Audi RS vs Subaru WRX: Specs Compared

Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the Subaru WRX burns about $3,150 of fuel annually against $3,300 for the Audi RS. That $150 yearly gap compounds to roughly $750 over five years and $1,200 over eight — often more than the price difference between two trims of the same vehicle, and the single largest running-cost line item separating these two.

City versus highway split: the Subaru WRX is the stronger commuter at 21 mpg city, while the Audi RS pulls ahead on the interstate at 29 mpg highway. If most of your driving is stop-and-go traffic the city figure is the one to weigh; for long-distance highway mileage the reverse is true, and the two vehicles effectively swap places depending on how you drive.

Powertrain choice: the Audi RS is recorded with 2 distinct engine configurations (SIDI, SIDI; Mild Hybrid), the Subaru WRX with 2 (SIDI, 2.5). Across 30 recorded Audi RS configurations and 32 for the Subaru WRX, the wider the engine spread the more the real-world fuel efficiency depends on which version you actually buy, so check the specific model year and drivetrain rather than the headline number.

Drivetrain and class: the Audi RS is offered with All-Wheel Drive, 4-Wheel Drive, the Subaru WRX with All-Wheel Drive. All-wheel drive typically costs one to two mpg combined against the same vehicle in front- or rear-wheel drive, which is worth remembering when the gap between these two is small. The EPA classes them as Subcompact Cars and Compact Cars respectively — the class drives the interior volume, cargo space and passenger space each one is measured against.

Tailpipe emissions: at their cleanest configurations the Subaru WRX emits 374 g/mile of CO2 versus 383 g/mile for the Audi RS. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.