So looking at replacement vehicles for the Fiesta 1.0 I have. Its out of warranty and I would like more power and awd. I have been researching and both the WRX and FXT with the options I want are about the same price, with the wrx being maybe $200 a year more for insurance. The WRX would be manual and the FXT would be cvt since that is all it comes with. I would wait for the 2018 WRX since I really don't want a sunroof but want heated seats. I drive 80 miles a day.
Anyone have any insight between the 2?
Apples and oranges really. Do you need the space? Don't go and buy a forester thinking it'll do what a wrx will. Without spending a lot on suspension mods you will be disappointed.
Answer that question first and go from there.
The Forester has more headroom, and the WRX has more spoilers and spats and stuff. Do you want to drive a big minivan or something that looks like Sport Compact Car's April 1998 issue threw up on a new Maxima?
edit: I don't actually know what their April 1998 issue was, I just used that random month as an example
In reply to bmw88rider:
I mean it will be paired with a Miata so something with space is nice, coming from a Suzuki Samurai and the Fiesta hatchback. As for the suspension it would remain stock if not lifted. I know it wont be like a wrx but it will get 75-80% of the performance(cvt vs cvt) and at most it would get intake/exhaust/tune it will be a daily so it will remain relatively stock.
Knurled wrote:
The Forester has more headroom, and the WRX has more spoilers and spats and stuff. Do you want to drive a big minivan or something that looks like Sport Compact Car's April 1998 issue threw up on a new Maxima?
edit: I don't actually know what their April 1998 issue was, I just used that random month as an example
turns out that it was a wrx on the cover of that issue...
edit: I also kind of like suv's I was looking at a crosstrek before coming to the FXT but the 148hp from the Crosstrek just wont cut it since it has 20hp more than my fiesta with 1000lbs more weight.
Ha! I did an alignment on the 300ZX on the cover.
In reply to Knurled:
are you a witch? talking about Subaru WRX's and you pic the issue with the wrx cover.
MrChaos wrote:
In reply to Knurled:
are you a witch? talking about Subaru WRX's and you pic the issue with the wrx cover.
My cars are all named after witches, does that count?
The current WRX is about as big as a late 90s Legacy used to be. It will probably hold value better over time than a Forester, but it will also be more expensive to insure.
The current Foresters are nothing like the older Impreza based Foresters. I've not driven one, but I understand they're more like a Rav4 now. The smaller ones can carry a surprising bunch of stuff, I'm betting the newer ones don't disappoint. I've heard that the AWD on the newer ones is different, too.
Head over to Subaru Forester Org or NASOIC to see what people are saying about them, I guess.
The new Foresters are HUGE. We had one in for basic service and I thought it was a Tribeca at first. It had a 4000lb reciever on the back. It's a little scary that something bigger than minivans used to be, and is rated to tow that much, has a little 2.5 running it all.
We have a Forester as a loaner car. It's a 2002. It's a GD with a tall roof. GDs are bigger than the original Legacies were (same wheelbase, more width) Our Forester was in the next bay and it looked like it would fit inside the new one without anything sticking out anywhere.
bmw88rider wrote:
Apples and oranges really. Do you need the space? Don't go and buy a forester thinking it'll do what a wrx will. Without spending a lot on suspension mods you will be disappointed.
Answer that question first and go from there.
They are not apples and oranges. I had a 15 STI and a base Forester at the same time and a 16 WRX and 16 FXT at the same time. The Forest is essentially the wrx wagon that's lifted....
With that being said...It all depends on your space requirements. The FXT is a hoot for a family truckster. I gapped a 02ish Mustang GT with it the other night after leaving disney. I've also run 14.0 flat with it in the 1/4 which made it just about as fast as the WRX. The hatch is nice. I can fit an extra set of wheels back there with car seats in or 100 sq ft of sod and 6 40lbs bags of filler dirt. The CVT does kill some of the fun but it's pretty smooth.
The WRX is a WRX. It's def more of a bang for the buck than the STI. The 15+ interiors are light years ahead of the past generations. They have adequate space as well with the seats folded down. Of course handling is much better than the FXT, wheel options open up as well being 5x114.3 vs 5x100. Getting to row the gears is way better too. The manual actually delivers the power more smoothly than the CVT. Which is crazy that the auto trans has a more visceral feel.
I actually don't feel much of a difference driving the two cars unless I'm carving corners. The seats in the WRX are better than the FXT. The FXT sits you higher. The FXT build quality is slightly less than the Japanese built WRX i.e. we've had way more fit, finish, and things just oddly falling apart on us in the two Foresters we've had than the two WRX/STIs. The WRX gets way better MPGs than the FXT. The FXTs headlights are better than the WRX in terms of stock vs. stock performance (Reflector HIDs vs. crappy projector halogens).
IMO get a base WRX and you'll save $$ and be just as happy. Even the base FXT is a few grand more than a base WRX.
STI is much different. I miss that car but happy I got money back from downgrading to the WRX. But got even more money downgrading to an S2000 but might go to a Crosstrek now haha.
I paid like $32 for my FXT Touring. $26k for the WRX base...if you can wait for the 18 to come out with the options you want, do that.
DirtyBird222 wrote:
I paid like $32 for my FXT Touring. $26k for the WRX base...if you can wait for the 18 to come out with the options you want, do that.
The main thing is with the heated seats the WRX and FXT are almost the same price.
Im sure if you wear felt or corduroy pants you'll heat your self up just fine.
