Most reliable WRX/STi years ranked? To me from best to worst:

pretty much, yeah

Most reliable. Not the 2.5
Least reliable. Subameme 2.5 engine

>>17448653
Think 08-2011 had the bad tunes

>>17448674
Useless post, stop posting.

File: sketch-1498716362091.png (3MB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1440x1080px

>>17448653
REEEEEE take that back

>>17448653
Rod bearing failure at 54k miles. Was stage 2 at the time and SOA still gave me a shortblock under warranty.

>>17448842
oh was in a '14 wrx btw

>>17448653
>2000-2007
>1992-2000
I thought these had glass trannies?

I wanna buy one so please enlighten me

>>17448854
5 gear was glass, 6 gear was OK

>>17448879
So you're saying STIs were fine, but regular WRXs sucked?

I can only afford a regular WRX. Does it get fucked even if I drive it normally and just *sometimes* push it a little? I don't intend to race it or anything.

>>17448900
It will break under normal conditions. Only way to guarantee it wont is if you redline it 5+ times a day

>>17448908
Come on, anon, no memeing please. I'm being serious. I don't want to spend a fucking fortune on repairing the car.

>>17448911
>buy wrx
>buy transmission from a wrecked sti
>pay some dude to swap it.
>now have a backup transmission in case you wreck the 6 speed

>>17448911
I can't speak for USDM csrs, but the JDM 5 speed boxes hold up fine to stock or lightly modified power outputs as long as they haven't been raped. Given that the v5/6 jdm WRX is rated at 280hp..

>>17448911
pick another car if you don't want to spend money on repairs when something breaks. Almost all used wrx/sti on the road were owned by enthusiasts and driven hard. Parts will fail and they are expensive to replace. Buy new.

>>17448950
I want a decent AWD sedan. I don't really have a choice here.

>>17448922
Which part of "I don't want to spend a fortune" did you not understand?

>>17448977
base model impreza

>>17448987
>swapping a transmission
>a fortune

>>17448992
I forgot to add that i want 200+hp

>>17448996
I'd need to buy it first. The swap itself would probably also cost me a bit

>>17449022
you want things you cant afford then. Make more money.

>>17449054
Well I can afford the WRX

>>17449059
apparently not if you can't afford for the transmission to break or to throw a rod

>>17449027
yes, but it would be less than getting the STI.

>>17448987
If you're so poor that you can't afford a grand or two on a transmission swap, then maybe you shouldn't be buying a second hand sports car.
Literally get a civic and shut the fuck up

>>17448977
If you want a reliable awd buy something else. I like the buick regal althought it's only automatic. Otherwise a volvo might do it for you. Anything where the geriatric owner brought it every other week at the dealership.

File: 1498684089453s.jpg (2KB, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 125x125px

There's no way in hell everybody who has a WRX has bought it new and it's equally implausible that everybody who bought it used had to replace motors and transmissions all the time.

STOP MEMEING REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

File: Subaru WRX Concept.jpg (131KB, 712x401px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 712x401px

>>17448900
The 6MT is a great transmission. Holds up to loads of torque, and as long as you don't actually TRY to destroy it, it'll do you well.

The 5MT in the 2002 WRX was not very strong. If you abused it on stock power levels, it could break. If you were good to it, you could get lay some more power down before anything goes wrong more or less. By 2006, the 5MT was much stronger, and by 2011, it was a fairly robust gearbox. Still not as strong as the STI 6MT, but fairly good for moderate power levels.

>>17449557
>Sports car

I own a WRX and I will never call it a sports car.

>>17450692
What do you call it then?

>>17450701
A hopped up grocery getter

File: ec7.jpg (56KB, 1000x650px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1000x650px

>>17450784
>>17450784