nondezkrypt

On Subarus the flat four hangs entirely forward of the front axle line. It is probably actually no further forward than the Evo's engine and has a lower center of gravity, but the configuration is not optimal. Subaru owners will point out that even though the Boxer engine is mounted north-south, it is only ~two cylinders in length since it is a horizontally-opposed four. Still, Subaru undoubtedly uses the engine-in-the-nose layout simply because it is the cheapest way to implement AWD, although some die-hard Subaru fans would argue that this is somehow a superior design with regard to performance.

Look at the front quarter of a Legacy or Impreza and notice how excessive the front end is in length forward of the wheel well. In the STI pic above notice how the front wheels are jammed back against the doors while the front end continues on mercilessly well-forward of the wheel wells. This is remarkably similar to the relationship between the B-pillar, the trailing edge of the rear doors, and the rear quarter--leading one to speculate whether, given overall boxy shape of the vehicle, the wing was added so that people could tell which way the car was pointed when viewed from the side. The fact that this effect makes the STI look like a riced-out throwback to the heyday of cab forward design (the 80s) doesn't bother me, but the weight of the engine would be better placed behind the axle.

One of the things that draws me to the Z is that it lacks the ridiculous layout of the STI. In the Z, the engine is bias behind the axle line and the driver is lower and closer to the rear wheels, which I alluded to here.

bboypuertoroc

iTrader: (4)

That is, if you're completely blind. That wing is actually functional.

nondezkrypt

Any wing can be said to be functional, provided that it facilitates downforce on the back end when a vehicle is at speed. And as ridiculously garish as it is, since the STI's wing does provide downforce, it was definitely a better marketing choice than painting a giant arrow on each side of the car.

bboypuertoroc

iTrader: (4)

Funny as that might sound, you'd have to be retarded AND blind to not be able to tell the front from the back.

nondezkrypt

Evos suffer from this problem less since the designers appear to have beaten the front end down from basic Tercel into more of a wedge shape.

bboypuertoroc

iTrader: (4)

Tercel huh? Funny.



































NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT!!!!!

Tony (quotes Borat)

nondezkrypt

It's hard to know what inspiration or lack thereof caused designers to excrete cars that look like the STI and Evo onto the market. Most obviously they are both enhanced versions of dowdy economy vehicles, so Subaru and Mitsubishi did not have to kill themselves on R&D--a big plus. Additionally, some execs might have recognized that those guys who had Tercels, Accords, Sentras, etc. with Pep Boys wings screwed onto their trunk lids, black plastic air dams, and chrome air filter covers when they were in high school would, as adults with buying power, long for cars with that same incongruous, snap-together appearance they had grown to appreciate plus the real performance they probably didn't have in high school. There is always a market for even the most revolting of looks.

The overall hideousness of the STI and Evo is a plus for those who don't want to waste time and money even bothering to try to make their cars visually appealing but would rather focus strictly on power gains.

bboypuertoroc

iTrader: (4)

Sure thing buddy.

The cars look fine the way they are... no need for body kits or any of that. So I guess the 350Z doesn't look good enough the way it comes from the factory that people feel the need to slap body kits on them... you know, using your same logic. From what you said, 350Z owners FEEL the need to waste their money on visual mods... funny.

Stop trying to sound smart.

Tony (thinks the Z looks fine the way it is, same with Evo's and STI/STi's)

zman1910

iTrader: (3)

LOL! Nice....

plumpzz

iTrader: (10)

Hate to break it to you, but the Z is based off almost the same frame as a lowly 2.5S altima. Don't deny performance when you see it. Like I said, go drive one, THEN comment.

nondezkrypt

To each his own. Like I said: "There is always a market for even the most revolting of looks."
Not my "logic".
Nope--never said that. The sentence was: "The overall hideousness of the STI and Evo is a plus for those who don't want to waste time and money even bothering to try to make their cars visually appealing but would rather focus strictly on power gains." Note that the letter Z was not even in the sentence. However, extending my point, Z owners would likely feel that they had not wasted their money on cosmetic mods since Zs are not hopelessly unsightly stock and are therefore not lost causes aesthetically to begin with.

nondezkrypt

And yet the Z is not a clone of an Altima with a retro-80s wing screwed onto it.
I didn't.
Already have driven an STI, but my comments were about the car's appearance. I did not deny that the car appears to have good performance.

plumpzz

iTrader: (10)

fair enough. to each his own

davidf

iTrader: (18)

To be honest, you have to expect no less than negative comments against the Suby since this is a 350 site, but in the reallity of it all, I can't begin to count all threads started by Z owners about problems with their Z. The fact is the STI is based around a ralley car which by the way does very well in the world ralley circuits. It does'nt have all the sex appeal as a Z but it was'nt Subs. intentions. It has a complex suspension and drivetrain with no "tranny probs". It makes 300 hp and with a few mods. can easily make 400 hp, not bad for a 4 banger. Plump get your STI and enjoy it. Chill out guys, we're car enthusiast's, we should like all cars, not just the one we own. My 2 cents.

Hydrazine

iTrader: (53)

Sorry to Plumpzz and the Sti enthusiasts but (to me) this has gotta be ugliest *** ive ever seen on a car.

I really like the Sti's performance, exhaust note and AWD, its has its clear advantages, but OTOH I would be embarrased and humiliated to let my family and friends see me driving in one. The wing on the back is hideous and something to be reviled. In fact, all the lines are look like they were just clustered together. Even the tail lights look like .

If I was 17 years old and had pimples all over my face I would think the Sti looked cool.

Not trying to insult anyone, its just my opinion on the looks.

The Sti has a modest functional advantage, but the Z is lightyears ahead in styling. I value function over asthetics but in this extreme case the function advantage doesn't close the major asthetic gap.

A car is like a girlfriend you have to stick with everyday for some time.
Would you date the fat/ugly girl because she will do absolutely anything in bed?
Or would you date the HOT looking babe who will do almost anything in bed?

I guess whats good, bad or ugly is in the eye of the beholder.

nondezkrypt

But it is hard to fault the STI on performance. Instead it falls down on aethetics and badly. For me this would be no reason not to buy one, but it is a big factor with others. I see the STI's true failing being its layout limiting its handling potential (beyond stock). But even that poor engine/drivetrain layout, when applied to a concept like the Prodrive P2, makes for a great car.
Which are interesting reading for prospective Z buyers. It's good to know what one might be in for when buying a car.

Z1 Performance

iTrader: (564)

everyone is an expert lolololol

nondezkrypt

True, but the STI Limited excludes the wing. Also, you can request not to have the wing on an STI (from what I was told).
http://www.subaru.com/media/image/20...sideration.gif
True, but that kind of poor visual integration has aesthetic appeal to a small segment of the automobile market.
Or if you had been 17 in the 80s and driven a modified economy car that the STI's styling now parodies you might be drawn to the look of the STI. Market researchers figured this out; there are plenty of people who actually like the ricer look, and Subaru is doing well with the car as a result.

plumpzz

iTrader: (10)

heh nondezkrypt, i wasn't planning on keeping the wing. I dont like the way it is. I want to get the 2006 rear windshield wing, and de-wing the car. it looks a bit sleeker that way.

plumpzz

iTrader: (10)

tell me about it lol.