[BMW269]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

An AP1 S2000 revs a good bit higher and gets better mileage by being lighter. Of course it's not really comparable in terms of practicality. I didn't say I hold it against anyone who buys a less efficient car, I will always prefer manuals to their more efficient automatic and dual clutch relatives. Again, I stated that economy does come into consideration for me. Not you, carry on with whatever you want, provided you don't drive into me, it won't effect me in the slightest.

I also don't recall saying anything related to any cars being alike, or trying to please everyone. There are enough maroons over here driving Priuii at 90+ mph and feeling awfully pious about it.

Hey, the S2000 has half the engine of an M3 by displacement and wieghs more than 300 kg less. And it does not exist anymore. I don't put any blame on you, but it is because of such wishes that the F8X will no more have any NA V8. But that is good for BMW, half of current 335i owners will jump on the M3 and sales will grow.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by Levi

Hey, the S2000 has half the engine of an M3 by displacement and wieghs more than 300 kg less. And it does not exist anymore. I don't put any blame on you, but it is because of such wishes that the F8X will no more have any NA V8. But that is good for BMW, half of current 335i owners will jump on the M3 and sales will grow.

Haven't every generation of M3 sales grown quite well? It can certainly be said that every generation has grown softer too, of course.

As my earlier rant stated, a lot of NA motors are capable of delivering much better efficiency than their FI competitors, it wouldn't surprise me if F8x M3's get worse track mileage than E9x M3's, and then there's the likely cooling deficiency too.

Global efficiency standards based on relatively sedate driving tests with fleet average standards are killing the high performance, NA engines in favor of FI cars that on paper get better mileage, but real world numbers will likely see little improvement, at least from the enthusiast side.

[BMW269]

Well, whatever, the WRX Concept is just drop-dead gorgeous. Hope it will look close to it once it hits production, unlike the BRZ that did not the the BRZ STI Concept rear.

Subaru WRX Concept
Lenght: 4.520 mm
Width: 1.890 mm
Height: 1.390 mm
Wheelbase: 2.760 mm


BMW 3 Series
Lenght: 4.625 mm
Width: 1.811 mm
Height: 1.429 mm
Wheelbase: 2.810 mm

[Red Bread]

Interesting, that looks much better than the early, single photo. Thanks for the update.

[TK-421]

Well I can tell you one thing, it won't come with those FIs from the factory if they want to actually keep the price reasonable.

[BMW269]

Originally Posted by TK-421

Well I can tell you one thing, it won't come with those FIs from the factory if they want to actually keep the price reasonable.

The rims are not FI's we know from the Ferrari 599 GTO, Lexus LFA as OEM and other aftermarket found on BMW's and Porsches. They are RI-D's, made of duraluminium and are even more expensive than FI's.

[TK-421]

Originally Posted by Levi

The rims are not FI's we know from the Ferrari 599 GTO, Lexus LFA as OEM and other aftermarket found on BMW's and Porsches. They are RI-D's, made of duraluminium and are even more expensive than FI's.

I forgot about those. Yeah those will definitely make the production model.

[Genericuser1]

A number of things will change for the production vehicle I'm sure. A very good looking concept. Its a couple inches shorterr than the existing WRX and should be lighter as well. The current STI hatch comes in at just under 3,400lbs so I'd imagine this could be 3,200-3,300lbs. Smaller engine, smaller platform, etc.

[DASHOCKER]

it looks like an evolution of the early 90s subies. Suburu should just use this sketch as this looks pretty damn good.

[just4kickz]

Originally Posted by son_of_siggy

I wouldn't be surprised to see the next STi get a direct injected motor and bumps its MPG to somewhere around 26-27.

I think the STi is a great vehicle, hence why I owned one. I also think it's lagging behind in how economical it can be, WITHOUT sacrificing performance.

pretty much how i felt when i was looking at the sti/evox at the time. love the performance, love the styling, but i can't imagine paying for that much gas on a DD especially when i plan to own the car for 4+ possibly 8 years (i've owned my e90 for just over 7 years now)

at some point, these "performance" cars will have to find ways to boost their mpgs..

[Jdub679]

Can someone answer a question for me? Why are WRX's and EVO's so loud when they have exhausts? Isn't the turbo supposed to dampen the exhaust noise a little bit?

[b0bab0i]

Originally Posted by Jdub679

Can someone answer a question for me? Why are WRX's and EVO's so loud when they have exhausts? Isn't the turbo supposed to dampen the exhaust noise a little bit?

Anything with a straightpipe/cat removed will be loud.

[Jdub679]

Originally Posted by b0bab0i

Anything with a straightpipe will be loud.

THanks. That's kinda what I thought.

[skins333]

that is awesome!!

[Inspired]

That looks very impressive and I never been a fan of the looks of Subaru.

[M5Rlz]

Originally Posted by just4kickz

pretty much how i felt when i was looking at the sti/evox at the time. love the performance, love the styling, but i can't imagine paying for that much gas on a DD especially when i plan to own the car for 4+ possibly 8 years (i've owned my e90 for just over 7 years now)

at some point, these "performance" cars will have to find ways to boost their mpgs..

Performance comes with sacrifices be it repair bills, insurance, gas.

26 seems to be an improvement with where it looks like I'm taking my cobb.

[son_of_siggy]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Global efficiency standards based on relatively sedate driving tests with fleet average standards are killing the high performance, NA engines in favor of FI cars that on paper get better mileage, but real world numbers will likely see little improvement, at least from the enthusiast side.

Despite many of us categorizing this as a high performance car, you have to keep in mind that probably 95% of people who buy and drive this will never, ever take it to the track. It only makes sense to design the cars to be more efficient in 95% of their driving. Even those of you who DO track the car, wouldn't you rather have more efficiency the 6 other days of the week you're driving it to and from work, even at the cost of some MPG on the track?

Almost any car from the manufacturers, whether its an STi or and M3 is only daily duty for the majority of the buyers, the majority of the time.

I will grant you that NA engines are becoming fewer, but even those have seen massive gains with these new MPG standards. Hell, Corvette is a prime example of that what can still be done.

[son_of_siggy]

Originally Posted by 335iRlz

Performance comes with sacrifices be it repair bills, insurance, gas.

26 seems to be an improvement with where it looks like I'm taking my cobb.

Honestly if this new STi could actually belt out 26-27mpg highway, I'd be on it in a heartbeat. Like I said, I LOVED my old STi, but given my commute now I'm just not sure I could handle almost 100 miles a day at 19-20mpg. Right now I average 26mpg from the GF's 05 325i, and it's still about 300 a month in gas.

[just4kickz]

Originally Posted by 335iRlz

Performance comes with sacrifices be it repair bills, insurance, gas.

26 seems to be an improvement with where it looks like I'm taking my cobb.

didn't see anything bout 26mpg which definitely would be an improvement over the 19/25 as the current sti, but i don't believe you need to sacrifice mpg over performance... just look at Posrches.

[M5Rlz]

Originally Posted by son_of_siggy

Honestly if this new STi could actually belt out 26-27mpg highway, I'd be on it in a heartbeat. Like I said, I LOVED my old STi, but given my commute now I'm just not sure I could handle almost 100 miles a day at 19-20mpg. Right now I average 26mpg from the GF's 05 325i, and it's still about 300 a month in gas.

I was getting 26-29 stock on my 335i and 21-24 with cobb stage 1 aggressive (DC traffic so top5 in the country in worst areas to commute)

Originally Posted by just4kickz

didn't see anything bout 26mpg which definitely would be an improvement over the 19/25 as the current sti, but i don't believe you need to sacrifice mpg over performance... just look at Posrches.

I might have just read someones guess in a post and assumed it was factual.

[son_of_siggy]

Originally Posted by 335iRlz

I was getting 26-29 stock on my 335i and 21-24 with cobb stage 1 aggressive (DC traffic so top5 in the country in worst areas to commute)



I might have just read someones guess in a post and assumed it was factual.

It was my guess .

[son_of_siggy]

Originally Posted by just4kickz

didn't see anything bout 26mpg which definitely would be an improvement over the 19/25 as the current sti, but i don't believe you need to sacrifice mpg over performance... just look at Posrches.

The WRX is rated at that. The STI caps at 22-23 I think. I drive pretty conservatively and I was only able to muster 20mpg max. Usually drove with RWD bias with the mapping on economy. That was on a stock tune with a tight (new) engine. I can imagine an aftermarket one would be better, as the stock throttle mapping always felt a bit off.