Talk:Subaru Impreza WRX

message: The now famous instructions given by Prodrive boss David Richards were to make a car that "looked like it was doing 100 mph, even when it was standing still in a car park".
Well... IMO David Richards from Prodrive (an independant company, operating Subaru's racing team) didn't care a lot about what the car was looking like, this was more a marketing concern. And 100mph (around 160 km/h I think) is honestly "peanuts" for such a car. My earlier (and very cheap) 1.4 liter Citroën Visa GT was able to get faster, and my even cheaper 1983 1.8 liter VW Golf GTI was able to run around 190 km/h. On the other side a 1983 Renault 4 GTL is able to run 130 km/h even if it doesn't look like being able to reach 100 km/h... 
Ericd 23:05, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seems strange to me 

message: At some point the 4eat offered on the wrx started using a VDC AWD system different from the 5 speed & more like the STI. can't seem to find what year, at least 2002 but maybe earlier CHM 23:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  auto 

message: This article says "Rally Applicant" and the STI article says "[Nürburgring] Record Attempt" (which has the '05+ door decals for support.) I've also heard "Race Altered." Which is accurate and shouldn't there sources? Fubaz 02:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type "RA" stands for ?? 

message: The RA acronym has more or less had it's meaning changed over the years.  Initially, it stood for "Record Attempt", as Subaru of Japan used the Nurburgring to set a new lap record for the Impreza WRX STi.  A more recent example seen on the 2005MY WRX STI Spec C Type RA, the usage of "Record Attempt" is apparent.  However, not every revision of the Type RA has been used on the Nurburgring.  Currently, it is marketting that decides what "RA" means.  Here is a response from Subaru of Japan (the makers and sellers of the Impreza WRX STi Type RA and Spec C Type RA) sent on 11/10/2006:
この度はご質問をお寄せいただきまして有難うございました。 日頃はスバル車にご関心をお寄せくださいまして誠に有難うございます。
スバルインプレッサTYPE　RA－Rの「RA」の意味は、 Rがレーシング、AがグループAという意味を持っています。
今後共にどうぞスバルを宜しくお願い申し上げます。
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊ このメールボックスは発信専用です。 改めてのご質問は富士重工業のホームページＦＡＱからお願いします。 ＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
It translates to R = Racing, A = Group A for the WRC class the WRC Impreza competes in.  The car Subaru of Japan is referring to is the 2007MY WRX STI Spec C Type RA-R.
To date, the official names that have been used are "Record Attempt" and "R = Racing, A = Group A".
Impreza01 23:05, 30 Nov 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type RA Clarification 

message: It's quite funny that although this model is mainly praised for its performance, there's nothing about acceleration in these articles (including that of the STi's). A lot of technical stuff about chassis/revisions/versions, but even that info can be very confusing for the ordinary visitor (I think that each and every REV. should include some identical info placed in a table, e.g.: Power, Torque, Curb Weight, Accleration - otherwise it is difficult for a reader to understand the differences between them.)
=== Reply ===
Straightline acceleration isn't the only thing this car is praised for.  It is relatively easy to comfortably drive at the limits of this car and has great corner exit acceleration.  The reason performance figures not written is due to variations.  Straight line acceleration heavily depends on the driver's ability to launch the car with a good 4.5k to 5k rpm clutch slip.  For instance, Road and Track managed to pull a 5.8 s and 14.4 s for 0 to 60 mph and quarter mile times, respectively.  Car and Driver manages to pull a 5.4 s and 14.1 s.  For skidpad and slalom, the surface matters.  For instance, R&T managed to get 0.92 g out of the 2003MY Lancer Evolution on it's first test.  A later test yields 0.88 g.  Really, to put down arbitrary figures is a bit misleading.  Realistically, a range should be given or at least conditions should be given with a time.  To compile the facts and data is difficult as the material is hard to find, especially the older years where the Japan-spec WRX was tested only in Japan.
Impreza01 02:48, 16 Dec 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some info about performance 

message: Straightline acceleration isn't the only thing this car is praised for.  It is relatively easy to comfortably drive at the limits of this car and has great corner exit acceleration.  The reason performance figures not written is due to variations.  Straight line acceleration heavily depends on the driver's ability to launch the car with a good 4.5k to 5k rpm clutch slip.  For instance, Road and Track managed to pull a 5.8 s and 14.4 s for 0 to 60 mph and quarter mile times, respectively.  Car and Driver manages to pull a 5.4 s and 14.1 s.  For skidpad and slalom, the surface matters.  For instance, R&T managed to get 0.92 g out of the 2003MY Lancer Evolution on it's first test.  A later test yields 0.88 g.  Really, to put down arbitrary figures is a bit misleading.  Realistically, a range should be given or at least conditions should be given with a time.  To compile the facts and data is difficult as the material is hard to find, especially the older years where the Japan-spec WRX was tested only in Japan.
Impreza01 02:48, 16 Dec 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reply 

message: No mention of the Impreza WRx's involvement in the FIA WRC, e.g. Petter Solberg's championship-winning year. Should this be added in here??
===Reply===
If you look at the Motorsports section, you'll notice a note is included about the connection of the Impreza WRX to the Impreza WRC car.  The rest of the WRC information is filed under the Impreza WRX STI article.  The reasoning is the WRX STI is the car that has been homologated for FIA motorsport competitions, not the WRX.
Impreza01 03:10, 27 Dec 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WRC 

message: If you look at the Motorsports section, you'll notice a note is included about the connection of the Impreza WRX to the Impreza WRC car.  The rest of the WRC information is filed under the Impreza WRX STI article.  The reasoning is the WRX STI is the car that has been homologated for FIA motorsport competitions, not the WRX.
Impreza01 03:10, 27 Dec 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply

message: I think that having external links that point to forums for these vehicles is very important... let's face it, there is no way that we can make this article comprehensive enough to cover every single thing regarding these cars and forums make up a great deal of the history.  I don't think that every single Subaru forum should be listed, but at the same time I think it's important that the popular ones are listed since they tend to have the most knowledgeable people on the subject matter.  WRXTuners, WRXModders, I-Club, and NASIOC are hugely valuable resources for these cars for people who want to read more about current topics pertaining these vehicles and I'm willing to bet that content from those forums has provided for at least one or more chunk of information in the article.  So I ask, if Wikipedia uses relnofollow, what's the harm in having already big forums listed as long as the list is kept groomed and not just blown flat out the window ever time it picks up some girth?
JiveMasterT 05:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Should we discuss the negative reaction to the look of the 2008 WRX?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.161.17.150 (talk • contribs).
:If by discuss you mean add it to the article I would say not unless it can be properly sourced.  I guess it is noteworthy considering how controversial the preceding "B9 snout" was.  Styling impact probably belongs in the regular Impreza article, though. ~ Dusk Knight 05:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negative Reaction to 2008 WRX? 

message: I propose we eliminate the subheadings for minor year to year changes.  Currently the important info is too diluted by info on changes in trim details.  I suggest merging the subheadings into prose paragraphs that detail important changes over each generation. --Daniel J. Leivick 19:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Too many sub headings

message: An anon user has removed the fact tag regarding the added weight of the GD chassis hampering handling.  This may be true but removing the fact tag claiming that weight always detriments agility is just plain wrong.  Try cutting the roof off your car, less weight but obviously worse handling.  Often handling is improved by adding weight in the form of chassis bracing as may be the case with the GD chassis.  I think the fact tag should remain until someone sources it with an actual source not just a simplistic statement about of physics. --Daniel J. Leivick 20:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Weight and handling

message: The Article says.. The Impreza GC8G was used a Nissan Silvia Chassis for a few time.
I'm just wondering what is that supposed to mean? GC8G used silvia chasis? any reference about this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.163.25.206 (talk) 11:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GC8G question

message: There's quite a bit of text that looks to be closely if not exactly the same as text from other sources. Someone needs to go through it and clean it up. One sentence stood out to me as being particularly bad, the beginning of this section.
:For 2006 the Subaru Impreza WRX received a complete front-end re-design, boldly styled headlights with smoke-tinted lenses, a three-section mesh-type grill, and distinguished new tail lamp clusters.
Not only is that pretty blatantly NPOV ("boldly styled", "distinguished"), but most of the individual clauses, although not the complete sentence, pop up on a Google search. Sucks cause I love this car. Sheep81 (talk) 07:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Run through the article for plagiarism please

message: This article is rated Start Class and High Importance in wikiproject Automobiles. I think this article has a lot of potential, but needs quite a bit of work to read like a good Wikipedia article. There is a ton of information in here, but not a lot that is accessible to the average reader. My recommendation would be to reorganize the article, cutting down on a lot of the technical information that accompanies each section about new versions of the car. The article should focus more on the significance of the particular changes, not just listing the new numbers. For example, what was the critical reaction to the new 2006 styling? How do the engine tweaks bring the car more in line competitively with cars like the EVO? 
A good example to follow is the article on the Porche 911. That article is significantly longer than this one, and yet is easy to read.
Compare
August 2000 brings the 2001 WRX NB sedan. It has an EJ205 with AVCS coupled with an MHI TD04L turbocharger. The engine produces 250 PS (184 kW) at 6000 rpm with 34 kg·m (246 ft·lbf, 333 N·m) at 3600 rpm. The wheels are 16-inch (410 mm) in diameter. The car uses 2 pot/1 pot front and rear brakes. The front brake rotors are ventilated while the rear are solid disks. It has a Torsen rear LSD and a 4.44 final drive ratio. The transmission has close-ratio gears unique to Subaru of Japan at that point in time. The car has a curb weight of 1,340 kg (2,954 lb).
To this section from the 911 article:
In 1974 Porsche introduced the first production turbocharged 911. Although called simply Porsche 911 Turbo in Europe, it was marketed as Porsche 930 (930 being its internal type number) in North America. The body shape is distinctive thanks to wide wheel-arches to accommodate the wide tires, and a large rear spoiler often known as a "whale tail" on the early cars, and "tea-tray" on the later ones. Starting out with a 3.0 L engine 260 PS (190 kW; 260 hp), these early cars are known for their exhilarating acceleration coupled with challenging handling characteristics and extreme turbo lag. For 1978, capacity rose to 3.3 L 300 PS (220 kW; 300 hp), and an intercooler was added which was placed under the rear spoiler.
This article is a good start, but it can definitely get a lot better. -Bonus Onus (talk) 19:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Review