[zax]

Because fun =/= fast. Plenty of fast and sterile cars. Plenty of fun and slow cars.

I bought my STI because it's fun to drive, not because it's fast (it isn't).

 

[zax]

It'd be the base 4cyl Supra.

That car already exists.

 

[zax]

One of the most fun cars I ever got to drive was a mini Cooper s. It was hilariously fun. It was like a wicked fast go-kart and it darted around like crazy

BMW or Original?

 

[zax]

Defensive around here...

God forbid someone calls my STI slow.

Oh wait, that's me. I call it slow.

Plain and simple: the WRX is blitzed by just about everything around a track today. The Elantra N, CTR, even the lowly GTI. I'm not saying it's not fun to drive... I'd have no idea anyway since I've not driven an VB of any type.

 

[zax]

Why do you want AWD?

Because yeah, I'd argue the current budget performance crown sits on the Elantra N. That car is ugly as hell but so is the WRX so 🤷

 

[zax]

• To get out of my driveway in inclimate weather
• To get up the big hill in front of my house in inclimate weather

I'd wager proper tires on any of the FWD cars I mentioned would work just fine in this case.

• I hate FWD wheel hop and understeer

Your car already drives like a FWD car with the same types of understeer present in a performance FWD car. The only difference is that Honda and others have cleverly designed front suspension to decouple cornering and braking/accelerating forces. Subaru has not. A CTR will drive far more neutral with less understeer than a WRX.

• I like torque vectoring

Great - but your car doesn't have it. At least not a real system anyway.

• I like the not seeing the traction control light blinking when I take off in the rain

But it will all the same, because your car does not have proper limited slip differentials... the TC will need to intervene to keep power from "leaking" out into any one wheel with limited traction.

Look - I like AWD too which is why I lust after a GR Corolla instead of a CTR despite the latter being objectively a better car in every metric. I am willing to admit my reasons are stupid, just like me... a neanderthal.

 

[zax]

You are comparing a modern car to a several FWD cars from the 1990s or earlier.

I suppose it isn't a TERRIBLE comparison since the WRX has an AWD system that should have stayed in the 1980s.

 

[zax]

Funny that you say that, because Subaru really did copy their layout from Quattro... excepting the less performance oriented center differential.

 

[zax]

Either front biased or 50/50

The CVT version is actually slightly rear-biased. 45:55 F:R neutral split.

 

[zax]

Per Subaru global at the time the cvt was 60:40 front biased. Unless that changed somewhere after the 2015 launch it was front biased.

I went and double checked but the site has changed. I found another link at nasioc to it that's dead but the excerpt says

The active torque-split AWD system usually distributes torque 60:40 front and rear, however sensors constantly monitor the vehicle's condition in areas such as changes in grip of the front and rear tyres or vehicle speed. The electronically controlled MP-T (Multi Plate Transfer) adjusts torque distribution to the front and rear tyres in real-time to suit driving conditions, as well as the transmission and driver inputs. This further increases the stability of the AWD system to deliver a safe and agile driving experience.

This is the same information I saw then.

This is correct for the standard CVT on the pedestrian Impreza, Forester, Outback etc.

The WRX ships with a different "performance oriented" CVT.

It's from Subaru Canada but you get the point.

Symmetrical AWD - Subaru Technology - Subaru Canada

 

[zax]

 

[zax]

This is a terrible comparison not sure what moron came up with it. Lets compare something that is actually similar of course there are none. Let's see how that BRZ compares to the WRX going up a steep icy hill?

Probably quite favorably to the BRZ if the owner installs Winter tires and the WRX owner doesn't (many seem to think AWD is all they need).

The BRZ is also equipped with a proper mechanical LSD in the driven axle (the WRX isn't). Up hill, weight transfers to the rear driven axle with an LSD and winter tires, the BRZ will likely do quite well.

 

[zax]

No way I live in North Tahoe the BRZ would be unable to survive in 4 inches of Sierra snow. Still a stupid comparison.

Based on your experience driving the BRZ?

How many RWD cars have you driven with Winter Tires installed? How many of those had a proper mechanical LSD?

 

[zax]

BTW, serious question, why do you think a mechanical LSD does better than computer/brake controlled variety? Full locker is definitely worse for icy, and my experience with an aggressive LSD (fixed ratio) is more spinning than you want for slippery conditions.

It's a fair question because the OEM traction control does a reasonable job in a non-performance application (like getting a car unstuck from a low-traction situation). Indeed it is the reason most manufacturers have moved away from mechanical LSDs and diff lockers in favor of open differentials in non-performance vehicles.

I'd argue that the best is to have both. There are a several reasons for this:
1. A Torsen or Torsen-like LSD on its own cannot transfer torque in total loss of traction
2. A Torsen or Torsen-like LSD has a maximum Torque Bias Ratio (TBR) after which it is no longer able to contribute torque to the axle with the most grip
3. A Torsen or Torsen-like LSD is PREEMPTIVE meaning that it can mechanically allocate torque to the axle with the most grip before wheelslip occurs

Knowing everything above, a Torsen or Torsen-like LSD is able to PREEMPTIVELY allocate torque by AMPLIFYING the braking force across the axle from the wheel with the LEAST traction to the wheel with the MOST traction without any wheelslip occurring.

Why is this better than using only the braking system?
1. It doesn't require wheelslip to initiate torque transfer (smoother and more seemless)
2. In the case of continuous traction loss i.e. driving up a long slope with minimal traction, it will fatigue the brakes less by leveraging the TBR of the mechanical Torsen-like differential.

The last point is particularly important in performance driving which is why I've often said the Active-Torque Vectoring implementation on the WRX is NOT the same as on the STI.

 

[zax]

Interesting. And great points about NOT requiring slip before it engages. That’s probably why Subarus in general are so popular in this area (tahoe, with some of the highest snow fall in the country). May take some slip for side to side to distribute power but front to back is proactively engaged.

Unlikely. The STI is the only vehicle in Subaru's lineup that is able to do this between the front and rear axle. Audis with the Torsen center OR with the newer Crown-type LSD also enjoy this capability.

The viscous coupler in the MT WRX is a speed-sensitive LSD device - the limiting torque increases linearly with the axle speed differential. It is also prone to overheating with abuse and effectiveness diminishes with mileage. It is not an ideal mechanism for a performance-oriented AWD system.

The CVT and previous E4AT WRXs use an electrohydraulic multiplate clutch system which is overall faster and more effective though not exactly preemptive.

Example was a poor RAV4 that couldn’t get up its own driveway back in winter. Helped the neighbor push it up, tried traction aids, etc. Was illuminating to see the amount of spin on front wheels before rear would engage. By time rear was helping, the front spin caused it to dig through the snow and get down to the ice.

My own experience has shown me that most of these complaints are either because the driver does not know how to properly drive in snow, is driving on old tires that have limited siping, or a combination of both.

 

[zax]

I can find about Subaru AWD implies there is SOME power to both axles at all times, implying no need to wait for slip. Right?

Ah yes, correct. When slip does occur, it is then reactive.

 

[zax]

Don't get butthurt for no good reason.

 

[zax]

Sometimes I just look back at my car and I'm like...

Damn that car is ugly.

 

[zax]

TBF to ford, alaska is a bit more than "winter"

Alaska is one thing. Fairbanks is a whole other...