2005 Subaru Impreza 1.6XI or TS

Zheiko

Zheiko

Octane Boostaholics
Hey guys, :imnewhere:

I just registered and I am planning to buy Impreza, thing is, that I have never had Subaru before, and therefore I am looking for some advice of what to get. I was thinking about the models in title.

Thing is, that I can rarely find any information, or reviews about 1.6 Imprezas.. I assume, we are all from Ireland here, or at least most of us, so we know what is going on here with the insurance and stuff... Unfortunately I do not have the option of getting insurance on someone else and be named driver, so I have to drive it myself. Currently I am driving Opel Corsa 1.0, just for the sake of passing first year of extremely expensive insurance, and second year should be better, but getting 2.0 engine is still kinda expensive(even tho I could afford it).

Now the question. Is 1.6 version good car? What is the difference between XI and TS? Is there even any difference, or is it the same car? Is here anyone who drove it and then went for 2.0l version? What are the advantages and disadvantages? Any tips, pros/cons are welcomed.

Also, once I decide to get that car, what to look for? How am I going to find out if the car is in good condition? How is it in here in Ireland with changing mileage of car? Like you get 15 years old car, that says 60k miles, but looks like 260k miles?

Thanks in advance!
 
Wouldn't be an expert but not much difference between 1.6 and 2.0

That is running costs , fuel etc. not sure about insurance. Stay away from jap imports won't have a chance insuring one.
Tommy would be the best man think he went 1.6 - 2.0 - 2.5

Still plenty of 10 year old + cars knocking about.

Stick up pics of ones your thinking of looking at and am sure you will get good advice here

:smokin:
 
[quote author=CARLO link=topic=38354.msg438714#msg438714 date=1372288346]
Wouldn't be an expert but not much difference between 1.6 and 2.0

That is running costs , fuel etc. not sure about insurance. Stay away from jap imports won't have a chance insuring one.
Tommy would be the best man think he went 1.6 - 2.0 - 2.5

Still plenty of 10 year old + cars knocking about.

Stick up pics of ones your thinking of looking at and am sure you will get good advice here

:smokin:
[/quote]

Thanks! How do I recognize Japan import vs 'Irish' car?
 
Running 2.0 are a bit expensive compared to the 1.6, extra on tax, insurance and petrol. The log book of the car wouldhave "registered out of state" on the log sheet about half way down if you want threw it.
 
usually a wiper on the rear window of jap imports. would go with a 2.0 if it was my decision i.6 impreza is thirsty beast and with the extra power in the 2.0 you enjoy the driving experience more even though car tax will be higher
 
if it was me i'd go with the 1.6 cheaper tax cheaper insurance lighter on petrol there's not much difference in the running costs of a 2.0 and a 2.0 turbo apart from insurance side of it . everyone will have different reasons for 1 over the other :thumbsup:
 
yea, my idea is go for 1.6 after getting 1year no claim bonus, and stick with that car for few years, pumping up my no claim bonus, and once I get some nice percentage down, then maybe upgrade to 2.0.

So you all say, that the 1.6 version is exactly same as 2.0 just with the difference of smaller engine, all other features like AWD, boxer engine and stuff should be the same?

How is it with maintenance of these cars? My corsa is very light on maintenance, and doing regular checks and changing oil every 5k miles makes it one happy panda.
 
Speaking from experience , starting off with my 1.6ts then moving onto 2.0 r sport and on to my current sti i would probably give a very accurate owner experience ,

i bought a new 1.6 ts in 2005 , the only description for the car is slow , thirsty and heavy,

the 1.6 would be just as hard on petrol as my Sti on normal town/city driving ,and even heavier on long motorway journeys , basically the 1.6 is built like a tank , its heavy and under powered , i traded the car in, in less than 2 years as it was breaking me to run it , went and bought a 2.0 r sport hawkeye then which was actually capable of 40 mpg on long motorway drives , in town it was fine 2 , the body of the car was lighter than the 1.6 also which made a difference to running costs i'd imagine , both cars ran perfectly and i certainly drove them as hard as they could go ,

In my opinion the 2.0r is the car to go for , for the 200 odd euro extra on tax you pay for the 2litre over the 1.6 , the mpg from the 2.0 will pay that back in a month of driving , thats how bad the 1.6 is , and depending on insurance quotes the 2.0 may well work out cheaper to tax , drive and insure for a year as a whole , that was very true in my case ,

as regards the difference in an xi and a ts , the xi came with fog lamps and the ts didnt , but they were a cheap add on from subaru so id say most had them added by the dealers , small differences in fabric on seats etc , nothing major to watch for ,

Afaik all blob and hawkeye 1.5 , 1.6 and 2.0 models were 4wd , there were a few jap import 2wd blob and hawkeye which have the narrow body style like the blob/hawk wagons , irish cars have the blistered arches same as a wrx or sti have , there also were 2wd bugeyes here and 2wd classics but not very common ,

Basically id say avoid the 1.6 cars all together , the only thing they will do is get you used to never passing a petrol station without stopping to fill up again ,
 
Whoa!!!! :goodpost:

Thanks Tommy, this was super duper detailed as I needed... I still have time till January, till my 1 year no claim bonus dings up, and as for what you said, I am defo going for 2.0 liter. There was actually more ppl advising to get the 2.0 over 1.6. I will probably have to go on smaller insurance, something like third party only(I have now full comprehensive) but I may then upgrade to full comprehensive later on.

Thanks again!
 
no problem mate . just out of interest what age are you . just asking as I was 21 when I bought the 1.6 and my insurance was around 1200 euro and dropped to about 1000 the second year . and when I changed to the 2 litre it stayed pretty much the same that would have been 23 with 4 years no claims discount .
 
I am 27 now, currently, the first year, I am paying 1400e for full comprehensive on 1.0 engine Opel Corsa. This is my first year of insurance in here in Ireland, which is the reason why its so high. The quotations I am getting now when I put 1year NCB on shows for 2.0l something between 1000-1200e, which will still be cheaper then what I am paying now:)

By the way, do you know some insurance companies that will create you quotation without filling all the unnecessary info(address, name, phone number etc.)? some companies even refuse to give me quotation without calling them and stuff. I am currently on AA broker with AXA insurance. But was thinking about 123.ie, as I have heard they can come pretty cheap, but they dont give me quotation without calling:(

edit: Ok, found nononsense.ie that actually offers very nice quotation for me... I still have plenty of time, but good to know:)
 
[quote author=Tommy 555 link=topic=38354.msg438757#msg438757 date=1372355677]
the 1.6 would be just as hard on petrol as my Sti on normal town/city driving ,and even heavier on long motorway journeys , basically the 1.6 is built like a tank , its heavy and under powered , i traded the car in, in less than 2 years as it was breaking me to run it , went and bought a 2.0 r sport hawkeye then which was actually capable of 40 mpg on long motorway drives , in town it was fine 2 , the body of the car was lighter than the 1.6 also which made a difference to running costs i'd imagine , both cars ran perfectly and i certainly drove them as hard as they could go ,

In my opinion the 2.0r is the car to go for , for the 200 odd euro extra on tax you pay for the 2litre over the 1.6 , the mpg from the 2.0 will pay that back in a month of driving , thats how bad the 1.6 is , and depending on insurance quotes the 2.0 may well work out cheaper to tax , drive and insure for a year as a whole , that was very true in my case ,
[/quote]

So, what would be the mpg in town? I am traveling every day to work within dublin, its roughly 12 miles road on Malahide road... I assume, I can count something about 8-10 liters per 100km in town, and 7-9 on highways? We are talking now about 2.0 RX '06(hawkeye)
 
33-34 mpg from the 2.0 is the average i would say , although 40+ is doable on long journeys , and high 20's to 30 in town , but remember you never buy a subaru for its economy , 4wd will always be harder to run than 2wd ,

best i ever got from a tank in the 2.0 was around 600km to the tank
best i ever managed from 1.6 would hae been around 450
 
Yes, of course I know that getting Subaru is not an economy thing, I was just asking to know what to expect, this information has absolutely no way of changing my mind getting that car :clocks:
 
Tommy is spot on. 33-34 is what you'll get from a 2.0 RX with mixed driving.

I also used to have a 2006 1.6 but it does feel underpowered compared to the 2007 2.0 I have now. Power wise, the 1.6 is fine for day to day driving, you just have to remember that it is a 1.6 and not a turbo that you see at a rally. The avg I got from the 1.6 was about 35/36 mpg, so there's not much in it really.

I've logged 36 fills on fuelly.com and the average is 33.1 mpg. I replaced the plugs a couple of months ago to long life iridiums and I get 34mpg now, just a small improvement but just goes to show that it's important to keep the car properly serviced.

The best average that I've got from the 2.0 car is 37 mpg, which, as Tommy mentioned, means you can get 40+ out of it if you were doing mostly long journeys.
 
35-36 out of the 1.6 ? either you were driving down hill with a good wind behind you or it was on a trailer been towed by a diesel discovery doing 35/6 mpg :falldownlaugh:

i once drained a quarter of a tank out of the 1.6 in about 6 miles , Nickys brother was actually in it with me at the time, mind boggling :hammerhead:
 
are ya sure you weren't driving with the handbrake on? :icon_biggrin:

seriously, i think they were must have been something wrong with your 1.6, I always found it reasonable, even with the air con on...! Apart from being a bit slow, it was ok on juice. always got 35+ out of it.

:scoobydoo:
 
no was nothing wrong with it well except for it been so thirsty , knew several of them around at the same time as i had mine and everyone said the same , animals on juice , one guy in wicklow town traded his against an sti bug at the time and swore the sti was better , hell even nickys v5 sti was easier and nicky would drive it like
 
[quote author=Tommy 555 link=topic=38354.msg438922#msg438922 date=1372529233]
i once drained a quarter of a tank out of the 1.6 in about 6 miles , Nickys brother was actually in it with me at the time, mind boggling :hammerhead:
[/quote]

Sounds like wormhole in your tank mate:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top