2.5i v. GT Sedan??

Hi all. I'm considering purchasing an 05 Legacy and have a couple of questions. Will I regret buying a 2.5i? It seems like most people here are going for the GT. I am currently driving a 98 VW Passat with a busted turbo. The 98 Passats were notorious as the first model year of the B5 Passat for having turbos go bad. I'm a little concerned about getting another turbo, and, in particular, another turbo in a first model year of a car. That's partially why I'm leaning 2.5i...well, that and the huge difference in price. I'm a little gunshy about pushing up to the cost of the GT. And given that I've been driving a car with a busted turbo for about 6 months, I'm thinking the 2.5 will be a HUGE improvement for me... What do you think? If it helps, I'm the kind of person who is really into their car, but I honestly mostly drive in Los Angeles traffic and don't have much opportunity to open it up and do any real sport driving. I need more power than the busted turbo can muster, but I'm not sure if that means I need to step up the the GT. On the other hand, I do love driving and I love cars, and I'm worried that if I get the 2.5, I'll always have GT envy! Thanks!

honetly, you would be making a wrong decision if you could afford the GT and are only buying the 2.5i because of the turbo. This is a Subaru, not a VW... and while that doesn't sound impressive, those of us in the know will tell you that Subaru quality far succeeds that of VW. Many people that I know have thier VW in the shop more than they are driving it. I have a WRX and I haven't had any problems with it at all and it's a first year turbo car as well. The GT gives you much more than just a turbo, it gives you much better brakes, interior refinements, wheels/tires, and a WHOLE lot more gusto. Subaru has been doing this turbo thing for YEARS and I would argue that they do it as good if not better than most. Rest assured that this shouldn't be a concern for you. I hope I helped you at least a little.

The GT is so worth it. The 2.5i has a decent amount of power for regular driving, but if you're an enthusiast at all, go for the GT. :D

About one month ago, I had the chance to test drive the 2.5i and GT one after the other. You can read about it here: [url]http://www.legacysti.com/viewtopic.php?t=1060&highlight=[/url] I am still asking myself some of the same questions that you are, even after this road test. But one thing I am not worrying about is the turbo's reliability. In my case, it is a battle between my rational :| and irrational sides :twisted: I don't *need* the GT...Nobody really does. I prefer the GT... But do I like it for the price difference?

Thanks so much for the posts. Bernard, your review was really helpful. It's kind of what I was thinking...that the 2.5 enough power, but the GT is much more fun to drive. I hear you on the decision between the rational and irrational...plus I've got my husband, a decidedly non-car guy, leaning over my shoulder telling me that we don't REALLY need to spend that extra money on the GT...

The 2.5i is an odd model. Subaru is not advertising it at all. In fact, when they talk about the Legacy, they're refering to the GT without even mentioning "GT." Just another thing to make you feel jealous and unappreciated. I'm glad I didn't get one. Even Honda advertises their "value package" Accord DX.

[quote name='7stars']The 2.5i is an odd model. Subaru is not advertising it at all. In fact, when they talk about the Legacy, they're refering to the GT without even mentioning "GT." Just another thing to make you feel jealous and unappreciated. [/quote] True. Subaru seems to be trying to generate the maximum "halo effect" for the GT. I would not be surprised if there is a second wave of advertising for the 2.5i, this time aimed at older, less sport-oriented types who still want to drive something different (The VW Passat type). Hmmm...That sounds pretty much like me... In fact, I enjoy driving my wife's 2002 Passat and would have considered it but for a few annoyances and the fact that an all-new model is coming out next summer.

[quote name='Buster']Thanks so much for the posts. Bernard, your review was really helpful. It's kind of what I was thinking...that the 2.5 enough power, but the GT is much more fun to drive. I hear you on the decision between the rational and irrational...plus I've got my husband, a decidedly non-car guy, leaning over my shoulder telling me that we don't REALLY need to spend that extra money on the GT...[/quote] WOW... you're every car guy's dream :love: Nobody [i]needs[/i] to spend money on the GT. But plenty of things we buy not because we [i]need[/i] it, just want it. It's Subaru's need-desire thing. Go for it if you can afford it.

I'm still debating this as well. I got a chance to drive them back-to-back last weekend. (Hopefully will get a post up about that soon...) Do I [i]need[/i] the GT? No, Not really. Would the 2.5i fill my need? Yeah. Do I [i]want[/i] the GT? You'd better believe it! The 2.5i is quite impressive -- it has some decent pickup -- not your typical 4-banger. But driving it back-to-back w/ the GT... Dangerous -- on the wallet that is. If you don't want to spend the extra $$$ on the GT, I'd recommend you not even test drive it. If you do, you WILL want it... That said, this is going to be a commute car for me; which makes the decision that much more difficult. It would be a replacement for my aging 96 Contour SE. It's got a 160hp V6 that does pretty well, so I wouldn't be gaining much there w/ the 2.5i, but the GT... Also would be going from an auto back to a stick, and can't wait! The traffic may suck, but I've had to replace the auto tranny in my Contour and it hasn't been the same since, and I do NOT want to have to go through that again. I've lost a lot of faith in autos... And a stick is so much more fun anyway... :D

My gf has a 91 Legacy Turbo AWD, with over 150,000 miles, and it runs beautifully. It runs 1000 times better than my 98 Kia Sephia, which has less than half the mileage of her Legacy. I've been very careful with the maintiance of the Kia, but her 91 Legacy Turbo AWD is such a pleasure to drive, it makes long distance trips over 2 or 3 hours like a dream. I was extremely impressed at how well it runs for a 14 year old car with over 150,000 miles. She has no problems with her 14 year old turbocharged legacy. Quality is A+++. - Mike

Appearance wise.. hows does the 2.5i differ from the GT? So far, I know about these features that the GT has over the 2.5i: 1. 17" rims on the GT vs 16" on the 2.5i 2. fog lights standard on GT, optional on 2.5i 3. LED turning lights on the GT 4. different dashboard (?) on the GT (electroluminescent) I'm interested in seeing the dashboard for the 2.5i, as the pics on this site so far have been of the GT!

Just because your turbo car has had problems, does not mean every turbo car will have problems. I have a VW 1.8T with over 100,000 chipped miles on it without so much as a hiccup from the turbo. I am a firm believer that turbocharged motors can be very reliable with proper maintenance: Synthetic oil changed regularly, warm them up slowly, cool them down for a few minutes before shutting down. Can I assume you did none of those three things with your Passat? If you buy a 2.5i, don't ever go back and test drive a GT, because you might really regret your purchase. Also, don;t forget to call your insurance company...there may be a premium difference between the two. -Nick

Bernard, thanks for the review. I'm also in the market and I'm looking for a sporty wagon that will meet my fun-to-drive criteria with the family useability obligations. I also took out the 2.5i and GT in [u]wagon[/u] form for a drive and my experience was similar to yours. I found the 2.5i to be quite torquey (of course nothing like the turbo). Given the ascending price of gas (delta in mpg + regular vs premium gas price differential), the rougher ride with the lower profile 17" wheels, and the steep purchase price delta between the two.... I'm finding it hard to justify the GT. :roll: I read somewhere that the 0-60 times for the 2.5i with 5MT came in at about 8.0 sec (vs the GT's 6.0s). Can anybody confirm or deny this ? I can't seem to locate my source. Thx, Tom

[quote name='BernardP']I am still asking myself some of the same questions that you are, even after this road test. But one thing I am not worrying about is the turbo's reliability.[/quote] Personally I'd be more worried about the increased gas consumption, Subaru Turbo motors are damn near bullet proof in stock form, there are a wide range of parameters the ECU controls to ensure reliability.

[quote name='Tom'] I read somewhere that the 0-60 times for the 2.5i with 5MT came in at about 8.0 sec (vs the GT's 6.0s). Can anybody confirm or deny this ? I can't seem to locate my source. Thx, Tom[/quote] I believe it's in the 8 second range, could be high 8's. There are a lot of WRX guys/girls on this forum who have the boost disease and would never consider a slower car, the 2.5i is however still a very nice automobile.

I sometimes wish I could have picked up a GT, but I am still very happy with my 2.5i. It does everything I need and them some. It is plenty fast for the daily commute and the gas situation is better than the truck I came from. It does lean a bit more in corners than the GT, but it still inspires confidence and I have yet to find it's limits.

[quote name='Tom']I read somewhere that the 0-60 times for the 2.5i with 5MT came in at about 8.0 sec (vs the GT's 6.0s). Can anybody confirm or deny this ? I can't seem to locate my source. Thx, Tom[/quote] Subaru is claiming acceleration times for the GT, but not for the 2.5i. The only thing I have found is for the euro version [url]http://www.subaru.co.uk/legacy_saloon/legacy_saloon_specifications_04my.htm[/url] They claim 0-100 km/h in 9.3 secs. The euro model has 3 less hp but is also lighter. I would be curious to see a Car & Driver test run on the 2.5i, but of course they won't do it as they almost always test top-of-the-line models. For example, any of you ever seen times in car mags for the regular 160 hp RSX or the 140 hp Celica GT ? Yet, these are the biggest sellers. I drove the 2.5i and it is strong enough for me, considering that we are stuck in dense traffic most of the time and that speed limits are artificially low. The 2.5i probably *feels* stronger than it is, because of the good torque. Horsepower sells cars but torque makes drivers happy. As for the price of gas, here in Canada, premium is currently around 0.96$ a liter, which, for those in the US is about 2.75 US per US gallon. So it is something that has to be taken in consideration

Thanks Bernard. I recall seeing a thread (somewhere) pointing out that the new 2005 Legacy 2.5i with 5MT was substantially faster to 60 than last years' 2.5i Legacy. The url you provide is, I believe, for last years' 2004 model year. The run to 60 was indeed in the low to mid 9s range and this year it's closer to 8.0s. The speculation being that the shaving off of ~200 lbs & the lower impedance backpressure from the dual exhaust arrangement have much to do with the (significant) performance boost. On the latter, I'd be curious to see what the new torque vs rpm curve looks like. As pointed out, it's the everyday useable rpm range that matters most... for me that's upto but not exceeding 3500 RPMs. And that's where the low end torque numbers make a difference. Cheers.

[quote name='Gumby']There are a lot of WRX guys/girls on this forum who have the boost disease and would never consider a slower car, the 2.5i is however still a very nice automobile.[/quote] I'm biased. That's why I won't argue on which car to buy. :oops:

[quote name='Tom']Thanks Bernard The url you provide is, I believe, for last years' 2004 model year. The run to 60 was indeed in the low to mid 9s range and this year it's closer to 8.0s. The speculation being that the shaving off of ~200 lbs & the lower impedance backpressure from the dual exhaust arrangement have much to do with the (significant) performance boost. On the latter, I'd be curious to see what the new torque vs rpm curve looks like. As pointed out, it's the everyday useable rpm range that matters most... for me that's upto but not exceeding 3500 RPMs. And that's where the low end torque numbers make a difference.Cheers.[/quote] Tom, the link I provided to the subaru UK site is for the 2004 Legacy, yes, but this is the new model which we just got here in North America. You can look it up on the site: [url]http://www.subaru.co.uk/legacy_saloon/[/url] See...? It is the new model, already out as a 2004 in the rest of the world. As for a torque and horsepower curve fot the revised NA engine, I would be very glad to see one too. In the interim, you can have a look at this chart: a dyno comparison of the SOHC (current) and DOHC (previous) 165 hp 2.5 NA engine in the Impreza. It should give a good idea of the power curve of the SOHC 168 hp 2005 Legacy engine [url]http://www.submariner.org/thepno95/Pictures/Subaru/Dyno%20curves/dyno%20comparison.jpg[/url] It is obvious why the 2.5i feels so torquey. The discussion of this graph is here: [url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1577762#post1577762[/url] I had to find a new link to the graph because the one in the thread is dead.

[quote name='BernardP'] [url]http://www.submariner.org/thepno95/Pictures/Subaru/Dyno%20curves/dyno%20comparison.jpg[/url] [/quote] yeeeeck! Looks like the SOHC would have been a better match for a turbo. regardless of the improvements from the wrx, it's still -> wait, wait, better, better, whoa.

Tom, I might have found the thread you were referring to concerning the improved performance of the 2.5 NA engine in the new Legacy [url]http://www.legacygt.com/viewtopic.php?t=199[/url] 0-100 km/h in 8.33 seconds As the poster is from New Zealand, these figures should be revised upwards, as the North American car is heavier. However, there is no source quoted for these performance numbers. Also, it is apparent from the gear ratios in this thread: [url]http://legacygt.com/viewtopic.php?t=228&highlight=gear+ratios[/url] That the 2.5i will not reach 60 mph or 100 kmh in second gear before the 6200 rpm fuel cutoff. This does'nt hamper real world performance, but has a negative impact on published performance because an upshift to third is required to reach 60 mph. The legacy GT can reach 60 before its higher fuel cutoff point The Acura TSX, from figures published in Car and Driver, reaches 60 at its 7100 rpm redline in second gear. That is fine-tuning it, from Honda's part, to get the best published acceleration numbers.

Thanks Bernard. I stand corrected. That's indeed the post that I saw re: 0-60 times with the 2.5i. As you say, not clear where those numbers were lifted from so hard to say what regional version of the Legacy it applies to. If anybody knows.... Regarding the torque curves for the SOHC vs DOHC engines in the Impreza.... yessir, they sure tell a story. A picture is worth a thousand words :) Now, wouldn't mind seeing the Legacy versions of those curves... Thanks again. Tom

Ive got a wrx right now and am thinking of trading it in for a base 2.5I with manual.

I think its a fantastic deal, but i think im going to wait it out until they start using the "new" 2.5 motor. Its cleaner, more effiecient and has a better power band.

And you cant really compare hondas 2.4L tsx motor to the boxer in the subie. Hondas motor is fine tuned and one of the best engines honda has ever made. The 2.5 in the boxer is average at best.

Way to revive a long dead thread.