2008 Subaru WRX: what were they thinking?

The Subaru WRX began as one of those cars on the other side of the proverbial fence. It was available overseas, but not in the U.S. So we really, really wanted it. Oftentimes, when such "forbidden fruit" finally does become available, all those people who said they'd buy one don't. Consider the Merkur XR4ti, the Cadillac Catera, and the latest Pontiac GTO. But the WRX bucked this trend. It sold strongly following its U.S. 2002 model year debut, and built a strong following.

The car was not without weaknesses. Styling has never been a Subaru strength, and the WRX went through three totally different front ends in six model years. And not everyone warmed to the minimalist interior. Some called it cheap.

Perhaps because of these criticisms, when the time came to fully redesign the Impreza, and the WRX with it, Subaru decided to go in a different direction. I took a 2008 Subaru WRX for a test drive to evaluate the result. The same day I drove a MazdaSpeed3, the current class darling, so I was able to see how the two compare.

Styling

The Subaru styling curse holds. In many ways, the 2008 WRX' exterior is the brand's most questionable yet, edging out even the original B9 Tribeca (which was heavily revised this year). The hatch is a misproportioned blob. The basic shape resembles a bloated Mazda3 hatch. But aside from the bloat, and bad proportions, the details are all wrong, from the grille to the tail lights.

The sedan, which I drove, fares a little better, at least in WRX trim. From some angles it resembles a circa-1990 Mitsubishi Galant, which was not considered a looker even in its day. As with the hatch, the lines are too bloated to suit the current fashion for edgy highlights and crisp panel transitions.

Subaru remained loyal to frameless door windows for long after other manufacturers abandoned them in anything with four doors. My understanding is that frameless glass is hard to adjust, and thus is prone to wind whistles and such. With the new Impreza, Subaru has joined the crowd. Theoretically this should make the door close with a higher quality sound, but the new Impreza does not impress in this regard.

The interior styling is little better. An attempt has been made to transfer the Tribeca's swoopy instrument panel to a narrower cabin and lower price point. This aspect of the interior succeeds more or less. But the materials strike me as even cheaper-looking and cheaper-feeling than those in the old WRX. They might be roughly the same grade, but inexpensive materials look and feel cheaper when the interior is pretending to be something fancy. While sitting in the rear seat I also noticed that the seams around the front seat headrests are somwhat shoddily done. They're not straight, and the fabric bunches a bit along them.

The interior in the Mazda has a more attractive and more upscale appearance, despite being similarly comprised of hard plastic.

Accommodations

The cheap materials also make more of an impression in the new WRX because there is more of them. In the old WRX, you sat relatively high compared to the minimalist door panels and instrument panel. Visibility was excellent. In the new car, the beltline (base of the side windows) is higher and the instrument panel is much more massive. My eye kept being drawn to the center stack, which bulges up taller than the instruments themselves. You sit relatively low inside the car, and I even felt a bit buried in it. Visibility is reduced, especially to the rear, where there is a high package shelf.

Though still a compact (as is the larger Legacy), the new WRX is significantly roomier than the old one for heads, shoulders, and legs. But, for me at least, it's less comfortable. The WRX I drove for some reason had a driver's seat from a regular Impreza but a WRX passenger seat. The salesperson thought that the service department might have grabbed the original seat for a customer's car. Otherwise, the plant has some serious quality control issues.

I cannot stand the seat from the regular Impreza. Lumbar support is insufficient and non-adjustable. This is unusual, because I usually like less of a lumbar bulge than most people do. The headrest juts forward, pressing uncomfortably against the back of my head. I've noted this in more and more cars, as more attention has become focused on whiplash protection. This is better for most people, but uncomfortable for those of us with relatively vertical necks.

I did not drive a car with the WRX driver's seat, but was able to sit in it. The same criticisms apply, but to a lesser extent. It's still one of the least comfortable seats I've sampled recently.

The ceiling is very high. So I'm surprised that the rear seat seems lower to the floor than before, and thus provides adults with little thigh support.

The trunk is reasonably large for the class, and unlike in past WRX sedans the rear seat folds to expand it.

On the Road

The WRX has never scored many points for styling or comfort. The driving experience has always been the primary selling point. Despite being substantially larger than the old WRX, the new one is a bit lighter. Meanwhile, the output of the 2.5-liter turbocharged flat four holds steady at 277 horsepower. The engine is supposedly all-new; instead of increasing peak power, the redesign has lowered the torque peak.

With a slightly improved power-to-weight ratio, the WRX remains a quick car. The new engine feels a bit stronger at low revs, and packs more of an explosive punch than the turbo four in the MazdaSpeed3 when boost kicks in. The engine note remains that of a flat four, but much subdued compared to the 2.0-liter in the 2002 car. The Mazda engine is much more refined still, but then refinement doesn't tend to make a car more fun, just more livable.

The shifter is mounted higher and further forward than in most compact sedans. A short-throw kit is highly recommended. The stock shifter is too tall and its throws are too long.

The Subaru's largest advantage is its all-wheel-drive system. Unlike in the front-wheel-drive MazdaSpeed3, you can get on the throttle in turns without fear of transforming the inner front tread into black dust. Better yet, the throttle can be used to induce a bit of oversteer in turns, which can be fun.

In every other respect, the new Subaru WRX' handling is a disappointment. The steering feels loose, numb, and slow for a sport compact. I wouldn't like this steering in a Buick. The suspension tuning is soft, permitting a bit much roll in hard turns and generally lending the car a sloppy feel. Pasts WRXs had a tauter feel to them, thought their steering was never the best. The Mazda is much better in this area.

On the other hand, ride quality is good, if not great. But the Mazda rides only a bit more roughly. Noise levels are very low in the new WRX below highway speeds. At 40 with the transmission in fifth the car feels like it's hardly moving at all. At highway speeds I noticed some wind noise.

All in all, the chassis tuning seems more suitable for a Corolla than a WRX. What happened?

Subaru WRX Price Comparisons and Pricing

With a base price of $25,495, the Subaru WRX lists for about $2,500 more than a MazdaSpeed3. Adjusting for unshared features--including the WRX's all-wheel-drive--reduces the gap by just $100. Easy choice for anyone who doesn't absolutely need all-wheel-drive.

Compared to a VW GTI, the Subaru's list price is about $2,200 higher, and adjusting for features widens the gap to $2,500.

When the WRX was the only 200+ horsepower semi-affordable compact, it could command a mid-twenties price. But today it has many excellent competitors, and the price is way too high for what you get.

Prices change frequently, and differences will vary based on feature level. To quickly generate these and other comparisons with the specific features you want, visit my Web site, www.truedelta.com. (It's the only site that provides true "apples-to-apples" price comparisons.)

TrueDelta's page for the Subaru WRX:

http://www.truedelta.com/models/Impreza.php

Last Words

I was a big fan of the old WRX. And like many fans of the old car, I'm disappointed by the new one. Especially now that I've driven it, and found the handling nearly as ill-conceived as the sheetmetal. I've frequently recommended the old WRX, the Legacy, and the Forester (my sister bought one). I cannot recommend this car.

Subaru has historically marched to a different drummer, and been all the more likeable for it. An alliance with GM fell apart because they refused to commonize core aspects of their products. (Only to hook up with Toyota.)

It's hard to believe that the new Impreza represents the independent approach Subaru was fighting to preserve.

There is hope, aside from the new alliance with Toyota. They re-did the front end of the previous Impreza twice. They've already redone the Tribeca. Apparently it's time for another do-over.

And, after this one, Subaru needs to figure out why they keep mucking up so badly, and eliminate that root cause. Supposedly the new WRX is the way it is because Subaru wants its products to appeal to a broader market. Maybe so, but so far the new car appeals to hardly anyone. So even if that was the goal, they've failed to reach it. As well as any other goal I can think of.

A more successful execution of a mass market car isn't the answer. We have plenty of those. Instead, Subaru needs to remember what got them this far, and improve on those traditional strengths.

A Note on Subaru WRX Reliability

I cannot practically cover reliability within the context of this review. However, many people are interested in such information, so I started collecting my own data in the fall of 2005. Results are posted to my site, www.truedelta.com, with updates every three months. This can provide results on new models like the 2008 WRX very quickly--if enough owners sign up promptly.

Unlike other sources, TrueDelta clearly identifies what difference it will make if you buy a WRX rather than another vehicle by providing "times in the shop" stats (with others coming in the future). You will eventually be able to specify the number of years, annual miles, and types of repairs to include in Subaru WRX reliability comparisons.

To report results, I need reliability data on all cars--not just the WRX--from people like you. To encourage participation, those who help provide the data will receive free access to the site's reliability information. Non-participants will have to pay an access fee.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.

A link to this website and alphabetized links to my other vehicle reviews can be found on my profile page.

Some of my reviews of related vehicles:
2006 Subaru WRX
Chevrolet Cobalt review (SS Supercharged at the end)
MazdaSpeed3 review
Mitsubishi Lancer GTS