PricklyPete
Lifer
- Sep 17, 2002
- 14,582
- 162
- 106
No hatch makes this car much less interesting... Sounds like it is a good drive for the money... But so much less practical.
First drive by C & D. They seem to like it. Not sure if I am all to thrilled with the $33k expected price tag for a fully loaded with CVT. STI to come next year I assume. At that rate, the STI might be close to $40k fully loaded.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-subaru-wrx-sedan-first-drive-review
No hatch makes this car much less interesting... Sounds like it is a good drive for the money... But so much less practical.
I think it is due to the fact they want to differentiate the WRX from the "regular" impreza, which comes in hatch style.
I share your desire for a hatch though. I have an impreza right now and there's times I'd kill to have that extra space. I can't imagine how awesome a 44% stiffer car would handle though.
no hatchy=no care
Consider the current WRX isn't even available with an automatic. Not sure when that went away. But I'm sure offering the CVT is sure to attract a few more buyers.I find it a little surprising that the only automatic option is a CVT. I have limited experience with CVT-equipped cars, but when I've driven them I absolutely hated the CVT with a white-hot passion. On the other hand, they are still putting an antiquated 5-speed auto in the Legacy (which I find remarkable), so I gather they may not have the financial resources to develop or even source a better auto or DCG. Personally I'd get a manual anyway, and now they've stepped up to a 6-speed, so not a problem for me.
I find it a little surprising that the only automatic option is a CVT. I have limited experience with CVT-equipped cars, but when I've driven them I absolutely hated the CVT with a white-hot passion. On the other hand, they are still putting an antiquated 5-speed auto in the Legacy (which I find remarkable), so I gather they may not have the financial resources to develop or even source a better auto or DCG. Personally I'd get a manual anyway, and now they've stepped up to a 6-speed, so not a problem for me.
What I read on autoblog though is that the CVT isn't all that bad, and in fact fairly decent and that's probably due to the gear 'modes' it let's you have. Its still much better than the 4spd it use to have though.
I would think a CVT would be great match for turbo 4. Engineers could concentrate on getting the engine into the "sweet spot" and keeping it there.
I find most people hate CVT's because generally they are the fastest and most efficient they are going to be. For some reason people think that with the manuals they can make their POS NA 4 banger move the car faster. Makes people that can't afford nice cars feel good I guess.
I find most people hate CVT's because generally they are the fastest and most efficient they are going to be. For some reason people think that with the manuals they can make their POS NA 4 banger move the car faster. Makes people that can't afford nice cars feel good I guess.