What's wrong with the Bug-eye?
23 September 2005, 07:59 AM
#121
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TruthHurts
What doesn't make sense about the assertion that it depreciates like a stone, is relatively slow, is a failed design that Subaru canned after a couple of years and is driven by people who couldn't afford to buy a decent Impreza?
Explain or STFU.
All I've seen here is pictures of sh1te looking cars and some upset people crying because they know that 'truth hurts'. Next time save up some of your pennies instead of driving round in the 'loser car' of the Impreza range.
Here's a quote from EVO about the worst car Subaru ever made
"But for the basic bug-eyed WRX (a curious regression from the previous generation model in pure driver appeal), the sudden evolutionary lunge of the superhatch threatened to turn it into a long-handled implement for cleaning floors."
Explain or STFU.
All I've seen here is pictures of sh1te looking cars and some upset people crying because they know that 'truth hurts'. Next time save up some of your pennies instead of driving round in the 'loser car' of the Impreza range.
Here's a quote from EVO about the worst car Subaru ever made
"But for the basic bug-eyed WRX (a curious regression from the previous generation model in pure driver appeal), the sudden evolutionary lunge of the superhatch threatened to turn it into a long-handled implement for cleaning floors."
23 September 2005, 08:05 AM
#122
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well cheese pants I've given my reasons why the bugeye is sh1te, just saying "talking out of bumhole" doesn't cut it as a rebuttal.
Or maybe EVO are talking out of theirs as well? Maybe Subaru didn't realise what a crock of sh1te they'd produced and withdrew the fugly after a couple of years. Maybe Hitler is still alive and the moon is made of green cheese?
Or maybe I'm right and the reason these sad sacks get so upset is 'cos 'truth hurts'
Or maybe EVO are talking out of theirs as well? Maybe Subaru didn't realise what a crock of sh1te they'd produced and withdrew the fugly after a couple of years. Maybe Hitler is still alive and the moon is made of green cheese?
Or maybe I'm right and the reason these sad sacks get so upset is 'cos 'truth hurts'
23 September 2005, 09:35 AM
#123
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Kent
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TruthHurts
Here's a quote from EVO about the worst car Subaru ever made
"But for the basic bug-eyed WRX (a curious regression from the previous generation model in pure driver appeal), the sudden evolutionary lunge of the superhatch threatened to turn it into a long-handled implement for cleaning floors."
"But for the basic bug-eyed WRX (a curious regression from the previous generation model in pure driver appeal), the sudden evolutionary lunge of the superhatch threatened to turn it into a long-handled implement for cleaning floors."
"Uphill runs become power-sappingly mundane, while overtaking National Express coaches can become a long, drawn-out affair.? Not my words, Carol. The words of Top Gear magazine"
Truth Hurts, are you trying to be Alan ?
23 September 2005, 09:46 AM
#124
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DBT
Is anyone else thinking of Alan Partridge ?
Truth Hurts, are you trying to be Alan ?
Truth Hurts, are you trying to be Alan ?
As for being 'Alan' I stopped being him about 3 user names ago (or so).
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why the bugeye is any good taking on my points about
1. the way it looks
2. relatively slow
3. depreciation
4. it's all round undesireability to anyone who can afford a decent Impreza.
Feel free to pepper your comments with insults but do at least try to put up some kind of decent argument. At the moment it's rather embarrassing for all the mug-eye owners.
23 September 2005, 09:51 AM
#125
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason we bought our WRX (one of the last 5 new ones left in the country) was because:
a) it was cheaper than the blob eye equivilent by £4k (dont try and tell me the blobeye is worth 4k more)
b) had 3 years of warranty and no classic would have more than 1 yr (which turned out to be useful as a big-end let go after 18 months)
c) the classic was getting to look dated, and the blobeye looked extremely front heavy
No one buys an impreza for its looks. Although the Bug-eye wrx is the slowest turbo impreza made it is still a relatively quick car, and it only cost £17k brand new!
Adam
a) it was cheaper than the blob eye equivilent by £4k (dont try and tell me the blobeye is worth 4k more)
b) had 3 years of warranty and no classic would have more than 1 yr (which turned out to be useful as a big-end let go after 18 months)
c) the classic was getting to look dated, and the blobeye looked extremely front heavy
No one buys an impreza for its looks. Although the Bug-eye wrx is the slowest turbo impreza made it is still a relatively quick car, and it only cost £17k brand new!
Adam
23 September 2005, 09:53 AM
#126
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TruthHurts
2. relatively slow
23 September 2005, 09:56 AM
#127
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by phelpsa
The reason we bought our WRX (one of the last 5 new ones left in the country) was because:
a) it was cheaper than the blob eye equivilent by £4k (dont try and tell me the blobeye is worth 4k more)
b) had 3 years of warranty and no classic would have more than 1 yr (which turned out to be useful as a big-end let go after 18 months)
c) the classic was getting to look dated, and the blobeye looked extremely front heavy
No one buys an impreza for its looks. Although the Bug-eye wrx is the slowest turbo impreza made it is still a relatively quick car, and it only cost £17k brand new!
Adam
a) it was cheaper than the blob eye equivilent by £4k (dont try and tell me the blobeye is worth 4k more)
b) had 3 years of warranty and no classic would have more than 1 yr (which turned out to be useful as a big-end let go after 18 months)
c) the classic was getting to look dated, and the blobeye looked extremely front heavy
No one buys an impreza for its looks. Although the Bug-eye wrx is the slowest turbo impreza made it is still a relatively quick car, and it only cost £17k brand new!
Adam
Agreed nobody buys the Impreza for the way it looks but the bugeye isn't just the worst looking one it's also slow which is a failure in anyones eyes.
Still your happy presumably which is what counts. However it doesn't make the reasons why the bugeye is universally regarded as Subarus worst Impreza any less valid.
0-60 times mean nothing and by relatively slow I mean compared to cars you could buy and run for far less money or even compared to the classic.
23 September 2005, 10:01 AM
#128
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TruthHurts
Still your happy presumably which is what counts. However it doesn't make the reasons why the bugeye is universally regarded as Subarus worst Impreza any less valid.
The only time people have ever laughed is when we managed to spin doin 50mph on a greasy Nurburgring
It isn't slow, it just isnt as quick as other imprezas.
23 September 2005, 10:03 AM
#129
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by phelpsa
The only time people have ever laughed is when we managed to spin doin 50mph on a greasy Nurburgring
Problem is the car IS slow for what it's sold as which is why people in the know have a downer on it and people who buy one do so ONLY for financial reasons.
23 September 2005, 10:08 AM
#130
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TruthHurts
You forgot the time people laughed as you were overtaken and outhandled by Clios, 205's and locals in MKII Golfs.
Problem is the car IS slow for what it's sold as.
Problem is the car IS slow for what it's sold as.
Yes, the only thing we overtook was a coach and a breakdown lorry
. We even got overtaken by a diesel VW Passat, but that was overtaking porsches! 10 minute lap wasnt bad for a first trip though In a trip round with simon in his STI8 (330+bhp?) we were overtaken by allsorts of little hatches!Adam
23 September 2005, 10:11 AM
#131
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by phelpsa
It was sold as a replacement for a Mercedes CLK 230 and Lotus Elise, which it fits nicely inbetween.
23 September 2005, 10:17 AM
#132
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was meant to be a more solid, more refined, better handling, more spacious car than the previous impreza, and thats what they made. It also gained more modern styling, but lost a little bit of performance as a downside.
Adam
Adam
23 September 2005, 10:22 AM
#133
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overall the fugly was a failure which was pulled as it was destroying Subaru in the UK at least. What Subaru actually ended up with is a car that was marginally better interior wise than a 'classic', slower and panned by almost everyone for the way it looks. I fail to see how it was a success.
What's the point in having a WRX that can be beaten by a 12K Clio?
What's the point in having a WRX that can be beaten by a 12K Clio?
23 September 2005, 10:27 AM
#134
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing thats worse about the new imprezas are the looks (questionable, love it or hate it), and the performance. Everything else was improved.
Note how the 03 style impreza has only lasted 6 months longer than the bug-eye! And how long was the Evo 7 produced before the Evo 8? Was the Evo 7 a rubbish car?
Adam
Note how the 03 style impreza has only lasted 6 months longer than the bug-eye! And how long was the Evo 7 produced before the Evo 8? Was the Evo 7 a rubbish car?
Adam
23 September 2005, 10:30 AM
#135
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Err, the clios list price was a little over £16k. And if subaru were trying to make a car to compete with the Clio, they would have made it a 3 dr hatch. Subaru were trying to move a little more upmarket, trying to steal some of those people who were going to buy a bmw 3-series.
23 September 2005, 10:31 AM
#136
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Evo is a different case altogether although you could point at the VII being a backward step from the VI.
Remember we are talking about a car whose very raison d'etre is performance. When you blunt that, it's a backwards step which is why the congnoscenti hate the bug eye.
Otherwise if you want comfort you'd have been better off in a BMW 328/330, that's another story though.
The bottom line is the bugeye was a failure and is now bought for financial reasons only. Kind of a poor mans Impreza, a poor man with a poor imagination........
Remember we are talking about a car whose very raison d'etre is performance. When you blunt that, it's a backwards step which is why the congnoscenti hate the bug eye.
Otherwise if you want comfort you'd have been better off in a BMW 328/330, that's another story though.
The bottom line is the bugeye was a failure and is now bought for financial reasons only. Kind of a poor mans Impreza, a poor man with a poor imagination........
23 September 2005, 10:32 AM
#137
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by phelpsa
Err, the clios list price was a little over £16k. And if subaru were trying to make a car to compete with the Clio, they would have made it a 3 dr hatch. Subaru were trying to move a little more upmarket, trying to steal some of those people who were going to buy a bmw 3-series.
23 September 2005, 10:39 AM
#139
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
51-reg bugeyes are selling for about the same price as the last of the classics, meaning that you have the choice between a faster but less comfortable, worse handling, worse quality impreza, or a slower, questionably worse looking but better qualitly, more comfortable and better handling impreza. Its the persons choice. A poor mans impreza is a 1993 GL import with no history whatsoever which can be picked up for <£1k.
23 September 2005, 10:56 AM
#140
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TruthHurts
The bottom line is the bugeye was a failure and is now bought for financial reasons only. Kind of a poor mans Impreza, a poor man with a poor imagination........
You seem to be prejudiced against those who don't have the money that you perhaps have to buy the very latest model of Impreza (or 5 series?). Snobbery in the extreme.
23 September 2005, 11:04 AM
#141
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I had the money I would have bought a Maserati Quattroporte as a family car and a Ferrari of some sort as a fun car, but unfortunately a budget of £20k won't buy you that! The impreza is an affordable comprimise between performance and practicality, especially in Wagon form. The bug-eye just edges a bit more towards the practicality side than the classic!
23 September 2005, 11:09 AM
#142
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by phelpsa
If I had the money I would have bought a Maserati Quattroporte as a family car and a Ferrari of some sort as a fun car, but unfortunately a budget of £20k won't buy you that! The impreza is an affordable comprimise between performance and practicality, especially in Wagon form. The bug-eye just edges a bit more towards the practicality side than the classic!
We are though getting away from the original question. The reasons why people look down on the bugeye I've aready outlined and other than the fact that they're cheap still fail to understand why anyone would have one.
23 September 2005, 11:11 AM
#143
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Derek W
So what's wrong with buying a car that you like and that's within your financial capabilities? It doesn't mean that you are poor or lack imagination. Quite the opposite probably.
You seem to be prejudiced against those who don't have the money that you perhaps have to buy the very latest model of Impreza (or 5 series?). Snobbery in the extreme.
You seem to be prejudiced against those who don't have the money that you perhaps have to buy the very latest model of Impreza (or 5 series?). Snobbery in the extreme.
23 September 2005, 11:14 AM
#144
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TruthHurts
No just if I was buying an Impreza and had no cash I'd take the classic because it's faster or buy a diesel Passat and count the savings all the way to the bank.
Adam
23 September 2005, 11:25 AM
#145
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by phelpsa
Ahh now we have opinion not fact! You prefere the classic because its faster, others prefere the bug-eye because it handles better! Your opinion, my opinion.
Adam
Adam
and opinion- "it handles better"
One is measurable fact, the other your opinion.
23 September 2005, 11:29 AM
#146
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I mean is it is your opinion that the classic is better, which is why you would buy one. You prefere performance over handling. It is a fact the the bug-eye is 250% stiffer than the classic, which means it handles better.
23 September 2005, 11:36 AM
#147
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Handling has nothing to do with grip, roadholding or anything else you can quantify. Therefore when someone says 'it handles better' it's entirely a subjective matter. Some people believe the MX5 is one of the best/sweetest handling cars ever made, does that mean it's fastest round corners, nope.
However you can measure speed and the classic is faster and I contend better as we are talking about what is a performance car.
For the record I prefer handling over performance and when I drove the bugeye I thought it understeered like a bitch and had overlight power steering- just like the classic.
However you can measure speed and the classic is faster and I contend better as we are talking about what is a performance car.
For the record I prefer handling over performance and when I drove the bugeye I thought it understeered like a bitch and had overlight power steering- just like the classic.
23 September 2005, 11:46 AM
#148
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we've come to an answer of the question : 'What's wrong with the Bug-eye?', and it is 'Depends why you bought it'.
If it was as a comprimise between performance, handling and comfort, then not much other than the questionable styling, if it was for outright performance then it isnt all that quick compared to the classic.
Adam
If it was as a comprimise between performance, handling and comfort, then not much other than the questionable styling, if it was for outright performance then it isnt all that quick compared to the classic.
Adam
23 September 2005, 11:59 AM
#149
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sometimes the truth bites asspipes
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed it's inferior to both the classic and blobeye which is essentially what you are saying when you use the word 'compromise'. It's the choice of the financially constrained and I guess they should be allowed to have an Impreza if they so desire.
23 September 2005, 12:05 PM
#150
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TruthHurts
No just if I was buying an Impreza and had no cash I'd take the classic because it's faster or buy a diesel Passat and count the savings all the way to the bank.
And what if you didn't really care that the bugeye was marginally slower than a classic but were content that you were getting a younger car that would cost less to service than a classic?
I could go on but I'm sure an intelligent person like yourself has already got the point but I'll spell it out just in case - people's circumstances and preferences are all different. Horses for courses, so to speak.