I know I could be just a bias reader with my loyalties deeply imbedded with my wallet do to the fact That I own two Subaru’s but I am tired of car mags putting cars up against the wrx and stacking the cards in the newbie’s favor take this months Motortrend for ex: they put a TR the cheapest version of the WRX against the new Mazda Speed 3 which is the top of its line. Now I know the editors like to say these things are based on price not how the car is appointed but if that is the case why do they ever compare the corvette to the 911 these two cars are not even close in price. Well back to my point. The article rates the Mazda as the better buy to the TR which I would agree based on the options/interior for the price but had they put it up against the regular WRX or the limited I feel the MS3 would pail in comparison. According to the # which I do not believe are very accurate there is no way the 0-60 & ¼ mile are going to be slower than the car it replaces the new WRX has greater HP/lbs than its predecessor and a much faster gearing it should not be probable for it to be slower than the 02 which was rated 5.3 and 14.1. Now this publication is telling its readers that despite all of Subaru’s improvements the car is not any better. But I can only tell you what I know
as a previous owner of a 2002 WRX Cobb stage II and a current owner of a 2006 WRX limited that this car is a vast improvement over its predecessor even modified, of course I never ran my old car against my new one but I now have friends with 02 threw 05 WRX that have taken there cars beyond what my 02 was think bigger Turbos VF-30 and 18gs
My 06 hangs right with them so to my conclusion, # don’t lie but editors still need to get paid.
Please discuss my early morning rant and I apologize to the somewhat randomness the content was cut so people would actually read it

 

What's wrong with comparing two turbocharged 4 cylinder sports car in the same price range. The WRX and the Mazdaspeed are targeting the same demographic. Why not see how the two compare eachother.

Mazda makes great sports cars and I'm sure the Mazdaspeed has traits that outshine the WRX. So why not show the similarities and differences between the two. If not only for an entertaining article, then at least to possibly help future car buyers whom are destined to choose between the two cars.

Not only that, but in the WRX's deffence (like it needs one), they also mentioned that the WRX could have performed better given sportier tires. Alos, that they perfered the WRX as an autoX car over the Mazda.

 

I was not bashing the Mazda. I do like the car but I was questioning the motives and information in the article. On one other point why did they use the 4 door and not the wagon after all the Mazda is only offered in a 5 door form. My main point besides disliking the politics imbedded in the media was that the publications # don’t add up in my opinion. At least that is my opinion I don’t possess the high dollar equipment to challenge there findings

 

It should have been wagon vs. wagon. Also they should have informed the readers that the Mazda they tested was the top model whereas the WRX was not.

 

But that shouldn't matter since the Mazdaspeed is still cheaper than the TR.

 

Ok, then they shouldn't be compared by price. If they are going to compare two cars, they should be comparably equipped and in the same class, regardless of price.

 

I don't read many car mags like "motor trend" or "car and driver" but I seem to remember how they do the supercar comparison and they have 911's , 360 Modena's, Gallardos, McLaren's, all of which are not in the same price group unless OVERPRICED is it's own group.

 

when you venture past the 80k range the buyer is the same

 

When you have two tubocharged 4 cylinder sport compacts, both of which are factory tuned versions of a base model entry level car, both have similar performance levels, and both target the same buyer market, all at a similar price, how are they not in the same class?

If anything, the stripped down TR should be able to show why it costs as much as a fully loaded Mazdaspeed. IMHO, the AWD and a huge aftermarket is probably the only reason to persuade a non-biased car buyer. Not to mention the Mazdaspeed will be a very limited production as where WRXs are readily availible to anyone.

 

Remember when the wrx came to the U.S for the first time and they compared it to the 911 carrera 4s. As far as price was conserned it wasnt even close, and im pretty sure porsche had different marketing targets than subaru (2door supercar vs. 4door grocery getter). Nevertheless it was a legitamate comparison on some levels. Subaru cant win every comparison, in fact the magazines are desperately trying to find competition for the wrx, hence they will put it agianst tough competitors.

Look at it this way, we're not being compared to the civic, or GTI because the wrx is a much better buy no matter how you look at it. When they start comparing Subaru's to lesser cars then we'll know that their is a problem. Be glad that we are the company to beat right now. My 2 cents.

 

i can understand scobywrx's frustration, but i think of it this way.

they can keep bashing the wrx and pretty soon everyone will think its a crappy car, that gets beat by anything you put it up against, until they see it in action.

on a side note:
i hate how fast the 06 wrxs offline line are compared to 02-05 wrx

 

now I am pissed I log on to I-club a Subaru site and the first ad I see is a mazda ad that states come see why the Mazdaspeed 3 is better than the Subaru WRX.... you know what
**** you mazda your cars are slightly better fords and ford is the crapyest car brand in the world only slightly better than Chevy... I think I need to send this to Mazda

if anyone from I-club should read this shame on you for letting that ad fly on our own site

 

if they put the MS3 against a more powerful car, MS3 owners would have the same argument you have.

 

they should put it up aganst the SRT-4, both fast crap

 

Get used to it. It's the way of magazines. Read the STI Vs. Evo tests and it's always the MR they test the STI against...never the GSR. It's just a fact of life.

Besides, who takes what magazines have to say to heart anyway....really. For the most part those magazines are based on someone else's opinions, especially MT, C&D, and R&T.

I've driven countless vehicles that some of these magazines have thrashed up one page and down the other, only to find that they were pretty decent vehicles, case in point being a Pontiac G6. They ranted and raved about how cheap the interior was, and that's what I expected, but after I checked one out I came away with a totally different impression of it. It was quiet, comfortable, the interior bits fit together well, no creaks or rattles, etc. It was a good car.

Not to mention, some of these magazines talk about how poor the interior in the Impreza is, but again, I have a different opinion on it. The interior panels fit together nicely, and while some of the interior bits are "plasticky," I don't find the car to feel cheap. No, it's not an Audi interior, but I don't find it to be poorly constructed.

The best use for an automotive magazine is to use as something to wipe your *** on after you run out of tp.