# M3 vs 2004 Subaru Impreza WRX STi



## CMOS (Oct 1, 2002)

So the new WRX has 33 less hp BUT 38 more ft.-lbs of torque.
I really don't want to see bimmers with high compressing inline 6es get beat by guys in flat 4's.
-CMOS

WRX:
Engine 
2.5L displacement double overhead cam (DOHC) 
flat 4 cylinder configuration gas engine 
16 valves variable valve timing 
turbo 300 hp @ 6000 rpm 
300 ft-lbs. @ 4000 rpm 
6-speed manual transmission all wheel drive 
full time 4WD viscous center differential 
front, center and rear limited slip differential 

M3
Engine 
3.2/inline 6/24 
3246 cu cm 
Nominal output/rpm 
hp 
333/7900 
Max. torque/rpm 
lb-ft 
262/4900


----------



## BlOOe46 (Dec 25, 2002)

CMOS said:


> *So the new WRX has 33 less hp BUT 38 more ft.-lbs of torque.
> I really don't want to see bimmers with high compressing inline 6es get beat by guys in flat 4's.
> -CMOS
> *


define 'get beat'

r u talking quarter mile or what?

if quarter mile . . . then . . . pffffffffft


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

Also peak torque is not the only thing (at least until we get good CVTs).

You have to look at the torque curve, and that is why the M3 is so awesome. 244 ft-lbs at 2000 RPM, peak of 270 at 4500, still 230 at 7500, and 221 at 7900. Can you say FLAT.


----------



## Emission (Dec 19, 2001)

As if you really need to race that Subaru at the light to show him which car is better?

Do what I do... smile at them... and watch them zoom away when it turns green.

(Which car do you think THEY would rather be in?)


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

in an ideal world, i'd get both.

but the world is far from ideal, and i want to try the STi first.....then maybe try a "used" E46m3 after that.

as far as flat torque curves, i think the new STi is better in this regard as it has variable valve timing, too so the power should be less peaky. the car is probably going to come in about 350-400 pounds lighter and understeer less than the WRX (front differential LSD that actually helps with this) plus a variable center differential. it will be an expensive impreza, but it will still be worth it, just for the experience.

it has something out of the box that one would be hard pressed to tune out of the M3: WEIGHT.

and....if the STi is as good as i think it will be, i'm gladly selling my 993.

just my opinion. i am getting to know the new M3 quite well because i use it as a dynamic benchmark. i'll buy it if the STi is disappointing (but in this scenario, definitely keep the 993).


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

pdz said:


> *in an ideal world, i'd get both.
> 
> but the world is far from ideal, and i want to try the STi first.....then maybe try a "used" E46m3 after that.
> 
> ...


beg your pardons, 350-400 pounds lighter than the OEM E46M3.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

pdz said:


> *in an ideal world, i'd get both.
> 
> but the world is far from ideal, and i want to try the STi first.....then maybe try a "used" E46m3 after that.
> 
> ...


I am hoping you are correct about the flat torque curve but... the torque peak is 4000 rpm for the STi. This is the same peak as a WRX, which I have not driven, and everyone complains about the turbo lag. So I am guessing the STi will have lag too even with VVT. I am hoping I am wrong.

As for comparisions between the M3, they are similiar but not direct competitors, IMHO. Like other posters said, who cares about winning stoplight wars.

Jeff


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

Jeff_DML said:


> *I am hoping you are correct about the flat torque curve but... the torque peak is 4000 rpm for the STi. This is the same peak as a WRX, which I have not driven, and everyone complains about the turbo lag. So I am guessing the STi will have lag too even with VVT. I am hoping I am wrong.
> 
> As for comparisions between the M3, they are similiar but not direct competitors, IMHO. Like other posters said, who cares about winning stoplight wars.
> 
> Jeff *


all true. i really am not expecting all that much for $32,000, to be perfectly honest. i'd be thrilled to death if it goes sub 5 seconds. after that, it is really down to gearing, which may or may not be favorable.

the jury should be out soon as to the shape of the power curve on this car. 2.5 litres is humongous for a 4 cylinder, that's for sure. i really believe it will be tweaked a lot more than the EJ205, which, as you know, is really a sorry-ass excuse for a WRX engine compared to the EJ207.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

pdz said:


> *all true. i really am not expecting all that much for $32,000, to be perfectly honest. i'd be thrilled to death if it goes sub 5 seconds. after that, it is really down to gearing, which may or may not be favorable.
> 
> the jury should be out soon as to the shape of the power curve on this car. 2.5 litres is humongous for a 4 cylinder, that's for sure. i really believe it will be tweaked a lot more than the EJ205, which, as you know, is really a sorry-ass excuse for a WRX engine compared to the EJ207. *


what engine # is what?

2.0l turbo?
2.5l NA?
2.5l turbo?

TIA


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

the generation right before this one, the "world base" WRX was a true WRX engine. it had power all over the place. am not exactly sure, but i think this engine put out the "276hp". forged internals, sodium filled exhaust valves, waterspray, variable valves and 2.0 litres.

the current "world" base WRX has a putrid 2.0 litre EJ205 engine which does not breathe well at high rpms and is also tuned for the turbo to not really come in until above 3500rpms for EPA efficiency, supposedly. it was therefore, not stupidity, such as the case for saab, but planned that the engine is very dual natured.

my main concern with both the S54 and this new STi engine is that both presumably are damn close to build tolerances in terms of pushing the limits of long term reliability. granted, the STi engine probably has a lot more room to go in terms of abuse, but still close.

am seriously looking at an e46m3 right now. just damn hard to pull the trigger on a 55k GT car when i could just outlay 59k and get a 1997 993 C4S instead (out of warranty, obviously), but a bit closer to racing heritage, too. plus the STi is in the running mostly because of price and am not really expecting too much in the performance department.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

pdz said:


> *the generation right before this one, the "world base" WRX was a true WRX engine. it had power all over the place. am not exactly sure, but i think this engine put out the "276hp". forged internals, sodium filled exhaust valves, waterspray, variable valves and 2.0 litres.
> 
> the current "world" base WRX has a putrid 2.0 litre EJ205 engine which does not breathe well at high rpms and is also tuned for the turbo to not really come in until above 3500rpms for EPA efficiency, supposedly. it was therefore, not stupidity, such as the case for saab, but planned that the engine is very dual natured.
> 
> ...


I am in the similiar boat as you in terms of my next car. E46 M3 or maybe STi if it turns out to be a good car. My wife wants me to wait a bit and get a new 996 but that is $$$$.

A used porsche sounds nice but I am more interested in buying a vintage one and fixing it up.


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

Jeff_DML said:


> *I am in the similiar boat as you in terms of my next car. E46 M3 or maybe STi if it turns out to be a good car. My wife wants me to wait a bit and get a new 996 but that is $$$$.
> 
> A used porsche sounds nice but I am more interested in buying a vintage one and fixing it up. *


i think a lot of us are in the same boat as far as "third" vehicles go. i am tempted by the 996 platform, but then again, NOT. they really skimped on this generation of engines, except for the GT3, GT2 and turbo engines. the standard M96 engine is horrible. i have a good link for you. i think i may hang onto the 993 and wait for the 997 as they will probably incorporate the needed changes into the engine that it lacks now.

http://www.technodyneracing.com/technodyne1/articles.htm


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

pdz said:


> *i think a lot of us are in the same boat as far as "third" vehicles go. i am tempted by the 996 platform, but then again, NOT. they really skimped on this generation of engines, except for the GT3, GT2 and turbo engines. the standard M96 engine is horrible. i have a good link for you. i think i may hang onto the 993 and wait for the 997 as they will probably incorporate the needed changes into the engine that it lacks now.
> 
> http://www.technodyneracing.com/technodyne1/articles.htm *


thanks, interesting article, 996 does not sound good for racing. For me it would be my daily driver that I would track occasionally so I think it would ok for me.


----------



## SWM3 (Dec 17, 2002)

My allocation for my M3 just came in for March build and I have to let the dealer know by Monday 2/17. The M3 will be a second car. My 2003 Cobra will be sold.

The problem? I live on a 1 mile dirt road in the Southwest and my WRX wagon has been great. No matter what the weather or driving conditions, the car handles and performs. Mountain driving through New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Arizona and Nevada is a thrill. The way the 4 wheel drive pulls through corners adds to the enjoyment. The WRX was built for me. If I could wish for anything else it would be another 50 HP or more and the new STi has it.

The M3, however, I lust for but it may wind up being a fair weather toy instead of something to put serious miles on. The oil usage issue is disturbing me (see Car & Driver March 2003 and thanks Pinecone for your response on another site). I am also concerned over the lack of max performance all-season tires available (like Michelin Pilot Sport A/S with a Y rating) that can help get me home if my road turns to chocolate syrup.

The Subaru dealer gave me a brochure on the STi but the specs are not finalized. Obviously, there is nothing to drive yet. As of now, the wing can be deleted (thank you!) so there is a good chance that the STi will look like an adult car.

So the big decision remains: The M3 which I lust for or the unknown STi which probably suits my needs. Just 48 hours to go for the yes or no.


----------



## webguy330i (Jan 9, 2002)

Wow I never expected to find this thread in the M forum! 

I too am highly interested in the STi. I have done as much research as one can do right now, short of going to Japan to drive a j-spec model. From what I can tell, this will be a hell of a car. It will obviously be a lot different than the M3, but honestly if I can get this kind of performance out of $32k I think it's one hell of a bargain.

pdz, speculation has this car running mid-high 4's 0-60. The gearing should be quite nice, check out http://www.cars101.com/subaru/impreza/wrxsti2004.html for lots of information... they only list 5 gears though, so I imagine they just omitted 6th since 5th is a 0.97.

Here's a speculative performance chart also:
http://www.car-videos.com/performance/view.asp?id1=169&id2=0

Compare it to the M3 numbers. Interesting!! 

I just saw the car in person at the TO auto show also, and wow. It's gorgeous IMO. Little bit of extra wheel gap, but not too much. My choice is blue / silver rims.

As more information becomes available I'll try to remember to post it up here. All I have right now is the internet and a wimpy brochure Scooby sent me. =/

Oh pics from the auto show:


----------



## SWM3 (Dec 17, 2002)

I told the dealer that although I really wanted the M3 with SMG, I could not order it at this time. Without more information on the STi, I could not make a proper decision. 

webguy330i - thanks for the info!


----------



## M3Inline6 (Oct 7, 2002)

Have you considered the EVOVIII over the Sti!? It clearly is the better performer, and in my opinion, the better looker.


----------



## webguy330i (Jan 9, 2002)

M3Inline6 said:


> *Have you considered the EVOVIII over the Sti!? It clearly is the better performer, and in my opinion, the better looker. *


No way is the EVO 8 a better performer. It's slower, has less power and less driver control (no DCCS) and is already pushing the limits of its engine at 19psi boost. IMO there's no comparison, the STi trumps it in every category!

I will agree it looks good though. 

SWM3, no problem!


----------



## webguy330i (Jan 9, 2002)

Some more misc. info:

Official Scooby Canada press release w/ proclaimed 0-60 of 4.8s:
http://www.subaru.ca/interface/Suba...793&OwnerID=7500&SortOrder=DateDisplayed+Desc

Scooby color selector (note: info on this site pertains to the 2.0l STi engine):
http://www.subaru-global.com/lineup/impreza/sti/exterior/colour.html

Subaru Canada official STi website:
http://www.wrx-sti.ca/

I-club STi forum:
http://www.i-club.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=77

NASIOC STi forum:
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=83

Also it appears to be that Canadian STis will get a 2-stage heated front driver seat. I am curious about sunroof availability, and seat heaters here in the US.  I'll take both please.


----------



## Jeff_DML (Mar 13, 2002)

webguy330i said:


> *No way is the EVO 8 a better performer. It's slower, has less power and less driver control (no DCCS) and is already pushing the limits of its engine at 19psi boost. IMO there's no comparison, the STi trumps it in every category!
> 
> I will agree it looks good though.
> 
> SWM3, no problem! *


No way, EVO VIII is nasty, especially with those clear taillights.

but I guess no reason to argue about looks


----------

