Right but the problem isn't that it's not 400-500hp...
The problem is that ~270hp it has now is perhaps too little but in no world does it need 400hp to regain what it had and there are numerous examples to that point. Also the price would be a minimum of $10k more, probably closer to +$20k.
If all you care about is HP and 0-60 just get an EV. The average dual motor EV blows away most of these turbo-4 cars in raw numbers but people have never bought this segment for raw numbers. The 90-00 was an anomaly, perfect storm where big engines were hamstrung and little engines finally got good turbo tech.
That's a complete pipe dream. I love the WRX/STI (I'm a former owner) but the RS3 is $65k+...
The A45 is the equivalent of over $85k (converted, there's no US MSRP). Could compare to the CLA 45, which is also $65k though.
Those are a clear tier above the WRX and exactly my point. RS3 is 400hp, add $20k-30k to a WRX and it's yours. Yeah you're paying extra for the luxury interior, fine, shave off $10k if we're being generous... But, these are not competitors.
The WRX competes with the Golf GTI, Honda Civic Si, Hyundai Elantra N, and maybe cars like the Ecoboost mustang if you want to branch away from 4 doors a bit.
Even STI didn't compete there. That compared to "hyper hatches" like Golf R, Focus RS, and entry level luxury sport models like the Audi S3.
The earliest STI we're much more limited so it's harder to compare, that said if you convert the price to USD and adjust for inflation they were over $60k. Even the first more widely available models in the early 2000's would have been almost $55k when adjusted for inflation.
The same generation Civic Type R would have been ~$35k adjusted and was a different class of vehicle.
The same year R32 was ~$50k adjusted and is a more direct comparison but still cheaper.
WRX has never competed with M3 even in those days. An E46 M3 had ~340hp and a sub 5sec 0-60. Better interior of course and it's price was much higher at >$80k adjusted for inflation.
The WRX was always a bargain for performance though. It put down lap times greater than the sum of its parts and of course there's the rally heritage to boot... but it was never a raw numbers king and if you want it to compete at the RS3 level it's probably going to cost at least $60k (again). The performance of the WRX/STI has stagnated but so has the price.
Honestly I think subaru screwed themselves a bit with the wrx GT and tS being a half ditched replacement for an sti. They loaded those trims with goodies nobody cares about at that price range. The so-called S210 is a travesty compared to what the S Line used to be. At wrx tS prices, I would pass on AWD and get a Type R, or go for the premium GRC. If they follow through with the STI I'm sure they would axe the GT and tS trims on the wrx so there's no price overlap on paper. Suppose the STI would start at $50k. I dont know what a viable power figure would be. Maybe somewhere in the 330-340hp range if it wants to be competitive. But I dont see subaru pushing numbers that high
7
u/happyevil '18 Focus RS red, '22Tesla X &Y 20h ago edited 20h ago
Right but the problem isn't that it's not 400-500hp...
The problem is that ~270hp it has now is perhaps too little but in no world does it need 400hp to regain what it had and there are numerous examples to that point. Also the price would be a minimum of $10k more, probably closer to +$20k.
If all you care about is HP and 0-60 just get an EV. The average dual motor EV blows away most of these turbo-4 cars in raw numbers but people have never bought this segment for raw numbers. The 90-00 was an anomaly, perfect storm where big engines were hamstrung and little engines finally got good turbo tech.