1 2 3 4
wherethefmi
wherethefmi Dork
7/11/09 5:03 p.m.

The fact of the matter is you're assuming he's going to rallycross this car. What if he's planning on upgrading the suspension bits anyway? What if he plans on power mods that would in effect void any powertrain warranty he's going to get with a new car. Dude you're making too many ASSumptions. Plus yes there's more low end torque on an NA impreza the suck balls anywhere else. They are portly cars now, and that turbo 2.0 is a ton of fun, and maybe it's classed where he wants to compete in any case.

paul
paul New Reader
7/11/09 6:06 p.m.

My 2004 rs (e.g. only 165hp) needed two transmission rebuilds by the time it hit 80k miles (both from regular use)...

Everyone I've known with over 100k miles on their wrx or RS has had to put $3-4k into their trans on various stages of syncro or gear failure...

RUN AWAY! :lol:

Woody
Woody GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
7/11/09 6:12 p.m.
paul wrote: Everyone I've known with over 100k miles on their wrx or RS has had to put $3-4k into their trans on various stages of syncro or gear failure... RUN AWAY! :lol:

I have a 2004 WRX that I bought new. It has 106,000 miles on it, everyone of them hard. But I knew ahead of time that there could be potential troubles with the transmission, so I have ALWAYS shifted carefully. It continues to shift like new.

If the car has been well cared for, I wouldn't be afraid of it.

MrJoshua
MrJoshua SuperDork
7/11/09 9:54 p.m.

Mine had a really really bad center diff when I bought it . I ignored it until it broke several gears (1 year later). I then bought the back half of a trans for $175 shipped, and bolted it on to solve the problem. Gee I wish I had $300 a month payments to give up 100hp and have a flatter torque curve.

MrJoshua
MrJoshua SuperDork
7/11/09 9:55 p.m.

Just a FYI to all of the potential WRX owners. The first 1/4 throttle of a mildly modded car is a RIOT!

Osterkraut
Osterkraut Dork
7/11/09 10:35 p.m.

Another FYI to all of the potential WRX owners: The other 3/4ths of the throttle aren't half-bad either!

RoadWarrior
RoadWarrior New Reader
7/11/09 11:42 p.m.
paul wrote: My 2004 rs (e.g. only 165hp) needed two transmission rebuilds by the time it hit 80k miles (both from regular use)... Everyone I've known with over 100k miles on their wrx or RS has had to put $3-4k into their trans on various stages of syncro or gear failure... RUN AWAY! :lol:

I dunno...my '99 2.5rs got 171k on it, stil on the original gearbox to my knowlege, little noisy when out of gear, but ehh....still shifts fine....The motor on the otherhand...ugh, lunched one 2 years ago, got a lower mileage longblock in it now...if I could only find a USDM wrx drivetrain to swap into this car....or someone who can get my car to pass OBD2 inspection up here with a non compliant japanese market wrx motor. ....

Brust
Brust Reader
7/12/09 1:49 a.m.

Rallycross a new car? Just add a few well placed skidplates? $$ $$. Pretty soon his $5500 turns into 7-9k. I'd go with the cheaper car and scan the interwebz for spares. CL showed a wrx trans for $275 which isn't a particularly good deal, but great to have as a spare. Car-part shows them $1000-1500 and I'm sure you can find several cheaper. I haven't had any troubles with mine in 80k. I can't really think of another "weak" spot in the drivetrain. The engines go forever, the parts are cheap (new front axle $60 from Autozone and it popped in in under an hour). Mod parts out the wazoo etc etc.

DILYSI Dave
DILYSI Dave SuperDork
7/12/09 3:21 a.m.
paul wrote: My 2004 rs (e.g. only 165hp) needed two transmission rebuilds by the time it hit 80k miles (both from regular use)... Everyone I've known with over 100k miles on their wrx or RS has had to put $3-4k into their trans on various stages of syncro or gear failure... RUN AWAY! :lol:

I purchased mine from the original owner at 145K. It's now at 170K. Original transmission.

Travis_K
Travis_K HalfDork
7/12/09 4:18 a.m.

A car with 104k miles is NOT an old car. A properly mantained car should last well over 300k miles, or it is poorly designed (yes, some cars will need major work to reach that kind of mileage, but you should be able to drive them that long. The problem is, many people buy cars and destroy them before they get much past 125k miles (look at the majority of cars in the junkyard). The main thing id be worried about is the transmission. I am pretty good at not breaking transmissions, but them there are people that have broken 3 or 4 in a stock neon. If you can afford the wrx plus a new transmission if it needs it, then id consider it, otherwise probably not.

neon4891
neon4891 SuperDork
7/12/09 8:55 p.m.

Hmm, both of my stock neons had the trannies go out by 130K. i wouldn't rally cross more than having fun on the seasonal highways.

Dpvog
Dpvog New Reader
7/12/09 10:58 p.m.
Travis_K wrote: A car with 104k miles is NOT an old car. A properly mantained car should last well over 300k miles, or it is poorly designed

Do you see, Neon4891?
This is an example of why the internet can be a very dangerous place.-Doug

Kiponator
Kiponator
7/12/09 11:57 p.m.

To those advocating a new Impreza base:

My '06 Impreza 2.5i was a pretty lousy car. It burnt oil and actually smoked on startup if I left it unused for a week. Also, from day one, the differential had a weird hiccup where it felt like it was bucking when coasting down in gear, it was even noticeable to passengers at 4500 to 3500 rpm in 4th.

In all a real sweetheart of a ride. I traded it at 44k miles and the PS pump was leaking at that point.

Since then, Subaru de-contented the NA Impreza for the redesign to move the pricepoint lower --- rear drum brakes ? Really!

Travis_K
Travis_K HalfDork
7/13/09 3:04 a.m.

My reason for making the high mileage statement is as follows:

96 legacy, 270k miles, still running, has had fuel pump and cat fail, needs a clutch soon, but otherwise is still fine/

1995 neon, original almost everything, 4th set of tires, 2nd set of brakes, the only mechanical failures were the water pump (before it was known to replace it at the timing belt change interval), alternator, and fuel pump). Stil has the original tranny and clutch. The engine finaly quit at 365k miles.

1992 nissan sentra totaled at 335k miles, still ran fine, had the clutch replaced twice, cv joints several times, fuel pump, water pump, and 5th gear in the tranny replaced. Still ran and drove fine when it got wrecked, and it was even a rental car the first 50k miles of its life.

On the other hand, my dads omni glhs he bought new went though a tranny, 2 power modules, 2 cylinder heads, and a few other things before it even hit 175k miles, but that was more due to the design.

My main point in making that comment though was that mileage isnt as important as mantaince. It is easy to destroy a car in 100k miles, but it doesnt take that much extra effort to keep one in good shape over 3 times that long.

njansenv
njansenv Reader
7/13/09 5:30 a.m.
Dpvog wrote:
Travis_K wrote: A car with 104k miles is NOT an old car. A properly mantained car should last well over 300k miles, or it is poorly designed
Do you see, Neon4891? This is an example of why the internet can be a very dangerous place.-Doug

You sound like a pretty condescending guy there Doug. Why do you keep calling neon "kid"?

For the record, this time I agree with Travis: 104k miles is just getting broke' in....IF it's been maintained and not abused. I'd not recommend a new Impreza, nor the WRX unless you can find a better deal though: 11k is a lot of scratch, and can buy a handful of Miata's.

wherethefmi
wherethefmi Dork
7/13/09 10:30 a.m.

doug has a very non grm mentality me thinks, hell half the time people on this board buy cars without any drivetrain whatsoever. neon has been around the block a few times. hell he might throw an lsx in there, geez dude the new impreza blows donkey penis compared to any wrx even one with 200k miles. low mileage is not the only reason to buy a car, hell i can blow up an engine without putting a mile on a car!

Dpvog
Dpvog New Reader
7/13/09 6:43 p.m.
Travis_K wrote: My reason for making the high mileage statement is as follows: 96 legacy, 270k miles, still running, has had fuel pump and cat fail, needs a clutch soon, but otherwise is still fine/ 1995 neon, original almost everything, 4th set of tires, 2nd set of brakes, the only mechanical failures were the water pump (before it was known to replace it at the timing belt change interval), alternator, and fuel pump). Stil has the original tranny and clutch. The engine finaly quit at 365k miles. 1992 nissan sentra totaled at 335k miles, still ran fine, had the clutch replaced twice, cv joints several times, fuel pump, water pump, and 5th gear in the tranny replaced. Still ran and drove fine when it got wrecked, and it was even a rental car the first 50k miles of its life. On the other hand, my dads omni glhs he bought new went though a tranny, 2 power modules, 2 cylinder heads, and a few other things before it even hit 175k miles, but that was more due to the design. My main point in making that comment though was that mileage isnt as important as mantaince. It is easy to destroy a car in 100k miles, but it doesnt take that much extra effort to keep one in good shape over 3 times that long.

Hi Travis, You can't cite anecdotal evidence of three or four cars that have gone 300k miles and then induce from that evidence that "all well designed cars should last more than three hundred thousand miles if they are properly maintained." It is an example of faulty logic which stems from a gross overgeneralization. For instance: I have met many poorly fed dogs who growl and bite. I own three dogs who are well fed and do not bite. Therefore, I conclude that all well fed dogs do not bite. To which I answer; "FIne, but I still don't think you should go near my fat dog when he has a fresh bone, and I also don't think you should be telling that 25 y.o. kid to buy a 7 y.o. WRX with 104k miles for $10k." When I say "you," I don't mean Travis, but everyone who is looking at the kid on the edge of the car dealer's roof and yelling "JUMP!!!!" None of us here have any idea how that car was driven or maintained, and a pre-purchase inspecton, no matter how thorough, can only give you so much information. I know my "dull but safe" recommendation has not been popular here, so if you want to temper it with some "you only live once" advice, go for it. But don't tell the nice kid to go out and buy a used WRX with 104k miles for 10k unless you've done it first. That's just my opinion, for whatever it's worth.-Doug

wherethefmi
wherethefmi Dork
7/13/09 7:12 p.m.

Yeah but you didn't say all that you said, get a NEW impreza, for warranty and other BS. You're being smug, there's no need for it, I think he asked what we thought of that WRX in particular, not what other cars he should consider, in it's stead.

Really man, he's a big boy, if he finds he got a raw deal, and the advice that he requested online was faulty, well he's still a big boy. Save the holier than thou crap for some other board you lurk on.

You've assumed a lot of things in this thread, one that neon doesn't know what to look at in a car, and how he plans to utilize said car. A properly maintained WRX can go well over 104K miles, no that one isn't worth 9999, I don't know the last time anyone paid the sticker price on a car, asides from hank hill and thought they were getting a fair deal. that car, MAY be worth 8500, but without looking at it in person, who knows.

I don't know dude but you rub me the wrong way, maybe I don't understand you, but I really think I do. If I were your kid I'd probably have kicked your ass by now.

Edirt: added smiley to lighten the post a little

wherethefmi
wherethefmi Dork
7/13/09 7:13 p.m.

Damn you posted something reasonable before I finished my rant, I take back some of the things I said

Dpvog
Dpvog New Reader
7/13/09 7:16 p.m.

In reply to Kiponator:

FORGET THE NEW IMPREZA. APPARENTLY, IT WAS A BAD IDEA. I'M TRULY SORRY I BROUGHT IT UP, REALLY. I SWEAR IT. NOW JUST HELP ME TALK NEON OUT OF THE USED 104K MILE, 7 Y.O. WRX, FOR $10k, AND IT'S ALL GOOD. -DOUG

Dpvog
Dpvog New Reader
7/13/09 7:21 p.m.
wherethefmi wrote: Damn you posted something reasonable before I finished my rant, I take back some of the things I said

If you really feel bad about it, then you see that little X in the upper right hand corner of your post? You could always point and press!-Doug

wherethefmi
wherethefmi Dork
7/13/09 9:09 p.m.

And lower my post count, NEVER!!!

listen FWIW the only other answer is Miata and that doesn't seem to be in the cards for this guy.

Are you going to talk the guys out of every car decision that isn't going to be 100% reliable, if so you're on the wrong forum.

Maybe just maybe there's nothing wrong with that car, he never said he was going to walk in with nine thousand, nine hundred, ninety nine dollars and ninety nine cents anyway. I've got a question for you, what's the basis for your argument against that WRX anyway, personal experience, or someone you know had a third cousin that had one that broke down?

Sorry man we'll probably never agree on this, I guess I just want to understand why you're so adamant that he not buy this car?

Dpvog
Dpvog New Reader
7/13/09 10:09 p.m.
wherethefmi wrote: listen FWIW the only other answer is Miata and that doesn't seem to be in the cards for this guy. I've got a question for you, what's the basis for your argument against that WRX anyway, personal experience, or someone you know had a third cousin that had one that broke down?

Nope, in case you didn't catch my post up above, I'm not big on drawing sweeping inferences from isolated anecdotal evidence. In point of fact, I have nothing against any Subaru and actually think that the WRX and the WRX-SI are both really cool cars. But here's the issue from my point of view. A brand new shiny out of the box WRX is under 22k if you're a perfect buyer and catch all the rebates. I just don't think it's a smart idea to pay almost 50% of new price for ANY seven year old car with 104k miles, ever, unless the previous owner happened to be a drug dealer, and there are fifty pounds of high grade Mexican grass in the trunk, and the DEA agents who seized the car forgot to check the trunk before they put the car up for auction. Then its okay, provided the weed is still fresh. But isn't that the exception that proves the rule? -Doug

Osterkraut
Osterkraut Dork
7/13/09 10:38 p.m.

You're a weird dude. Double his price? Yeah. Great advice. Funny logic. Really, really funny logic.

In fact, this is so weird, that I'm beginning to think you work for Subaru North America and this is a clever ploy to market cars.

Brust
Brust Reader
7/13/09 10:40 p.m.

Yes, but therein is another generalization- not all used cars depreciate equally. Something special (WRX, Civic SI, Mazdaspeed anything, s2000, SS, Z06 etc) will hold more value than their RS, DX, etc equivalents. Also, I believe that subaru's hold value pretty well because they are solid AWD cars that really are built tough. Maybe I bought into the whole "rally" advertising scheme, but personal experience has exceeded my expectations. Now I don't know anything about the particular car he's looking at, but the weak links in the WRX are the transmission and... nothing else really. Like I posted above the repair parts are pretty inexpensive, the aftermarket for mods spectacular, the racing venues also pretty varied. If a "normal" person drove the car, then the transmission's fine. Bummer that you can't interview all previous owners for crooked/backward hat types smoking said weed while performing 7k clutch drops.

1 2 3 4

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
YiIFAtoERnj0NApOJnJNLGTBZ9l2EonbpEdjDrnB6XaRuZ38iD5lhh9DrdH60eIX