Subaru Owners.. (Part 2)

[Blueblueman]

 

Yes I'm aware of that. How do you find the Forester?

Forestor nice but it's diff class from lancer

 

 

What do u mean by level ground? Flat road? Your max speed 160?

 

Tip for bros driving 1.6A TS Impreza (Hawkeye, Cockeye, etc.)

 

Took it around the track twice at Sepang. Car understeers like mad.

 

All stock, except upsized wheels -- I'm running Michelin PS3 215/45/17.

 

Increasing front tyre pressure reduces the understeer drastically.

 

I'm using:

- Front tyre pressure 36-37psi

- Rear tyre pressure 30-31psi

 

Higher front pressure helps reduce the understeer a bit. If you often carry lots of passengers can increase rear pressure another 2 psi.

 

Also get your car aligned and get camber bolts to dial in some negative cambers into the front wheel. If you don't drive fast then it's OK... leave the camber alone.

 

This is a great car. Bring it up to NSHW for a drive and you will know how stable it feels even going at 140-150kph. 160kph seems to be max speed on level ground.

[StefanK]

Hi guys, I would like to get some advice on getting a car.

 

As of now, I'm considering (depends on parents) getting a Mitsubishi Lancer GLX 2nd hand, Mazda 3 2nd hand, or Subaru Forester 2.0i premium. I'm considering the Subaru cause the guy who won the Subaru Challenge is looking to sell his car at a discounted price so I felt it could be a good opportunity.

 

What are your opinions on the new Forester? Is the maintenance expensive etc?

 

Do you guys recommend I get a 2nd hand car instead and if so, which brand and model?

 

Would appreciate some advice. Thanks.

 

If you are getting a car on your parents' money, I'd suggest to stick with the Lancer or the Mazda 3. The Forester is a different class on the 2litre alone. If I'm not wrong, the other 2 are 1.4 and 1.6 respectively, so the comparison is unfair.

 

Handling wise, I'd say any Subaru cars handles better but with cheap purchase (relatively), comes high maintenance. FC for Subaru cars is not pocket friendly. And that is almost, always, the deal breaker for most standard car buyers.

 

Servicing wise, I don't think there is a vast difference unless the Premium model is turbocharged, then there is an additional cost of topping up the redline oil.

 

Also, personally I feel that Subaru cars are more raw than other makes. The driving experience is very real and engaging compared to a Lancer, BMW, Merc or Volvo (all cars I have driven before). Even though the pick up is slow (remember AWD), it really depends on how you want to drive your Subaru.

 

If you are a first time car buyer/driver and subsequent maintenance bears a major load on your burden, I'd suggest the Toyota Altis/Axxion/Allion, Mazda 2/3 or other BnB makes.

[Detach8]

How old is the Mazda 3 vs the Forrester?

 

Mazda 3 is a good car and handling is much better than the Lancer. Lancer is running an ancient engine and a very lousy CVT transmission. Of course these are my own opinion. Drive and feel for yourself. Request to take the test drive on a longer route. The moment you take a corner (DON'T SPEED, just a normal corner will do) and you will feel the difference.

 

Mazda 3 should be having a Mazda/Ford developed 4-speed auto that is capable of manual shifting. That is a good transmission.

 

For the Forrester as many have said it is a completely different class of car. But price and class aside, an old Forrester is worth considering since it is really spacious and the 2-litre engine is still pretty decent (versus 1.6 + auto in my Impreza is really crappy slow). Handling wise I still feel the Mazda 3 will do better. Forrester is a bigger, taller and heavier car overall.

 

If it's the NEW Forrester, I do not like the CVT at all. FC or no FC, that is my deal breaker. I'm quite upset that the Japanese have moved from a proper automatic to these damned continously-lagging-transmissions.

 

For what it's worth... consider a newer Cerato Forte with a 6 speed transmission. It should be a better car than an old Mazda or Lancer.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Detach8

[Detach8]

What do u mean by level ground? Flat road? Your max speed 160?

 

Yes. 160kph max. Going downhill I ever hit 180kph but I did not push. Not sure if my tyres were in good shape. Realize conti cars or higher HP cars have two speed ratings for air pressure, one is 0-160kph, and another is for 160kph and beyond. From 160kph and beyond the pressure is higher to reduce tyre deflection otherwise it may cause tyre fatigue/damage and could be dangerous.

 

The Impreza's max speed on paper is around 150kph, that's why it did not have the high speed tyre pressure ratings.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Detach8

[DF7]

 

If you are getting a car on your parents' money, I'd suggest to stick with the Lancer or the Mazda 3. The Forester is a different class on the 2litre alone. If I'm not wrong, the other 2 are 1.4 and 1.6 respectively, so the comparison is unfair.

 

Handling wise, I'd say any Subaru cars handles better but with cheap purchase (relatively), comes high maintenance. FC for Subaru cars is not pocket friendly. And that is almost, always, the deal breaker for most standard car buyers.

 

Servicing wise, I don't think there is a vast difference unless the Premium model is turbocharged, then there is an additional cost of topping up the redline oil.

 

Also, personally I feel that Subaru cars are more raw than other makes. The driving experience is very real and engaging compared to a Lancer, BMW, Merc or Volvo (all cars I have driven before). Even though the pick up is slow (remember AWD), it really depends on how you want to drive your Subaru.

 

If you are a first time car buyer/driver and subsequent maintenance bears a major load on your burden, I'd suggest the Toyota Altis/Axxion/Allion, Mazda 2/3 or other BnB makes.

 

Thanks for the advice. I'm definitely leaning more towards a Mazda 3 now.

[DF7]

How old is the Mazda 3 vs the Forrester?

 

Mazda 3 is a good car and handling is much better than the Lancer. Lancer is running an ancient engine and a very lousy CVT transmission. Of course these are my own opinion. Drive and feel for yourself. Request to take the test drive on a longer route. The moment you take a corner (DON'T SPEED, just a normal corner will do) and you will feel the difference.

 

Mazda 3 should be having a Mazda/Ford developed 4-speed auto that is capable of manual shifting. That is a good transmission.

 

For the Forrester as many have said it is a completely different class of car. But price and class aside, an old Forrester is worth considering since it is really spacious and the 2-litre engine is still pretty decent (versus 1.6 + auto in my Impreza is really crappy slow). Handling wise I still feel the Mazda 3 will do better. Forrester is a bigger, taller and heavier car overall.

 

If it's the NEW Forrester, I do not like the CVT at all. FC or no FC, that is my deal breaker. I'm quite upset that the Japanese have moved from a proper automatic to these damned continously-lagging-transmissions.

 

For what it's worth... consider a newer Cerato Forte with a 6 speed transmission. It should be a better car than an old Mazda or Lancer.

 

Great advice!

 

Well if I'm getting a Mazda 3, I would want to get one which still has at least 3-4 years of COE left. As for the Forester, it would be a new one but like you said, it's a bigger, taller and heavier car. Hence, not too sure if I should drive a big car for my first car.

 

Anyway, I'm considering getting the Forester only because I can probably get a decent discount on that from the guy who won the Subaru Challenge. I saw the new Cerato Forte though and it looks pretty good although I'm not really considering getting a new car. What is your opinion on getting a new car with the COE projected to decrease in the near future?

[Detach8]

 

Great advice!

 

Well if I'm getting a Mazda 3, I would want to get one which still has at least 3-4 years of COE left. As for the Forester, it would be a new one but like you said, it's a bigger, taller and heavier car. Hence, not too sure if I should drive a big car for my first car.

 

Anyway, I'm considering getting the Forester only because I can probably get a decent discount on that from the guy who won the Subaru Challenge. I saw the new Cerato Forte though and it looks pretty good although I'm not really considering getting a new car. What is your opinion on getting a new car with the COE projected to decrease in the near future?

 

First car? Get one that's 3-4 years left then.

 

[StefanK]

 

First car? Get one that's 3-4 years left then.

 

 

get 3-4yrs if you firmly know that after that you have the ability to renew or trade in at a decent value for a new car/another 2nd hand.

 

If not, my suggestion is to go for 5yrs, that's a decent buffer and allows you to plan or save up for the next COE or next car.

[Blueblueman]

 

Yes. 160kph max. Going downhill I ever hit 180kph but I did not push. Not sure if my tyres were in good shape. Realize conti cars or higher HP cars have two speed ratings for air pressure, one is 0-160kph, and another is for 160kph and beyond. From 160kph and beyond the pressure is higher to reduce tyre deflection otherwise it may cause tyre fatigue/damage and could be dangerous.

 

The Impreza's max speed on paper is around 150kph, that's why it did not have the high speed tyre pressure ratings.

Wow, you running +10 to paper Max

[Hotshot85]

 

If you are getting a car on your parents' money, I'd suggest to stick with the Lancer or the Mazda 3. The Forester is a different class on the 2litre alone. If I'm not wrong, the other 2 are 1.4 and 1.6 respectively, so the comparison is unfair.

 

Handling wise, I'd say any Subaru cars handles better but with cheap purchase (relatively), comes high maintenance. FC for Subaru cars is not pocket friendly. And that is almost, always, the deal breaker for most standard car buyers.

 

Servicing wise, I don't think there is a vast difference unless the Premium model is turbocharged, then there is an additional cost of topping up the redline oil.

 

Also, personally I feel that Subaru cars are more raw than other makes. The driving experience is very real and engaging compared to a Lancer, BMW, Merc or Volvo (all cars I have driven before). Even though the pick up is slow (remember AWD), it really depends on how you want to drive your Subaru.

 

If you are a first time car buyer/driver and subsequent maintenance bears a major load on your burden, I'd suggest the Toyota Altis/Axxion/Allion, Mazda 2/3 or other BnB makes.

 

Bro, I thought AWD has a better acceleration from standstill since power is diverted to all 4 wheels and hence there's almost no lack of traction, compared to FWD or RWD where only 2 wheels has to tahan all the power and the chance of tyres slipping and losing traction is higher?

 

I watched a video of a GTR vs LFA and it showed in bullet-time, how the AWD propelled the GTR off the line faster than the RWD LFA.

[StefanK]

 

Bro, I thought AWD has a better acceleration from standstill since power is diverted to all 4 wheels and hence there's almost no lack of traction, compared to FWD or RWD where only 2 wheels has to tahan all the power and the chance of tyres slipping and losing traction is higher?

 

I watched a video of a GTR vs LFA and it showed in bullet-time, how the AWD propelled the GTR off the line faster than the RWD LFA.

 

I think if you compare NA to NA, AWD loses out cos of the power dispersion to all four wheels, whereas the FW/RW model only relies on the power to front (pull) or power to back (push). Which is why RWD cars have better acceleration.

 

But I think the tahaning power, tyres slipping and traction depends more on the handling of the vehicle bah...

 

the GTR acceleration beats almost every car in any category lah... you ask Sp4wn can aldy!

 

I believe it's the way they tune the engine and the turbocharger, reducing the power lag.

 

Anyway, all these are based on my understanding, so I can be wrong.

[Hotshot85]

 

I think if you compare NA to NA, AWD loses out cos of the power dispersion to all four wheels, whereas the FW/RW model only relies on the power to front (pull) or power to back (push). Which is why RWD cars have better acceleration.

 

But I think the tahaning power, tyres slipping and traction depends more on the handling of the vehicle bah...

 

the GTR acceleration beats almost every car in any category lah... you ask Sp4wn can aldy!

 

I believe it's the way they tune the engine and the turbocharger, reducing the power lag.

 

Anyway, all these are based on my understanding, so I can be wrong.

 

Well, in a launch off the line, I am pretty sure the AWD will win la haha ... but I guess if b&b cars then AWD with more weight will probably lose out.

 

However, at higher speeds FWD or RWD will definitely accelerate faster liao due to power loss thru the transmission in AWD.

 

Anyhowwww ... you're up early sia haha!

[StefanK]

 

Well, in a launch off the line, I am pretty sure the AWD will win la haha ... but I guess if b&b cars then AWD with more weight will probably lose out.

 

However, at higher speeds FWD or RWD will definitely accelerate faster liao due to power loss thru the transmission in AWD.

 

Anyhowwww ... you're up early sia haha!

 

I think it depends on how much low power the car have bah...

 

But our Subaru higher gears more power leh! Unless is vs VTEC lah... then nothing to say...

 

Ya loh... sleepy sia... got things to do... sigh

[Hotshot85]

 

I think it depends on how much low power the car have bah...

 

But our Subaru higher gears more power leh! Unless is vs VTEC lah... then nothing to say...

 

Ya loh... sleepy sia... got things to do... sigh

 

I haven't lost to Vtec yet, on corners or straights

 

Still waiting around for someone to let me smell smoke

[StefanK]

 

I haven't lost to Vtec yet, on corners or straights

 

Still waiting around for someone to let me smell smoke

Haha... You haven't met the crazy ones.

Anyway, although I have already gotten 2 speeding tickets last month and guilty of some angry driving, I still must adivse you to drive safe, within acceptable limits.

 

This way, we get to enjoy our precious ride longer.

 

Be careful.

[Hotshot85]

Haha... You haven't met the crazy ones.

Anyway, although I have already gotten 2 speeding tickets last month and guilty of some angry driving, I still must adivse you to drive safe, within acceptable limits.

 

This way, we get to enjoy our precious ride longer.

 

Be careful.

 

Thanks bro, but yeah ... lately I tone down my driving style and agressive mood towards others on the road liao.

 

You be safe too!

[Detach8]

 

Bro, I thought AWD has a better acceleration from standstill since power is diverted to all 4 wheels and hence there's almost no lack of traction, compared to FWD or RWD where only 2 wheels has to tahan all the power and the chance of tyres slipping and losing traction is higher?

 

I watched a video of a GTR vs LFA and it showed in bullet-time, how the AWD propelled the GTR off the line faster than the RWD LFA.

 

 

Not correct. RWD is easier to get off the line than a 4WD or FWD. Why? When you accelerate the car squats, putting weight to the rear wheels and increasing rear wheel traction. A good driver will be able to pull a 4WD off the line, but inexperienced driver will do better with RWD.

 

Anyway a 1.6L engine + AWD... it's just wasting fuel. I'd rather they make a RWD since the engine is already mounted longitutinally.

 

I think it depends on how much low power the car have bah...

 

But our Subaru higher gears more power leh! Unless is vs VTEC lah... then nothing to say...

 

Ya loh... sleepy sia... got things to do... sigh

 

Subaru auto transmission sucks, or at least in my Impreza 1.6A it sucks. If you have a manual the car should drive well.

 

 

get 3-4yrs if you firmly know that after that you have the ability to renew or trade in at a decent value for a new car/another 2nd hand.

 

If not, my suggestion is to go for 5yrs, that's a decent buffer and allows you to plan or save up for the next COE or next car.

 

Rubbish one lah. Car here depre every year... you buy one with 5 years left you're just paying upfront more for the car that you will use down the road.

 

As first car, get one that you will drive around 2-3 years. Then you will know what car you want. Nobody I know will know what car they want until they have really started owning and driving one.

[StefanK]

 

 

Not correct. RWD is easier to get off the line than a 4WD or FWD. Why? When you accelerate the car squats, putting weight to the rear wheels and increasing rear wheel traction. A good driver will be able to pull a 4WD off the line, but inexperienced driver will do better with RWD.

 

Anyway a 1.6L engine + AWD... it's just wasting fuel. I'd rather they make a RWD since the engine is already mounted longitutinally.

 

Subaru auto transmission sucks, or at least in my Impreza 1.6A it sucks. If you have a manual the car should drive well.

 

 

Rubbish one lah. Car here depre every year... you buy one with 5 years left you're just paying upfront more for the car that you will use down the road.

 

As first car, get one that you will drive around 2-3 years. Then you will know what car you want. Nobody I know will know what car they want until they have really started owning and driving one.

 

I prefer to use the "Sports" gears setting, but nowadays I try not to cos of the much heavier FC. But ya, the standard auto leaves much to be desired.

 

I dunno is rubbish or not lah... but I think 5 years is a decent amount of time to pay off that loan, rather than giving yourself 2-3years of intense saving and paying off. Besides, I think with the current payment scheme, the interest payable between 5 years and 2-3years is almost similar.

 

Anyway, different strokes for different people.