Cobalt SS vs. WRX?? Which one to buy
- Thread starter Todd@RUPES
- Start date
imported_Denzil
New member
Scottwax said:
I know exactly what you mean there Scott. I detailed my buddy's Mazda3 and it took longer than usual just to vacuum it. Not only that but it was black carpet so every little spec of dirt was noticeable and all sorts of hair loves to thread between the carpet strands. Such a PITA! :LOLOL
SuperBuick
Member
I have to re-disagree, and I stress that I am not posting with any animosity towards your opinion, which you are entitled to, and that my post is just my opinion, that's all...
The cheapest feeling car I've ever sat in was a Dodge Caliber, however a close second is the toyota camry. Does that mean the Caliber and Camry are crap? No. Clearly the Camry is a good car, and while I would never own a caliber personally, it didnt give me the impression it was going to break down, and it drove well enough.
My wife and I own 4 cars; a jeep, a ford truck, a corvette, and a porsche, and the jeep and corvette are MUCH nicer inside than the porsche. Not to mention they are tenfold more reliable, far cheaper to repair, and were a far better value when new. Even if your thing is molesting dashboards, the new stuff, particularly GM, is equal to or better than the imaginary japanese stalwarts of quality (though you can't deny the beauty and wonder of a honda engine revving to the sky and back!). And speaking of stuffing things in cracks to prevent problems, our boxster rattles incessantly (side airbag module is always coming loose) and a friend with a 2005 M3 has cardboard stuck in the back deck between the rear window gap to eliminate the incessant rattling. So should we say all BMW M3s are poor quality? NO! They are a great car (if a little overpriced in my opinion) Did you know the Mazda 3 shares its chassis (and was developed in conjunction) with Ford and Volvo? The bottom line is that one type of car is not always better than another. There is no blanket statement that applies like "american cars are bad". The Hyundai example is a great one. One poster mentioned terrible resale value - why is this? Because so many people THINK Hyundais are crap, based on something that was true YEARS ago.
Lastly, and this coming from someone who still has half of his family back in England, Jeremy Clarkson is blatantly anti-american, and a self-contradicting, blowhard moron. (He is also HILARIOUS, and I love the show) Using his opinions on cars for any reality-based comparison should not be allowed!
I would take the Cobalt over sooo many over priced under performing cars out there.
Would I take it over a WRX? That is a hard question considering the WRX is AWD making it a lot more function friendly. However considering the Cobalt breaks and handles better and will be cheaper it makes it easy to pick the Cobalt.
Good question though it would really end up being answered after some seat time. On paper the Cobalt has the edge IMO
Would I take it over a WRX? That is a hard question considering the WRX is AWD making it a lot more function friendly. However considering the Cobalt breaks and handles better and will be cheaper it makes it easy to pick the Cobalt.
Good question though it would really end up being answered after some seat time. On paper the Cobalt has the edge IMO
imported_Aurora40
New member
Just my two cents. I've been really amazed by everything I'm reading about the Cobalt SS. I've never driven either, though. But I can't get that SS out of my mind. It sounds like GM hit a home run with it.
Beside performance, the fuel economy numbers are also no-contest, with the WRX registering 18/25 vs the SS's 22/30. If you are talking STi, it's 17/23. The SS also undercuts on price both the WRX and STi (the STi by a substantial margin). For interiors, I'd say a) who cares in a performace car, and b) you are comparing to a Subaru, not a Merc... Do Subies set some bar for interiors that I'm not aware of?
I assume you have seen this by now:
The Lightning Lap, 2008 - Feature/Features/Classic Cars/High Performance/Hot Lists/Reviews/Car and Driver - Car And Driver
Beside performance, the fuel economy numbers are also no-contest, with the WRX registering 18/25 vs the SS's 22/30. If you are talking STi, it's 17/23. The SS also undercuts on price both the WRX and STi (the STi by a substantial margin). For interiors, I'd say a) who cares in a performace car, and b) you are comparing to a Subaru, not a Merc... Do Subies set some bar for interiors that I'm not aware of?
I assume you have seen this by now:
The Lightning Lap, 2008 - Feature/Features/Classic Cars/High Performance/Hot Lists/Reviews/Car and Driver - Car And Driver
critical_level2
New member
Aurora40 said:
One thing you need to remember is the STI and the Cobalt SS are 2 different leagues. That would be like comparing a Corvette and a V6 Mustang. 2 entirely different vehicles.
If you are set on FWD Turbo, What about the VW GTI. They have always been very good all around and there is tons of aftermarket support for them.
imported_Picus
New member
Just on the quality thing. I think it is important to make the distinction between a few things.
1) Mechanical reliability.
2) Exterior/interior part/fitment and finish quality.
3) design.
I think a lot of "car guys" talking about cars on forums sort of mish-mash these together, or talk about them interchangeably. For example, someone might say a domestic is "poor quality" and mean that they use low grade plastic on the interior. That doesn't mean the car is of poor quality, it means one material on the interior is. Example: people often comment the 3-series has a "cheap" interior, what they generally mean is the design is spartan, so it looks like plush than competitors. The actual material quality/fitment/finish is quite good. I've had people say Range Rovers are of fantastic quality - which is true in terms of interior materials, but mechanically they tend to suck. I hope this makes sense.
For the Cobalt; in terms of interior quality I am not a huge fan. Fitment is good, but the quality of materials is eh. Mechanically I am sure it is a fine car. The Subaru's interior is more appealing in a design sense to me, and the materials are of slightly better quality (imo), but I don't think it will be any more mechanically reliable than a cobalt.
1) Mechanical reliability.
2) Exterior/interior part/fitment and finish quality.
3) design.
I think a lot of "car guys" talking about cars on forums sort of mish-mash these together, or talk about them interchangeably. For example, someone might say a domestic is "poor quality" and mean that they use low grade plastic on the interior. That doesn't mean the car is of poor quality, it means one material on the interior is. Example: people often comment the 3-series has a "cheap" interior, what they generally mean is the design is spartan, so it looks like plush than competitors. The actual material quality/fitment/finish is quite good. I've had people say Range Rovers are of fantastic quality - which is true in terms of interior materials, but mechanically they tend to suck. I hope this makes sense.
For the Cobalt; in terms of interior quality I am not a huge fan. Fitment is good, but the quality of materials is eh. Mechanically I am sure it is a fine car. The Subaru's interior is more appealing in a design sense to me, and the materials are of slightly better quality (imo), but I don't think it will be any more mechanically reliable than a cobalt.
Picus said:
This was the message i was trying to get across. Its how it feels, not saying the car is just going to fall apart. It just feels/looks cheap.
And to the poster who brought up the 3 sharing ford parts:
Yes, the 3 does share chassis with the Euro Ford market. However, thats not to say that mazda=ford. Ford uses mazdas design and technology for their products (i.e sharing chassis) and mazda uses ford parts to keep their costs down. Its not saying that because they are Ford parts mean that the 3 is a cheap ford car. Im talking specifically about Ford cars with ford design and build that feel cheap to me. (like the new focus)
Because of Fords economic situation, they are actually selling back a marjority of their share back to mazda (they currently hold 33.4 percent) 14% goes back to mazda i believe, while another small percentage goes to various japanese insurance companies. Ford needs mazda to stay afloat IMO.
but comon. who doesnt love that boxer growl?
:heelclick
NCZ13 said:
Actually, the chassis is Ford's design, the engine is Mazda's. The current American Focus is irrelevant and will be discontinued in 2010 to make way for the real Focus currently offered in Europe.
Has this been confirmed? Last I was told, this is all speculation at this point. I agree that Mazda's partnership is one of the rare ones that has worked in the industry, I wouldn't say that Ford needs Mazda though; one could argue its the other way around, Mazda was a mess until Ford took a majority interest IMO. Ford and Mazda will continue to work closely together regardless of what happens though.
On Topic:
BTW, I replied to the original poster, as I have a '08 WRX, but the post is pending approval as I included a link and am a new user. In summary, good car but crappy paint quality. I'll wait for that post to get approved rather then repeating myself now.
MASKDMARVL
New member
Scottwax said:
My thoughts exactly. Plus I read today in the motor trend mag that WRX beat out the SS the EVO, and the 3. In all test. Gets my vote is'nt it also 4 WD.
MASKDMARVL
New member
BigJimZ28 said:
AWD OK dude. Ill give an up date on the issue tomorrow. It was the issue with the new gallardo lime green. LP5604
imported_rydawg1
New member
Todd, buy an Audi S5 with all the money you have, cheapo:rofl
imported_Picus
New member
Nevermind the S5, buy a Carrera S.
imported_DJ Mayo
New member
WRX end thread.
imported_rydawg1
New member
Picus said:
That's what he should be buying his wife.
I'd vote for the wrx. Especially the 2009 wrx with increased in power, and ton's of potentials. I'd check out NASIOC.COM, its a subaru forum where you can find out all the good / bad things about the wrx.
From my experience ( I have an 03), the wrx has a glass tranny, so if you have on doing ALOT of "very spirited driving" I would think twice and go straight for the STi or even an EVO. But if you want something thats a DD with good power and great handling and occasional "spirited driving" the wrx is more than enough car.
Bad thing about a subaru besides the tranny (again this was the issue with previous wrx models, not sure how the new ones are) is that people often mistake it for a diesel (at least that what mines get mistaken for)
The SS on the other, is... well ehh. Im biased, as I hate the SS or the neon SRT4, I think these cars are GM's way of trying to get a piece of the pie ( the tuner world) without really thinking about it. I'm look at the styling, its ugly as hell and makes it more ridiculous with the stupid looking wing that simply does not flow the body lines.
But one good note for the SS, a few years back on the speed channel they did a challenge, and took the SS and other "tuner" cars and had "tuners" built them for racing specs, the SS of course was backed my GM while the others car were done with private tune shops. The SS won the challenge, but thats after ever piece of the ecotec motor was re-vamp.
My vote, wrx, its what makes a subaru a subaru.
If that isnt good enough check out this video, This should make you wanna buy a SUBARU
Subaru Impreza by FORMAT67.NET on Vimeo
From my experience ( I have an 03), the wrx has a glass tranny, so if you have on doing ALOT of "very spirited driving" I would think twice and go straight for the STi or even an EVO. But if you want something thats a DD with good power and great handling and occasional "spirited driving" the wrx is more than enough car.
Bad thing about a subaru besides the tranny (again this was the issue with previous wrx models, not sure how the new ones are) is that people often mistake it for a diesel (at least that what mines get mistaken for)
The SS on the other, is... well ehh. Im biased, as I hate the SS or the neon SRT4, I think these cars are GM's way of trying to get a piece of the pie ( the tuner world) without really thinking about it. I'm look at the styling, its ugly as hell and makes it more ridiculous with the stupid looking wing that simply does not flow the body lines.
But one good note for the SS, a few years back on the speed channel they did a challenge, and took the SS and other "tuner" cars and had "tuners" built them for racing specs, the SS of course was backed my GM while the others car were done with private tune shops. The SS won the challenge, but thats after ever piece of the ecotec motor was re-vamp.
My vote, wrx, its what makes a subaru a subaru.
If that isnt good enough check out this video, This should make you wanna buy a SUBARU
Subaru Impreza by FORMAT67.NET on Vimeo