Opinions on the 2005 WRX (not sti)

[Pumba]

Hello everyone,

I am currently in the market for a new car. I am looking at the new volvo
S40 (AWD T5 version), the SAAB 92X (Turbo AWD version) and the Subaru WRX
(not sti). From my research all 3 cars appeal to me and are up my budget.
I have heard that the SAAB is merely a Subaru WRX engine with a SAAB body -
is that true? Out of all 3.....the Volvo appeals to me the most......but
with the options i want (like moonroof etc)......the price is going over my
budget.

I have also never owned a Subaru and so I am interested to hear
opinions/concerns about its reliability etc. I generally tend to keep cars
for at least about 6-7 years.......My current Honda has about 120K miles and
is 7 years old and has served me really well with respect to realibility.
So my 2 main factors are I want a car thats fun to drive (I think all 3
above models would be fun to drive) but at the same time gives me the
reliability i want.

Just wanted to get opinions from die hard Subie fans on what i can expect by
owning a WRX for about 6-7 years.

Thanks,
Pumba

 

[Fuzzy Logic]

I am currently in the market for a new car. I am looking at the new
volvo S40 (AWD T5 version), the SAAB 92X (Turbo AWD version) and the
Subaru WRX (not sti). From my research all 3 cars appeal to me and are
up my budget. I have heard that the SAAB is merely a Subaru WRX engine
with a SAAB body - is that true? Out of all 3.....the Volvo appeals to
me the most......but with the options i want (like moonroof
etc)......the price is going over my budget.

The Saab 92-X is a rebadged Subaru Impreza and is assembled in the same
Japanese plant as the Subaru. The only differences are in trim, color,
options and the front and rear bumpers/liftgate. The 9-2X Aero is the
equivalent to the WRX and the 9-2X Linear is the base Impreza.

 

[Wyn Roberts]

Hi Pumba,

The Volvo and the SAAB are great motors but if you really enjoy your
driving, get the Subaru. Japanese reliability is second to none, the awesome
performance and handling will never be matched by the Nordic pretenders.
Test drive one for a day.

Wyn.

 

[BSackamano]

Our '03 WRX is great, but also consider the new Legacy. It would be more
comparable to the S40.

 

[Philip Procter]

I've never driven the S40, but other Volvo's have seemed a bit stiff
to me, and I don't mean just the springs. Not my cuppa tea! The Saab
is a Subie with a bit more upmarket trim and interior bits. If it's
worth the extra price over the WRX depends on the value you place on
the upgraded bits. I've got a 2005 and a 1998 Subie, the interior of
the 2005 is vastly better designed, but not up to the standards of my
old Audi.

But, once you're at the price of the Saab, the STi is just around the
corner. Ahhh, sweet temptation (but no moonroof)!

As for reliability, I drive my cars till they drop and the Subies have
been very reliable. Much better than my Audi, in fact.

Philip

 

[JaySee]

No it isn't. The S40 is built on the same platform as the Mazda 3 and
new Ford Focus. It's in the compact sedan category, not midsize.

 

[JaySee]

The Saab 92-X is a rebadged Subaru Impreza and is assembled in the same
Japanese plant as the Subaru. The only differences are in trim, color,
options and the front and rear bumpers/liftgate. The 9-2X Aero is the
equivalent to the WRX and the 9-2X Linear is the base Impreza.

You also lose the roof rails in the Saab vs WRX Wagon. The WRX Wagon
is by far the better value. The Saab also has a softer suspension.