I don’t follow Toyota but the GR Yaris has been out for a little while overseas. They should have an idea of the reliability and potential power output of their 3 cylinder.

Also, if the JB4 is like what’s on the Q50/Q60 that “tricks” the ECU I would personally avoid it on the WRX.

 

remember, a lot of review sites/companies get paid to do good reviews.

 

The fa24 is a tank. It's a large displacement making decent power. The Yaris has a tiny engine making shit tons of power.

Long term the Yaris will die first. It's just the nature of the beast.

Other reliability standards, hard to tell. Toyota and Subaru have been working together for a while now and I suspect quality standards are pretty matched. If this was a generic Camry I'd say the Camry all day long, but it isn't.

 

The GR Corolla is objectively cooler /thread.

 

Well that’s not really the point of the thread, although it is its premise.

Objectively it is cooler on paper. That stated, we all know on paper is not real world.

I am admitted payment on this…. But I see a 3cyl car pushing 273HP. That’s 91 HP per cylinder with .533L of engine displacement per cylinder.

The VB has four cylinders putting out 271 HP and significantly less torque based on published numbers. That’s 67.65HP per cylinder and .600L of engine displacement per cylinder.

I guess I see that and go maybe the optimistic tuners are right regarding the “tuneability” of the VBs engine. That, or the GR is always one rev limiter bounce off of a blown engine.

Did Toyota crack the code, or is there more to the story? Is there a rebuttal to the Toyota fanboys who will copy/paste your post or is the GR really that superior of a car at effectively the same price point?

 

They cracked the code probably with Subarus help.

 

Also, GR Corolla has a fantastic 300 hp from its 1.6L 3 cylinder.

That's not all that crazy in today's world of swan-song ICE vehicles. With 500hp 3L M3s, 415hp 2L CLA AMG S, 400hp from a 2.5L 5cyl Audi engine.

The ICE will be soon left behind, and either Subaru wins with the Solterra or the fate is the same for Subaru. The 2.4L WRX was a silly step. It kept the same number of cylinders and INCREASED the displacement for no additional torque. The golden ratio of engine geometries is a square with 500cc of displacement per cylinder. Subaru had that with the FA20 so why did they change it?

That said, the party trick of Toyota's 1.6L 3cyl should be fuel economy, but the press have found that was a lie...

 

Subaru had that with the FA20 so why did they change it?

They had a warehouse full of 2.4L blocks and had to find a way to use them. 🙂

 

OK OK you want a more direct answer to your question... which will be more reliable?

Probably the GR Corolla.

It's more expensive and more exclusive and less sought-after by the fuckboi crowd that has infested the Subaru community. Owners kill motors. Subaru WRX owners will probably remain much worse than GR Corolla owners, at least until that car drops in value.

 

Googling new rotary engine now.

 

It's worth mentioning that, while Mazda popularized the Wankel engine, it wasn't the first manufacturer to use a Wankel in a production vehicle.

We should also be clear in distinguishing Wankel from other types of Rotary engines.

It's no doubt that Mazda has been pretty pioneering for such a small automaker, but that little nitpick has always bugged me.

Back to the topic at hand... Specific output is NOT a good indicator of engine reliability. There are so many factors in the design that correlate to performance and reliability. I would strongly argue that there is more overlap between various specific outputs and reliability than variation between. HOWEVER, there may be a weak correlation primarily driven by the supporting technologies needed to get a 1.6L 3cyl 300hp engine to pass modern emissions standards. Then it would be important to characterize what we define as "failure."

 

It's worth mentioning that, while Mazda popularized the Wankel engine, it wasn't the first manufacturer to use a Wankel in a production vehicle.

We should also be clear in distinguishing Wankel from other types of Rotary engines.

It's no doubt that Mazda has been pretty pioneering for such a small automaker, but that little nitpick has always bugged me.

True, it's a 20s invention and most companies were making prototypes. Impressive part is that tiny Mazda made it work & made it an exciting sports car engine where GM & Merc's giant budgets failed.

Yeah wankel gets called rotary because that's the only rotary engine sold in substantial numbers. Radial & turbine engines never sold in mainstream numbers.

I will stand on the soap box in front of you and stand my ground with specific output being a player in reliability.

I vaguely remember arguments about the wankel being an orbital piston vs rotary. Rotary is when the block spins around the core. Either way, directly injecting your lubrication into the combustion chamber is stupid.

I agree with zax on this. High/low stress is the ratio of actual stress in operation to fatigue limit of each component. Specific output definitely affects reliability when you compare different outputs on the same engine. But the design & quality differences between engines will have a bigger effect on reliability.

Injecting lubrication is a great idea. Without emissions regs, everyone would do that & triple piston ring life.

 

Also, before I get down from this soapbox...

I detest the "high-stress" vs. "low-stress" argument for a state of tune. There's so much more to components that are under stress and whether the materials are engineered to withstand those stresses. I typically hear this applied against lumpy American V8s from the early 90s as being "low stress" because they have a low specific output and don't rev very high. OK sure, but they have long strokes, cast crankshafts, long pushrod valve-actuation, poor intake runner design, and poor VE. The materials are under just as much stress modulus as a high-revving Honda engine of the same vintage and yet the Hondas were much more reliable.

 

I will stand on the soap box in front of you and stand my ground with specific output being a player in reliability.

I vaguely remember arguments about the wankel being an orbital piston vs rotary. Rotary is when the block spins around the core. Either way, directly injecting your lubrication into the combustion chamber is stupid.

 

And the engine in the Toyota does indeed incorporate piston oil jets compared to the Subaru lacking in this department.

 

That's irrelevant outside of the ej as far as I'm aware the fa engines all have squirters.

And no, injecting oil into the combustion chamber would be avoided.

 

 

I'll be darned. I could have sworn they added them to the fa platform.

 

No, which is why I'm saying that the design of the engine is a more important indicator of longevity vs. only cylinder pressure.

Piston oil squirters keep the piston crown temperatures more controlled allowing 1. reduced propensity for knock and 2. the manufacturer to choose a more ductile piston material while still conforming to emissions regulations. That's a win-win: more knock resistance AND better survivability when knock does occur (which it will). You could (and should) argue that knock is more likely to occur in the much higher cylinder pressures of the Toyota 3-cyl, but given the differences described above, the end result may not be less survivability nor reliability.

Direct injection helps both with knock resistance, but the Toyota uses port and direct injectors (D4-S) reducing the effects of carbon buildup.

These are just several things that indicate to me the Toyota motor will be more reliable, but that's crystal-ball shit. We don't know the common failure modes on either car just yet. The RTV issues in the FA24 are pretty damning right now.

 

Numbers can be deceiving (its all about traction). Theres also alot of variables to reliable like how its driven, the owners attention to service, fuel used, ect. With newer vehicles coming out its hard to tell. If it was me choosing i'd pick the GR Corolla but just as a DD fun around town car. I wouldn't expect it to win any track days or impress my friends.

 

I feel like you're looking for gratification for your purchase. You did fine. Stop looking at other women and wondering if you could have done better.

 

Haven’t picked up the car or put a penny down. Going to value my Giulia tomorrow though and will trade it in if they can make it work. Otherwise my lease ends April 4 so I’ll grab it at the end of the month. ☺ Confirmation bias is great, sure; but curious on the community’s opinion with Toyota basically building the hatchback STI the world wanted. I didn’t even realize it was a 3 cyl until I posted the thread because it took me off guard and made me wonder about reliability… No replacement for displacement right? Figured it’d be an interesting discussion and has proven to be. I’ve learned some stuff from it.👍

 

Well since we went down that rabbit hole … what about the Type R? 🙂

I think real world after mark ups the GR Corolla and Type R will be priced similar.

 

Type R will be more hardcore, more reliable and will have better handling on dry tracks. WRX will be a better daily and much better grip and handling on snow, wet roads, mountain roads, etc. Also the red seats are an acquired taste. If the upcoming Integra Type S has muted styling and more sound deadening/adaptive dampers, it may be a fantastic option.

 

I will offer that an integral part of engine longevity is ownership. While being studious about driving habits, maintenance and general care does not guarantee longevity, it is an influencer. Cars are far more reliable today (period). Good habits can help ensure more trouble free miles. These miles can even contain high stress track miles, as long as the vehicle is built for track use and you follow the maintenance religiously. Abuse a Honda, Toyota or Subbie while neglecting proper care can have disastrous effects. $800 oil changes on a 4 pot engine is just part of the cost of ownership (AMG).

No amount of care could make that Colin Chapman, monkey motion, Big Valve, machine reliable (more to do with the electrics). The same was true of the 3.5-liter V8 in that wedge shaped vehicle (same electrical issues).

 

I will offer that an integral part of engine longevity is ownership. While being studious about driving habits, maintenance and general care does not guarantee longevity, it is an influencer. Cars are far more reliable today (period). Good habits can help ensure more trouble free miles. These miles can even contain high stress track miles, as long as the vehicle is built for track use and you follow the maintenance religiously. Abuse a Honda, Toyota or Subbie while neglecting proper care can have disastrous effects. $800 oil changes on a 4 pot engine is just part of the cost of ownership (AMG).

No amount of care could make that Colin Chapman, monkey motion, Big Valve, machine reliable (more to do with the electrics). The same was true of the 3.5-liter V8 in that wedge shaped vehicle (same electrical issues).

I dunno man. Have a friend who drove a Lexus sedan for years. Put over 300k miles on it, and didn’t change the oil for the last 100k of use. He more than got his money out of the car at that point and I honestly think began to enjoy abusing it.

But on a whole I agree. I follow my maintenance schedules pretty tight.

 

^ and worrying about if their car is going to have ringland failure. I've seen cars treated like museum objects still have problems and guys who drove their car like they stole it never have problems. Sometimes you just get unlucky.

 

Ring land failure peaked in 2009-2011 and has become less of an issue since.

Of course it still happens, but tuners have become much better at their craft, the ECU definitions have become much more refined in AccessTuner, and people are fairly well aware of the stock block "safe" limits of roughly 400wtq.

 

Taking delivery of my WRX this month. One of the main competitors right now is obviously the Corolla GR. Better horsepower/torque and LSD available, it looks way better (IMO) and is available in a hatch.

All things considered, it’s a better car on paper for the same price as MSRP for many VB WRX’s in premium trim (although good luck finding a GR at MSRP while WRX’s are advertised under all around).

That stated, all of that power in the Toyota is coming from a 1.6L THREE cylinder engine. Toyota’s are usually extremely reliable and well built (my wife’s mini van is a testament to this), but that’s a lot of power to squeeze out of very little displacement and 3 cylinders. I’m not an engineer or a mechanic, but my laymen’s brain thinks this engine is about as tuned as it’ll ever be. I want to have faith that Toyota is continuing with their legendary reliability in this, but do we have any idea how much more performance could be reliably eeked out if that drivetrain?

While we don’t really know yet, the 2.4L has already been shown in the Accent of more power from the factory, and the popular rumor is that this engine has lots of room for tuner improvement.

So what do we think…. Will those of us going with the VB WRX be proven right in the long run (so long as RTV doesn’t clog our pickup), or will Toyota’s legendary reliability stand? Will a JB4 or state 1 WRX deliver similar numbers but still be a 9/10 Subaru still on the road in 10 years while GRs are blowing up engines just outside of warranty?

Really curious on more smarter people’s thoughts.

the gr sales for way over sticker ,,,saw one for 75k ,,plus they are more track ready car ,,,rough street ride

 

Probably no more rough than my STI.

Saw a youtube video the other day of some dude with a cobb OTS tune who blew his motor and had a glazed clutch that needed to be replaced. I think it had another mod, too. He was pissed he still had to pay a few thousand dollars...

 

On the GR or WRX? Sounds like homeboy really abused it regardless of what it was.

 

^This.
Nothing warms my heart more in the "cOmUniTy" than seeing a stock GD chassis STI. Those are some of the few WRX(/STI) owners I can relate to.

 

The WRX is probably the best bang for your buck and now sits basically alone with the evo gone and apparently GRs selling at twice of MSRP.

I wonder if the recent reviews calling the car more “tame/refined” will turn anyone away. I think the body cladding certainly will if going for the ricer-fuckboi look. WRX has been a bucket list car since I was a kid and now that I’m in my 30s and am blessed enough to where I can easily own one and afford the maintenance it just makes sense. A machine shop I used to work with in Vegas has a Subaru tuning/shop place next to it. All manner of WRXs would flow through there and talking to some of their customers it was stupid the WHP numbers they were claiming. Cool people though!

Hopefully all the swill you’re complaining about will go to the Si and Elantra N (🤮).

 

I dont think the wrx is being marketed the same way it used to be. You don't see some guy doing a 80 MPH shitty. Even though it has rally in the name its more taylored for the driving experience of a performance turbo car that wont get stuck in the mountains with the right tires. Best bang for your buck is subjective but its a decent entry level AWD performance car. When i first got into the Subaru game with my Sti all I wanted was monsterous performance and HP numbers but as time went by I just enjoy the wrx for what it is and purchased other vehicles to fill my skull crushing acceleration.

 

The "twice the MSRP" thing is completely bogus for the majority purchases. I've actually seen a few people on Facebook snag them for MSRP, others having a few mandatory dealership add-on's, and some paying three or four thousand over MSRP. That strikes me as relatively reasonable, only relative to today's market. They are more hard to come by than most, but it's not quite the Type-R unobtanium people thought it was going to be. Although, all of everyone's comments do likely apply for the circuit model.

I had at least a few problems with the GR Corolla (GRC). First, although not as difficult as originally thought, I didn't want to screw with the waiting game. Second, I'm not going to be 42 years old (when I get rid of the car) and not have a center console. On that note, I also work too hard for basic cloth seats. My in-transit WRX is a limited. Third, ride quality is supposedly inferior to the WRX. Lastly, I don't like the way it looks.

I hate to be the party pooper, but the "I always wanted a WRX and now I have one" statement almost doesn't apply to anything but the badging. The car is so drastically different and has matured so much that if you were lusting for one in 2002, you're not getting the same vehicle. It's not even near the same vehicle as my 2013 GR. This is especially true with the unique characteristic Subaru rumble forever gone.

Comparatively, the motor sounds like trash and can only truly be loved by the Honda owner transplants... I roll my eyes when they refer to the FA as having the "boxer rumble."

 

The "twice the MSRP" thing is completely bogus for the majority purchases. I've actually seen a few people on Facebook snag them for MSRP, others having a few mandatory dealership add-on's, and some paying three or four thousand over MSRP. That strikes me as relatively reasonable, only relative to today's market. They are more hard to come by than most, but it's not quite the Type-R unobtanium people thought it was going to be. Although, all of everyone's comments do likely apply for the circuit model.

I had at least a few problems with the GR Corolla (GRC). First, although not as difficult as originally thought, I didn't want to screw with the waiting game. Second, I'm not going to be 42 years old (when I get rid of the car) and not have a center console. On that note, I also work too hard for basic cloth seats. My in-transit WRX is a limited. Third, ride quality is supposedly inferior to the WRX. Lastly, I don't like the way it looks.

I hate to be the party pooper, but the "I always wanted a WRX and now I have one" statement almost doesn't apply to anything but the badging. The car is so drastically different and has matured so much that if you were lusting for one in 2002, you're not getting the same vehicle. It's not even near the same vehicle as my 2013 GR. This is especially true with the unique characteristic Subaru rumble forever gone.

Comparatively, the motor sounds like trash and can only truly be loved by the Honda owner transplants... I roll my eyes when they refer to the FA as having the "boxer rumble."

It's like the RS fiasco. You could get them at MSRP from a reputable dealer but most dealers started bidding wars and would just ask whatever.