car manufacturers(car clubs), there are cults for Corvette guys, Mustang guys, Camaros, Porsches, you name it, it is not just Subaru.

You said that the Golf r doesn't look much different than a regular golf. I remember the Subaru impreza (non WRX) was almost identical to the WRX except the hood scoop. Many car manufacturers makes cars that look similar despite being more performance oriented from other models.

In summary, you are misinformed, unexperienced and unfamiliar with other car brands. You chose your car because it is a good performance car but you went far to discredit the competition without having a fair assessment.


I am unbiased. I like the new STI(Remember, I had one of the current model) and the Golf R, I haven't seen the Focus yet. If you want I can start posting links on road courses lap times and car magazine test and you will be surprises on how often the Golf R ties or beats and sometimes lacks the STI in many categories(Acceleration, gas mileage, roll acceleration in top gear, sustained torque a lower RPMS, road courses times, drag strip).

Do you know that there are people running 11 sec at the dragstrip with just a tune on the Golf R ?

Here is one comparo with a quote below:

VW Golf R vs Subaru Impreza WRX STi twin test review (2015) by CAR Magazine

"The interior, of course, knocks the Subaru’s into sub-museum territory. The R has great sports seats, cool blue needles on the dials (despite the 155mph limiter, the speedo reads up to 200mph) and a build quality that Subaru doesn’t even have dreams about. Throw in the Golf’s ability to average 40mpg beside the STi’s 27.7mpg and the fact it rides better when you’re not in the mood and the Golf R is simply the better car"

On this other comparo the STI got beaten at the track:

2015 Subaru WRX STI vs 2015 Volkswagen Golf R

and gets beaten once again on this other test:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-PLpLhfJmA

and again.....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4r6D8GMqyU

and another independent magazine win for the Golf R:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KF3FC6X3FX0

and... another win for the Golf R:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8SnxtIyq1A

and tie the STI:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVb6DrL01FU

 

Subaru will last longer without costing you tons of reparation costs. The quality of a VW Is such a letdown these days. Turbocharger fail, DSG failure, huge oil consumption issues and my sympathy for the VW concern just dropped to the ground because of dieselgate....if you cheat on one subject, they might have done more. It's a mentality question, and I believe it's just plain criminal to cheat on a health issue as emission regulations. I don't do business with criminals


#SayNoToVolkswagen

 

The thing is though that the WRX and STI are just much nicer looking cars than the RS or the Golf, both of which look like they were transplanted from the late 80's with a body kit on it. The WRX and the STI have much more modern styling. I noticed that a lot of brands copied the WRX concepts basic front fascia and headlight layout after it was revealed.

So I think that when people say the RS and Golf look too much like the base models it's because of the outdated 80's hatch look. The WRX and STI have updated sedan styling and just look more substantial.

 

I love the STIs, I agree but again I have to remind you that that is my opinion and your opinion therefore everything is subjective. You and I represent you and I(two opinions), many people out there thinks that a Hatchback is a better looking car. In Europe Hatchbacks are more popular.:beer:

 

Lol who drifts a stock Sti is my question

 

I have subscribed to a lot of car magazines. One thing is certain NEW cars Always win in car comparison. Think about it, the journalist is paid to fly over and see and drive the the new car. New cars are the biggest advertisers in the magazines. They need to win because the manufacture has millions in costs before one is sold. and on and on. Its all about taking your money

 

This is the truth. When the S550 Mustang came out, it was lauded as the best pony car, a real sports car, and so on. Now it's a fat pig with an unsorted IRS and a shit interior, according to many magazines and sites out there but hey, look at this new Camaro here, it just beat the M4!

 

Having owned several VW's over the years (and still daily at MK6 GTI) as well as owning a 15 STI I don't see as much bias in the article as a lot of the others see. The STI is getting dated on a lot of fronts, the standard features are disappointing for the price range and the engine, while a good one, is falling behind of a lot of the current ones companies are producing.

All that said I still love my STI and have no regrets on getting it, it has a rawness when driving that makes it so much fun to switch to from my refined VW daily that is very bland. All the cars have their place and strengths. I do look forward to test driving a Focus RS at some point but I'm committed to my STI long term and no matter how good that car is, I won't change my garage line up.

 

I love the raw, mechanical, connected feel of my 2015 STI. It is not for everyone, of course will come out as a negative in any reviews. I wonder if a 2018 or later STI redesign will tone down a lot of these things I like about the STI.

 

I bet the ford ecoboost tuned will be a beast. Probably put it over 400hp with an amazing torque curve

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

Hope the RS drivetrain can take it. I don't mind all this competition. I have no doubt Subaru is and has been testing their STi answer. I'm hoping/expecting a next year release. I just hope that the price doesn't go up too much. Look at it this way though, the STi doesn't even need more power. The stock RS is only 0.1 seconds faster to 60 with an identical quarter time. All Subaru needs to do, is mount a DSG and it'll crush the competition. Now, we are getting a new engine, I mean, we just are. When or what? No idea. But if they mate it to a good strong 50 ms DSG box, nothing stock in it's segment will beat it. No RS, no R, nothing. I bet it'll punch far above it's weight. Let's just hope it happens.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

So much of this is entirely subjective. I read the article and how they ripped on the interior of the STi. Then they stated that the interior of the RS is no better than the base $17,000 Focus. Looking at the pictures, I find the focus interior hideous. They have the big infotainment screen, but take that out it the interior looks like it is from the early 90's (to me at least). I truly like the looks of the STi interior much better. But as was stated before, these magazines are making their money off of the new car release and advertising for it. These guys are no dummies. It's like my sister's boyfriend when she finished her medical residency and started getting her full time offers as a full practicing doctor. He's no dummy either, he was down on one knee in no time wrapping her up as fast as he could. They already have a new house and new car. He's actually a great guy and she's very lucky. But seriously, he's no dummy to let that pass by.

 

That's because they're "American made" biased C#nts. Same with motor trend. I saw a video years ago how a Mustang "beat" an M3 around a track. The Mustang was apexing and driving like it was in the 24hr of Le Mans. Then the M3. It was being drifted around every corner, flailing it's ass around. But the lap times showed the Mustang faster. Yeah, right. These Magazines 99/100 always pick the new car (s). Why? That's what they're paid for, flown out for, wined and dined for. To sell new product. I'm sorry but if a 13 year old engine can be within 0.1 seconds of the "new kid" for 10k less (RS is getting asked 5k over sticker) then it shows how awesome the STi still is.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

I read the article. Honestly, all the gripes about the STI were bonuses for me, save the ride quality. I specifically bought the car because it was a no-compromises, hard-edged Bad A**. If i wanted some soft, limp wristed creation, i would have gone to VW

 

Yeah, IMO, this STi has pretty incredible damping for the factory struts. Comfort ride be damned, I'm not an old man yet! Didn't expect nor desire a luxury lounge ride.

It's also funny how they bash the RS interior in the article, but then if I remember right it got quite high points (don't remember exact) in the tally for interior design, lol, talk about contradicting themselves.

I also wonder how much the increased weight of the Limited full option STi may have effected results?

Also had me intrigued by the fuel ratings in the specs for the cars, showing the RS calls for 93, but the STi and Golf R only need 91...?

 

Run mine on she'll v power in England which is 99


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

i believe europe has different octane ratings than U.S.

 

I own a STi hatch, my sister has a MK6 GTI, I worked at VW and Ford as a tech when there was only the GTI and ST.

I didn't like anything about the ST aside from the seats, but they got uncomfortable fast, the car's floaty and rough, unless the RS is worlds different... I won't be liking the RS.

I actually like the drive and ride of the GTI, my butt dyno tells me that it corners better and a lot more planted at any speeds than my STi. Not to mention great seats that don't get uncomfortable, great interior and sound (road, engine, music). Only thing i HATE about all VAG is that the throttle response is utter garbage and apparently the R is no different, I should not have to wait a whole one to two seconds after i step on the pedal. and that in 3 years the timing chain tensioner failed, and I currently have the intake manifold off to clean out the carbon build up at only 47k km because it was misfireing.

The only Ford I would buy is their trucks and Mustang, I would never ever buy anything VAG ever. I'll always buy Japanese.

 

I live in Idaho and we only have 91 octane. I believe that all throughout the Rocky Mountain states it is very hard to find 93; at least I know that Idaho and Utah are that way.

On the stiff ride, this was one of the big selling points of the 2015 redesign. Didn't they say the chassis was about 30% stiffer than the previous model? I personally love the ride and it doesn't bother me that it is bumpy. I feel connected to the road. I was going through a Mountain pass east of Park City, UT and a guy in a Hyundai was trying to keep up with the guys in front of him. He had so much body roll that his car was all over the place. I believe he needed to replace some items on his car because it was so bad. I was able to fly through the 50 max mph recommended curves at over 70 just like I was driving on a normal road. I could have taken them much faster. If stiff is wrong, then I don't wanna be right!

 

Engine recall and it ain't even here yet [emoji1] [emoji13]

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

Image Link


Engine recall and it ain't even here yet [emoji1] [emoji13]

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

This looks like it affects models in Europe perhaps?? If so , would this affect the US as well?

I know it looks like ppl are getting irritated they they aren't getting notified of delivery yet. Some places are even charging 3,5, even 10 grand in dealer mark-up.

 

All Subaru has to do, is put a DCT in the STi. Back on top.

I would love to see what an S207 with the 323 hp engine and a DCT could do.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

Crazy that the still have similar speed performance figures. I was expecting the rs to be way faster.

 

Wonder if the RS driveline may have more parasitic loss?

Not that it would tell the whole story, but I would like to see a same day direct comparison of dyno results for these 3 cars. Would help to find out which manufacturers like to inflate hp numbers, or underestimate them.

 

Already put on hold for an engine problem. I'll be sticking with subaru and my 06' STI. And Ford dealers asking 5,000 over sticker for the RS??? They must be living in fantasy land. Ford should have kept this RS in europe where hatchbacks belong. STI's are as fast from 0-60, equal and/or faster in the 1/4 mile(based on 2 years of published tests for the STI's that show many have run 13.0's @ 104-15 and the RS has only managed a 13.4 @ 105. The STI is faster from 0-100. The STI and RS are within 1 ft of each other from 60-0 braking, and they have both recorded .98G on a skidpad tests. The RS can beat the STI from a roll though I mean really like i have said for over a year now, the RS is too late to the U.S market. If this were 2008 it would have been a better impact, but heck, seems like no one even cares about the RS anymore. They hyped it way WAY WAY too much ahead of time. Without a Mustang SVO with a hi po 2.3 turbo they made a big mistake throwing everything at the RS in my opinion.

 

Already put on hold for an engine problem. I'll be sticking with subaru and my 06' STI. And Ford dealers asking 5,000 over sticker for the RS??? They must be living in fantasy land. Ford should have kept this RS in europe where hatchbacks belong. STI's are as fast from 0-60, equal and/or faster in the 1/4 mile(based on 2 years of published tests for the STI's that show many have run 13.0's @ 104-15 and the RS has only managed a 13.4 @ 105. The STI is faster from 0-100. The STI and RS are within 1 ft of each other from 60-0 braking, and they have both recorded .98G on a skidpad tests. The RS can beat the STI from a roll though I mean really like i have said for over a year now, the RS is too late to the U.S market. If this were 2008 it would have been a better impact, but heck, seems like no one even cares about the RS anymore. They hyped it way WAY WAY too much ahead of time. Without a Mustang SVO with a hi po 2.3 turbo they made a big mistake throwing everything at the RS in my opinion.

I always figure SOA pays you by the post. :lol:

The RS isn't too late. It's coming at a good time now that the EVO is done. The next rivalry will be RS v STi.

Dealers will always try and sell high. This is nothing new. I remember when STi's landed, dealerships wanted $5k over MSRP. Hell, I saw a new one that had an $8k "market value premium" tacked onto it. :lol: This is America last I checked, so the dealer can sell for whatever someone is willing to spend (yes, I know this may actually be illegal in some states).

The RS hoopla will subside in a year or so anyway and prices will drop to invoice again. As for that picture, I've heard a ton of rumors on it but I haven't heard anyone substantiate it from OASIS. Not saying it isn't real, I'm just skeptical until more comes out.

Oh, and I'm not in the market for an RS or Crapback in any brand. :lol:

 

Perhaps the engine problem could be serious, check #58 in the link below. In these other threads, there is also mention of Diffs over heating and wheel issues or something like it. Rumors and speculation though at this point. Perhaps there are some other issues that prevent it from performing as well as it really should.

Early batch recall - Page 6