This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The 4th gen section has no mention of the now-released WRX and STi variants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.84.49.122 ( talk) 02:28, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
This article needs merging with Impreza, probably. There are too many Impreza pages in the Subaru category! Andrewferrier 15:27, 2004 Nov 10 (UTC)
I think this has been done. Impreza now redirects here. -- SportWagon 17:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone here think this thing looks like a hypermodern AMC Pacer? - Litefantastic 23:43, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
I remember Pacers. An Impreza Wagon doesn't really look that much like one in real life.-- SportWagon 17:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Can you say Subaru 360, Subaru Justy ? And the Legacy isn't "large". Do they mean precise "compact" versus "sub-compact" or "micro" or something? Or is the claim just plain wrong?-- SportWagon 17:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
"The basic turbocharged motor, the EJ20, produces 211 bhp."
The "EJ20" was the single overhead camshaft engine with either 8 valves (88) or 16 valves.
The "EJ20T" was the twincam 16 valve turbo which produced upwards of 180HP
Actually, EJ20 is a block designation, it has nothing to do with the heads or turbo.
^^^ Don't forget to sign! EJ22T is different block to the non T model, with design considerations made for Turbo-charging. It was used before the 97-99 redesign. Daniellis89 ( talk) 23:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Would it be possible when adding / changing images that the full spec is included in the image name or comment, including the region. -- Jbattersby 11:21, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a separate page for the RS just like the WRX and STi? -- Arun 23:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you; at the least, this article needs more info about the RS, and perhaps a picture of the RS. Also, since there are seperate articles about the WRX and WRX STI, a lot of the info about those cars can be cut out of this article. Maybe this article could benefit from a chart explaining the differences in the cars, or a more organized listing of the trim levels. The differences in the trim levels of the Impreza are more extreme than most cars, and the Impreza could be viewed as either a slow granny-driving station wagon, a rugged off-road vehicle, or a high performance sports car.
At one time (5 years ago) it was difficult to find die-cast replicas of Imprezas, or Subarus in general. There are far more available now, however, both as collectibles and pure toy variety (I myself sometimes find the latter more "collectible", but anyway...). IMHO the new section says little of interest (toy and collectible replicas are made of most successful automobiles), and is nowhere near complete. I mean, they don't even mention AutoArt. (And yet a complete list would probably be off-topic for the article).-- SportWagon 17:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be some mention that the 2.5L engine used in the USDM STi is the EJ257, and the 2.0L JDM and EDM versions are the EJ205?
There's a silly amount of external links here, mostly to fan sites and other non-encyclopedic sources. Can someone take a look a tidy them up? StopItTidyUp 20:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
once again the engine range and data is not complete.
From 92 the impreza was available with an ej15, ej16 or ej18
In 96 the impreza wagon was available with ej20
Not all nonKei Subarus are AWD. In North America that may be the case, but then the reference to Kei cars is pointless. If JDM Kei cars are mentioned, then it must be said that Subaru markets a base model FWD Imprez in Japan.
I think I've seen Impreza's used in road course racing. 67.188.172.165 20:01, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
For the 2008 model it's said the base model have a 1.5L engine, that doesn't sound right, I'm fairly sure 2.5 was intended.
talk about fuel efficiency of Subaru Impreza models? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.138.245 ( talk) 13:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
The very first Impreza had a very strange grill partially closed off with a plastic panel. It didn't last very long, but does pre-date the more open type shown in the 1st generation images in this article. Can anybody find a picture of the original? Paul Fisher 10:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
The blue impreza doesn't do the article any favors and it is now 2008. I hope the old image doesn't have a fan and tries to defend his vehicles image with the old one. Maybe someone will upload a nicer image of the latest impreza, just anything but the bug eyes blue sedan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dddike ( talk • contribs) 16:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
IFCAR please stop reverting to the picture of the sedan. The 3rd generation Impreza is a hatchback in every market in the world except North America. This was a major departure for Subaru and has drawn much comment in the motoring press. Hence the infobox picture should be a hatchback. By all means include the sedan in a gallery to indicate the difference, but it doesn't belong as the lead image for this section.
In addition, two or more pictures of the same car do have a particular value if they demonstrate different facets of the vehicle. It is not unreasonable to show a front, rear and profile view of the same car. Paul Fisher ( talk) 04:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted to the version that seems more correct (dates mesh with filenames) and has more references. It would be great if both of you would discuss your differences instead of reverting each other as vandalism. -- BillWeiss | Talk 14:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
At the beginning of this article, one sees links immediately to the WRX, WRX STI, and Outback. Is this really necessary? It just strikes me as odd in comparison to other articles about car models. I know they're very important, but I think it would be more fitting to be placed somewhere in the main text, perhaps before the Contents. RotisserieEngine ( talk) 06:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Atleast in the Finnish Subaru site you can "order" a diesel version already, [4]
So the article is very outdated with the "Diesel" section in the third generation. The infobox could be updated with the 2.0 liter Diesel as well, or is it only US-centic, as it does not even list the 1.5 L version for Japan and Europe? -- Pudeo ' 23:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
The article stated:
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |publisher=
and |title=
(
help)Sorry, but Polish dictionary is not a proof. Do you know what Ford Kuga means in Serbo-Croatian? Here's The answer. So, please give as a source, preferably from Subaru, which states the origin of the name. No such user ( talk) 19:51, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
If the Outback was crying out to be merged into the Legacy, why not do the same for the Impreza. It would make navigating through the WRX and STi versions so much easier, the logic used for the Outback and Legacy merger ( Regushee ( talk) 18:54, 25 May 2012 (UTC))
Have an umbrella article titled Subaru Impreza with the following sub-pages:
The WRX and WRX STI pages would be turned into a single disambiguation article, akin to Subaru Outback. And to quash any concerns that the next generation WRX will be an independent model separate from the Impreza; that is true, but the new car will be migrating to the "Subaru WRX" nameplate, completely eschewing the Impreza title and allowing a new Subaru WRX page to exist. OSX ( talk • contributions) 04:19, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
I withdraw my opposition, I am now on board. MarcusHookPa ( talk) 16:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
For the second generation article, I believe that we should leave the information boxes for each model (Impreza/WRX/WRX STi/9-2X) as they all have slightly different weights and slightly different engines (especially Impreza) as we did for the individual generation Legacy articles. MarcusHookPa ( talk) 23:55, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but merging these pages has done nothing but add complication to an already difficult to read article. I realize the Wikipedia plan involves making things as "encyclopedic" as possible, but you have to understand your target audience before making such sweeping changes. The people who wiki Impreza are NOT the same people who wiki WRX's/STI's, and pruning relevant information about these models to make them fit on one page is a disservice to everyone involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.64.16.132 ( talk) 17:09, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Okay, where is the first generation? I know Impreza's were made in the 80's. I am really confused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookster451 ( talk • contribs) 14:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
I see that in the past several articles for Impreza were merged, and understand that reasoning... However, I'm sure many of us are aware the WRX is it's own model now. So... What to do?
Proposal 1: Separate Article for WRX. Pull all the meat of the WRX stuff in there, and reference back to Impreza article when necessary. Likewise, in the Impreza article, mention the WRX, but no specifics.
Pros: - Both articles contain all the important information, and are relatively thorough.
Cons: - Maintenance. lots of duplicated information and crosslinking.
Proposal 2: Separate article for WRX (not to be confused with the former Impreza WRX). Simply start with the 2015 model. In history, mention the Impreza article and that they used to be the same model. also highlight the differences from the Impreza to establish the new platform. (truthfully, I don't know how different it is, but know that a lot of different "model" subarus are very similar e.g. 1999 Forester and Impreza.)
Pros: - Accurately matches the current branding. - Little initial work to be done.
Cons: - That Will make the WRX article pretty short, but that's fine for now I think. Many readers if not most will have to navigate to the Impreza article to get older info. - Also, over time that Impreza article will seem to have little relevance to the WRX.
As it stands, the current structure is ok, but somewhere down the road this will have to be addressed. I think this will please a lot of people who liked the separate articles in the past too i.e. the performance crowd versus practical shoppers.
Other suggestions are welcome, so feedback would be great! AutumnWind 16:53, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Update: I already see some flaws in my logic... I was under the impression the chassis is different with the newest WRX models. But anyway, given that the last debate on this was a while ago, maybe worth rehashing.AutumnWind 17:24, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
In the section "First generation (1992–2000; GC, GF, GM)" it says:
"Trim levels were LX, GL and Sport generation. LX models were front-wheel drive, and powered by a 1.6 L engine; these were four-door only. GL trim levels were either front-wheel drive (Subaru badged these 2WD) or all-wheel-drive (badged AWD); cars launched in 1993 had a choice of 1.6 and 1.8 flat-4 engines, the 1.6 being available with 2WD, the 1.8 an AWD version only. From 1996, the 1.6 and 1.8 versions were dropped (in the European market), and replaced by a 2.0 L engine."
The LX models were available both with FWD and AWD, and were also available both 4-door and 5-door (hatchback). Thus the 1.6 engine was available with both FWD and AWD. Also the 1.6 was available at least until 1998. I cannot find any online sources for this though, and I've been searching for almost an hour. I do know there are many Impreza LX cars near me with the 1.6 engine and AWD. I even owned one ('98, LX, 1.6L, 5-door). Sedumacre ( talk) 18:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This article is an absolute mess and very hard to read or skim for relevant info. There are also large sections that sound like they are written or copied from an auto magazine or something. I'm not a very experienced Wiki editor, so I'm not sure what the 'standard' template should be, but as it stands I find it incredibly hard to understand anything. Esoteridactyl ( talk) 11:55, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
According to the manufacturer's site, the dimensions listed for the 4th generation are incorrect. Is the company's own website an appropriate source? Ckoerner ( talk) 13:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
The WRX and Crosstrek redirect to here. They're two separate cars so I'm proposing a split. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:D0B9:3847:B5F:CCA6 ( talk) 17:23, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
I would like to cite osx as precident from another edit "The link provided is for the WRX model. This is different to the regular Impreza. The manufacturer is fine for sourcing dimensions—feel free to add the numbers for the WRX. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:31, 8 October 2015 (UTC)" Wrx and impreza are different models with different chassis codes and should have their own pages, or if your polish and Italian are good enough we could just translate. :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyboardmechanic ( talk • contribs) 06:57, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Oppose - Crosstrek is just some cladding and suspension. The Impreza WRX was a sub-model of the Impreza until 2011 (when it was no longer called Impreza) or 2016 (when it gained a more different body). I believe that splitting Impreza into generations would be the best, with the latest WRX getting its own entry. This page could then be reduced to a clear, concise explanation of what is what and when the WRX was split off the main Impreza line. I see no reason to separate the Crosstrek/XV yet, but I guess that could change in the future. Mr.choppers | ✎ 06:22, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Oppose - Couldn't agree more with User talk:Mr.choppers. The latest WRX is way more different to Impreza than Crosstrek is. Just like to add that the latest Subaru WRX in a way already has its own entry with Subaru Levorg which is a WRX station wagon. If the next generation Levorg won't show up in detuned version I would recommend adding WRX to Levorg and renaming an article to Subaru WRX/Levorg. Zvrkljati ( talk) 11:02, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Oppose - A much better solution might be to split this article by generation, not by trim level, and leave only part of this page in place as an overview. The GC, GD, GE/GH/GR/GV, and GJ/GP/VA should probably all be different articles. After all, this is what we have done for cars like the Honda Civic, Ford Mustang, etc. Then again, there is precedent for splitting the article by trim level in the form of the Nissan Skyline and Nissan Skyline GT-R pages... GearheadLydia ( talk) 23:38, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Oppose - The Impreza, the WRX, the STI, and the CrossTrek all use the same platform with slightly different suspensions/drivetrain/options and vastly different marketing. A split would just confuse the readers of wikipedia. Like others have said, the most significant difference is the branding, not the vehicle. 107.77.204.72 ( talk) 03:10, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Support The WRX and Crosstrek are similar cars, but performance-wise, they are in completely different classes. They're even classified as different chassis codes (The WRX with VA, Crosstrek with GP and GT). -- Eightsixofakina o< 02:00, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Support I believe that the best way to approach this would be to turn this article into a general article, create separate WRX and XV/Crosstrek articles that are also generalized, then have separate, more detailed articles, for each generation:
I will admit my understanding of how these model codes are arranged isn't perfect. But would some form of this idea work well enough? EDIT: I should also mention that, since WRXs up to the VA generation seem to be connected to the regular Impreza, it'd be safe to keep those together until the split. Just my two cents. — R. J. Circus – contribs - talk – 03:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Should the WRX STI be split into its own article, since the Subaru WRX exists as its own article? -- Chelston-temp-1 ( talk) 10:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I think it doesn't match the main WP:SPLIT reasons. Jasmir54 03:37, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Good afternoon all,
Me and Vauxford have an image of a Subaru XV 5th gen that we are sorta arguing over. It appears based on this, that he believes that his would be the better example as his is "...look nicer because it similar colour and angles..." however, while I agree with this statement, however coming back I did a second check and found the orange highlights are aftermarket (not factory fitted), because the wing mirrors are supposed to be body coloured even on the base model. I'm going to enlist Charles01 as he'd have more experience with this trivial matter.
I know mine is original because it retains the black bumpers and also has the body colour wing mirrors (not the orange highlights). Knowing Subarus, I can tell that I can recrop the image if need be. Noticing Vauxford used to do his images tightly cropped, I learnt my crops through OSX & the 2017 method so thats why. Lets have a discussion and see which one of these would be the most suitable. Vauxford please see this discussion and input your thoughts. Until we have a discussion, this edit will remain. Okay, because we do not want this to become an edit war. Vauxford's Subaru image will be violating WP:CARPIX and therefore would not be suitable for use in the car articles -- EurovisionNim (talk to me) (see my edits) 05:02, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
I've read through the split proposals on the Talk page, and it seems that the majority of people who replied support the split, so I am wondering as to why it hasn't happened. Eightsixofakina ( talk) 05:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Looking back at a post made five years ago by Autumnwind on the same subject, I looked through proposals they've made and I should agree with the second proposal regarding the creation of an article specific to the V* era WRX, while leaving the G* era WRXs on the Impreza article. To reiterate, there would be a brief history explanation as to the G* era WRXs moving into the V* era, which would be detailed from then on in a main WRX article and expanded with information on the forthcoming (VB?) WRX.
I.e: Summary > History (hotlinks to the first three Impreza WRX generations) > First Generation (VA) > Second Generation (V?) > etc.
Meanwhile, the Impreza article should have a brief explanation as to the off-shooting of the WRX into its own brand. I believe it would be ideal to have that explained at the end of the subsection describing GR/GV WRXs as those continued into the 2014 model years (in the U.S, at least) while GJ/GP Imprezas started with the 2012 MYs (again, in the U.S.).
As for the XV Crosstrek, approach it similarly.
Summary > Predecessors? (as the American Impreza Outback Sport exists) > First Generation (GP) > Second Generation (GT) > etc.
I know I've said earlier to have separate articles for each little generation of three different cars, but in hindsight that'd be a lot of overhead. The Crosstrek only has two generations thus far, and the V* era WRX is soon to be evolved to only its second generation. So I now see no justification to separate the articles to *that* much of an extent. — R. J. Circus – contribs - talk – 01:26, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
I definitely think a split is in order. I came looking for information about one of the three and found an utterly unnecessary amount of information about different vehicles. To say that the platform or drivetrain underneath is all that matters means that VAG only produces like two or three cars across all of Audi, VW, Seat, Skoda, etc. which is clearly not the case. I agree that these started together, much like the Celica Supra, but at some point they are shaped and sized differently and have different customer bases. They each deserve their own article. If nothing else, this isn't even particularly usable in its current form. There's too much information that isn't relevant. The Impreza may tie them together but I can't imagine anyone straight-face claiming that an STI and a Crosstrek are the same.
130.45.43.153 (
talk) 17:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
I was asked by User:Bkissin to split Subaru Crosstrek, and it does appear that there was consensus for the split, so I have accepted Draft:Subaru Crosstrek (after renaming the draft). Robert McClenon ( talk) 23:26, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I am currently working on a WRX article ( Draft:Subaru WRX). Since the articles will split anyways and the WRX has a much more confusing history than the Crosstrek, can I use the text from this article in my draft? (Also if they are being split maybe the information on this page about the Crosstrek that isn't there already should be moved over to the new article as well.) KK027 ( talk) 19:31, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
I have completed the WRX article draft, so please feel free to move it, as I cant ("there is another article with the same name"). Kk027 ( talk) 18:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
I've done extensive editing on the Subaru Crosstrek article, but there is still a lot that needs to be done. Any help is appreciated! Eightsixofakina ( talk) 06:08, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Now that there is a separate article for the Crosstrek, is there any word on a separate WRX article? Eightsixofakina ( talk) 03:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
The "all-new" "completely redesigned" 2024 Impreza is being unveiled on Nov. 17th at the LA Auto Show, meaning the final model year for the current (fifth) generation is 2023. Sixth generation section should be added after the unveiling, as seems to be custom. Luma834 ( talk) 22:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
I want to division of wrx sti article and restore the old version of 2012 about 60 kb, which can be further expanded with subsequent generations. The WRX STi is an icon of both sports and rally cars in Motorsport and street legal versions, such as the Lancer EVO, BMW M3, Sierra Cosworth, Lotus Cortina, Lotus Omega, Civic Type R, 911 GT3, Lancia Delta HF and others; all of which have a separate article of their own. Will separate and restore the unbundling if there is no objection to it. 5.90.232.9 ( talk) 13:08, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The 4th gen section has no mention of the now-released WRX and STi variants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.84.49.122 ( talk) 02:28, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
This article needs merging with Impreza, probably. There are too many Impreza pages in the Subaru category! Andrewferrier 15:27, 2004 Nov 10 (UTC)
I think this has been done. Impreza now redirects here. -- SportWagon 17:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone here think this thing looks like a hypermodern AMC Pacer? - Litefantastic 23:43, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
I remember Pacers. An Impreza Wagon doesn't really look that much like one in real life.-- SportWagon 17:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Can you say Subaru 360, Subaru Justy ? And the Legacy isn't "large". Do they mean precise "compact" versus "sub-compact" or "micro" or something? Or is the claim just plain wrong?-- SportWagon 17:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
"The basic turbocharged motor, the EJ20, produces 211 bhp."
The "EJ20" was the single overhead camshaft engine with either 8 valves (88) or 16 valves.
The "EJ20T" was the twincam 16 valve turbo which produced upwards of 180HP
Actually, EJ20 is a block designation, it has nothing to do with the heads or turbo.
^^^ Don't forget to sign! EJ22T is different block to the non T model, with design considerations made for Turbo-charging. It was used before the 97-99 redesign. Daniellis89 ( talk) 23:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Would it be possible when adding / changing images that the full spec is included in the image name or comment, including the region. -- Jbattersby 11:21, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a separate page for the RS just like the WRX and STi? -- Arun 23:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you; at the least, this article needs more info about the RS, and perhaps a picture of the RS. Also, since there are seperate articles about the WRX and WRX STI, a lot of the info about those cars can be cut out of this article. Maybe this article could benefit from a chart explaining the differences in the cars, or a more organized listing of the trim levels. The differences in the trim levels of the Impreza are more extreme than most cars, and the Impreza could be viewed as either a slow granny-driving station wagon, a rugged off-road vehicle, or a high performance sports car.
At one time (5 years ago) it was difficult to find die-cast replicas of Imprezas, or Subarus in general. There are far more available now, however, both as collectibles and pure toy variety (I myself sometimes find the latter more "collectible", but anyway...). IMHO the new section says little of interest (toy and collectible replicas are made of most successful automobiles), and is nowhere near complete. I mean, they don't even mention AutoArt. (And yet a complete list would probably be off-topic for the article).-- SportWagon 17:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be some mention that the 2.5L engine used in the USDM STi is the EJ257, and the 2.0L JDM and EDM versions are the EJ205?
There's a silly amount of external links here, mostly to fan sites and other non-encyclopedic sources. Can someone take a look a tidy them up? StopItTidyUp 20:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
once again the engine range and data is not complete.
From 92 the impreza was available with an ej15, ej16 or ej18
In 96 the impreza wagon was available with ej20
Not all nonKei Subarus are AWD. In North America that may be the case, but then the reference to Kei cars is pointless. If JDM Kei cars are mentioned, then it must be said that Subaru markets a base model FWD Imprez in Japan.
I think I've seen Impreza's used in road course racing. 67.188.172.165 20:01, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
For the 2008 model it's said the base model have a 1.5L engine, that doesn't sound right, I'm fairly sure 2.5 was intended.
talk about fuel efficiency of Subaru Impreza models? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.138.245 ( talk) 13:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
The very first Impreza had a very strange grill partially closed off with a plastic panel. It didn't last very long, but does pre-date the more open type shown in the 1st generation images in this article. Can anybody find a picture of the original? Paul Fisher 10:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
The blue impreza doesn't do the article any favors and it is now 2008. I hope the old image doesn't have a fan and tries to defend his vehicles image with the old one. Maybe someone will upload a nicer image of the latest impreza, just anything but the bug eyes blue sedan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dddike ( talk • contribs) 16:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
IFCAR please stop reverting to the picture of the sedan. The 3rd generation Impreza is a hatchback in every market in the world except North America. This was a major departure for Subaru and has drawn much comment in the motoring press. Hence the infobox picture should be a hatchback. By all means include the sedan in a gallery to indicate the difference, but it doesn't belong as the lead image for this section.
In addition, two or more pictures of the same car do have a particular value if they demonstrate different facets of the vehicle. It is not unreasonable to show a front, rear and profile view of the same car. Paul Fisher ( talk) 04:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted to the version that seems more correct (dates mesh with filenames) and has more references. It would be great if both of you would discuss your differences instead of reverting each other as vandalism. -- BillWeiss | Talk 14:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
At the beginning of this article, one sees links immediately to the WRX, WRX STI, and Outback. Is this really necessary? It just strikes me as odd in comparison to other articles about car models. I know they're very important, but I think it would be more fitting to be placed somewhere in the main text, perhaps before the Contents. RotisserieEngine ( talk) 06:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Atleast in the Finnish Subaru site you can "order" a diesel version already, [4]
So the article is very outdated with the "Diesel" section in the third generation. The infobox could be updated with the 2.0 liter Diesel as well, or is it only US-centic, as it does not even list the 1.5 L version for Japan and Europe? -- Pudeo ' 23:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
The article stated:
{{
cite web}}
: External link in |publisher=
and |title=
(
help)Sorry, but Polish dictionary is not a proof. Do you know what Ford Kuga means in Serbo-Croatian? Here's The answer. So, please give as a source, preferably from Subaru, which states the origin of the name. No such user ( talk) 19:51, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
If the Outback was crying out to be merged into the Legacy, why not do the same for the Impreza. It would make navigating through the WRX and STi versions so much easier, the logic used for the Outback and Legacy merger ( Regushee ( talk) 18:54, 25 May 2012 (UTC))
Have an umbrella article titled Subaru Impreza with the following sub-pages:
The WRX and WRX STI pages would be turned into a single disambiguation article, akin to Subaru Outback. And to quash any concerns that the next generation WRX will be an independent model separate from the Impreza; that is true, but the new car will be migrating to the "Subaru WRX" nameplate, completely eschewing the Impreza title and allowing a new Subaru WRX page to exist. OSX ( talk • contributions) 04:19, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
I withdraw my opposition, I am now on board. MarcusHookPa ( talk) 16:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
For the second generation article, I believe that we should leave the information boxes for each model (Impreza/WRX/WRX STi/9-2X) as they all have slightly different weights and slightly different engines (especially Impreza) as we did for the individual generation Legacy articles. MarcusHookPa ( talk) 23:55, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but merging these pages has done nothing but add complication to an already difficult to read article. I realize the Wikipedia plan involves making things as "encyclopedic" as possible, but you have to understand your target audience before making such sweeping changes. The people who wiki Impreza are NOT the same people who wiki WRX's/STI's, and pruning relevant information about these models to make them fit on one page is a disservice to everyone involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.64.16.132 ( talk) 17:09, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Okay, where is the first generation? I know Impreza's were made in the 80's. I am really confused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookster451 ( talk • contribs) 14:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
I see that in the past several articles for Impreza were merged, and understand that reasoning... However, I'm sure many of us are aware the WRX is it's own model now. So... What to do?
Proposal 1: Separate Article for WRX. Pull all the meat of the WRX stuff in there, and reference back to Impreza article when necessary. Likewise, in the Impreza article, mention the WRX, but no specifics.
Pros: - Both articles contain all the important information, and are relatively thorough.
Cons: - Maintenance. lots of duplicated information and crosslinking.
Proposal 2: Separate article for WRX (not to be confused with the former Impreza WRX). Simply start with the 2015 model. In history, mention the Impreza article and that they used to be the same model. also highlight the differences from the Impreza to establish the new platform. (truthfully, I don't know how different it is, but know that a lot of different "model" subarus are very similar e.g. 1999 Forester and Impreza.)
Pros: - Accurately matches the current branding. - Little initial work to be done.
Cons: - That Will make the WRX article pretty short, but that's fine for now I think. Many readers if not most will have to navigate to the Impreza article to get older info. - Also, over time that Impreza article will seem to have little relevance to the WRX.
As it stands, the current structure is ok, but somewhere down the road this will have to be addressed. I think this will please a lot of people who liked the separate articles in the past too i.e. the performance crowd versus practical shoppers.
Other suggestions are welcome, so feedback would be great! AutumnWind 16:53, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Update: I already see some flaws in my logic... I was under the impression the chassis is different with the newest WRX models. But anyway, given that the last debate on this was a while ago, maybe worth rehashing.AutumnWind 17:24, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
In the section "First generation (1992–2000; GC, GF, GM)" it says:
"Trim levels were LX, GL and Sport generation. LX models were front-wheel drive, and powered by a 1.6 L engine; these were four-door only. GL trim levels were either front-wheel drive (Subaru badged these 2WD) or all-wheel-drive (badged AWD); cars launched in 1993 had a choice of 1.6 and 1.8 flat-4 engines, the 1.6 being available with 2WD, the 1.8 an AWD version only. From 1996, the 1.6 and 1.8 versions were dropped (in the European market), and replaced by a 2.0 L engine."
The LX models were available both with FWD and AWD, and were also available both 4-door and 5-door (hatchback). Thus the 1.6 engine was available with both FWD and AWD. Also the 1.6 was available at least until 1998. I cannot find any online sources for this though, and I've been searching for almost an hour. I do know there are many Impreza LX cars near me with the 1.6 engine and AWD. I even owned one ('98, LX, 1.6L, 5-door). Sedumacre ( talk) 18:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This article is an absolute mess and very hard to read or skim for relevant info. There are also large sections that sound like they are written or copied from an auto magazine or something. I'm not a very experienced Wiki editor, so I'm not sure what the 'standard' template should be, but as it stands I find it incredibly hard to understand anything. Esoteridactyl ( talk) 11:55, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
According to the manufacturer's site, the dimensions listed for the 4th generation are incorrect. Is the company's own website an appropriate source? Ckoerner ( talk) 13:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
The WRX and Crosstrek redirect to here. They're two separate cars so I'm proposing a split. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:D0B9:3847:B5F:CCA6 ( talk) 17:23, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
I would like to cite osx as precident from another edit "The link provided is for the WRX model. This is different to the regular Impreza. The manufacturer is fine for sourcing dimensions—feel free to add the numbers for the WRX. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:31, 8 October 2015 (UTC)" Wrx and impreza are different models with different chassis codes and should have their own pages, or if your polish and Italian are good enough we could just translate. :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyboardmechanic ( talk • contribs) 06:57, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Oppose - Crosstrek is just some cladding and suspension. The Impreza WRX was a sub-model of the Impreza until 2011 (when it was no longer called Impreza) or 2016 (when it gained a more different body). I believe that splitting Impreza into generations would be the best, with the latest WRX getting its own entry. This page could then be reduced to a clear, concise explanation of what is what and when the WRX was split off the main Impreza line. I see no reason to separate the Crosstrek/XV yet, but I guess that could change in the future. Mr.choppers | ✎ 06:22, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Oppose - Couldn't agree more with User talk:Mr.choppers. The latest WRX is way more different to Impreza than Crosstrek is. Just like to add that the latest Subaru WRX in a way already has its own entry with Subaru Levorg which is a WRX station wagon. If the next generation Levorg won't show up in detuned version I would recommend adding WRX to Levorg and renaming an article to Subaru WRX/Levorg. Zvrkljati ( talk) 11:02, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Oppose - A much better solution might be to split this article by generation, not by trim level, and leave only part of this page in place as an overview. The GC, GD, GE/GH/GR/GV, and GJ/GP/VA should probably all be different articles. After all, this is what we have done for cars like the Honda Civic, Ford Mustang, etc. Then again, there is precedent for splitting the article by trim level in the form of the Nissan Skyline and Nissan Skyline GT-R pages... GearheadLydia ( talk) 23:38, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Oppose - The Impreza, the WRX, the STI, and the CrossTrek all use the same platform with slightly different suspensions/drivetrain/options and vastly different marketing. A split would just confuse the readers of wikipedia. Like others have said, the most significant difference is the branding, not the vehicle. 107.77.204.72 ( talk) 03:10, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Support The WRX and Crosstrek are similar cars, but performance-wise, they are in completely different classes. They're even classified as different chassis codes (The WRX with VA, Crosstrek with GP and GT). -- Eightsixofakina o< 02:00, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Support I believe that the best way to approach this would be to turn this article into a general article, create separate WRX and XV/Crosstrek articles that are also generalized, then have separate, more detailed articles, for each generation:
I will admit my understanding of how these model codes are arranged isn't perfect. But would some form of this idea work well enough? EDIT: I should also mention that, since WRXs up to the VA generation seem to be connected to the regular Impreza, it'd be safe to keep those together until the split. Just my two cents. — R. J. Circus – contribs - talk – 03:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Should the WRX STI be split into its own article, since the Subaru WRX exists as its own article? -- Chelston-temp-1 ( talk) 10:47, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I think it doesn't match the main WP:SPLIT reasons. Jasmir54 03:37, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Good afternoon all,
Me and Vauxford have an image of a Subaru XV 5th gen that we are sorta arguing over. It appears based on this, that he believes that his would be the better example as his is "...look nicer because it similar colour and angles..." however, while I agree with this statement, however coming back I did a second check and found the orange highlights are aftermarket (not factory fitted), because the wing mirrors are supposed to be body coloured even on the base model. I'm going to enlist Charles01 as he'd have more experience with this trivial matter.
I know mine is original because it retains the black bumpers and also has the body colour wing mirrors (not the orange highlights). Knowing Subarus, I can tell that I can recrop the image if need be. Noticing Vauxford used to do his images tightly cropped, I learnt my crops through OSX & the 2017 method so thats why. Lets have a discussion and see which one of these would be the most suitable. Vauxford please see this discussion and input your thoughts. Until we have a discussion, this edit will remain. Okay, because we do not want this to become an edit war. Vauxford's Subaru image will be violating WP:CARPIX and therefore would not be suitable for use in the car articles -- EurovisionNim (talk to me) (see my edits) 05:02, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
I've read through the split proposals on the Talk page, and it seems that the majority of people who replied support the split, so I am wondering as to why it hasn't happened. Eightsixofakina ( talk) 05:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Looking back at a post made five years ago by Autumnwind on the same subject, I looked through proposals they've made and I should agree with the second proposal regarding the creation of an article specific to the V* era WRX, while leaving the G* era WRXs on the Impreza article. To reiterate, there would be a brief history explanation as to the G* era WRXs moving into the V* era, which would be detailed from then on in a main WRX article and expanded with information on the forthcoming (VB?) WRX.
I.e: Summary > History (hotlinks to the first three Impreza WRX generations) > First Generation (VA) > Second Generation (V?) > etc.
Meanwhile, the Impreza article should have a brief explanation as to the off-shooting of the WRX into its own brand. I believe it would be ideal to have that explained at the end of the subsection describing GR/GV WRXs as those continued into the 2014 model years (in the U.S, at least) while GJ/GP Imprezas started with the 2012 MYs (again, in the U.S.).
As for the XV Crosstrek, approach it similarly.
Summary > Predecessors? (as the American Impreza Outback Sport exists) > First Generation (GP) > Second Generation (GT) > etc.
I know I've said earlier to have separate articles for each little generation of three different cars, but in hindsight that'd be a lot of overhead. The Crosstrek only has two generations thus far, and the V* era WRX is soon to be evolved to only its second generation. So I now see no justification to separate the articles to *that* much of an extent. — R. J. Circus – contribs - talk – 01:26, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
I definitely think a split is in order. I came looking for information about one of the three and found an utterly unnecessary amount of information about different vehicles. To say that the platform or drivetrain underneath is all that matters means that VAG only produces like two or three cars across all of Audi, VW, Seat, Skoda, etc. which is clearly not the case. I agree that these started together, much like the Celica Supra, but at some point they are shaped and sized differently and have different customer bases. They each deserve their own article. If nothing else, this isn't even particularly usable in its current form. There's too much information that isn't relevant. The Impreza may tie them together but I can't imagine anyone straight-face claiming that an STI and a Crosstrek are the same.
130.45.43.153 (
talk) 17:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
I was asked by User:Bkissin to split Subaru Crosstrek, and it does appear that there was consensus for the split, so I have accepted Draft:Subaru Crosstrek (after renaming the draft). Robert McClenon ( talk) 23:26, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I am currently working on a WRX article ( Draft:Subaru WRX). Since the articles will split anyways and the WRX has a much more confusing history than the Crosstrek, can I use the text from this article in my draft? (Also if they are being split maybe the information on this page about the Crosstrek that isn't there already should be moved over to the new article as well.) KK027 ( talk) 19:31, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
I have completed the WRX article draft, so please feel free to move it, as I cant ("there is another article with the same name"). Kk027 ( talk) 18:23, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
I've done extensive editing on the Subaru Crosstrek article, but there is still a lot that needs to be done. Any help is appreciated! Eightsixofakina ( talk) 06:08, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Now that there is a separate article for the Crosstrek, is there any word on a separate WRX article? Eightsixofakina ( talk) 03:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
The "all-new" "completely redesigned" 2024 Impreza is being unveiled on Nov. 17th at the LA Auto Show, meaning the final model year for the current (fifth) generation is 2023. Sixth generation section should be added after the unveiling, as seems to be custom. Luma834 ( talk) 22:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
I want to division of wrx sti article and restore the old version of 2012 about 60 kb, which can be further expanded with subsequent generations. The WRX STi is an icon of both sports and rally cars in Motorsport and street legal versions, such as the Lancer EVO, BMW M3, Sierra Cosworth, Lotus Cortina, Lotus Omega, Civic Type R, 911 GT3, Lancia Delta HF and others; all of which have a separate article of their own. Will separate and restore the unbundling if there is no objection to it. 5.90.232.9 ( talk) 13:08, 31 May 2023 (UTC)