Subaru Crew - Future Models II

ateixeira · July 2005

Thanks Ken, interesting info.

-juice

rsholland · July 2005

This is the first application of a Spec B automatic that I'm aware of.

http://www.japanesecarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2050728.002

http://www.subaru.com.au/news/?newsid=12293

Bob

rob_m · July 2005

Interesting how the Auto costs $1k less than the manual. Rob M.

ateixeira · July 2005

Sweet. I guess that 6MT costs a pretty penny.

Add Nav and that would be a perfect car for my wife, cost no object. She's back into sedans, and wants an auto this time around.

-juice

rsholland · July 2005

Isn't the Legacy GT auto available with NAV for '06?

Bob

njswamplands · July 2005

bigelm · July 2005

This is the same person who could not understand why many of us were into the NAV when a 'cheap' map would do... Huh juice...? :P

rsholland · July 2005

If you click on the Impreza link, you can also download the Canadian Impreza PDF brochure.

http://www.subaru.ca/

Also shown are the 2.5 i and Outback Sport. The 2.5 i has some nice new wheels. The Outback Sport has chrome grille accents, which is the reason why the grille is constructed in several pieces (which juice didn't care for). It also looks like Subaru has finally removed that tacky looking large "Outback Sport" decal from the rear doors. Thanks you SOC/SOA, as I've hated that styling detail from the very beginning!

Also, in Canada there is no WRX Limited (most of the Limited equipment minus the leather is available, however), WRX TR, and the WRX wagon is not available with an automatic.

Bob

rsholland · July 2005

I think what you see here with the Outback Sport, with its chrome grille accents, is something very similar to what Subaru will do with the '08 Legacy and Outback, when they too get this new front end.

Bob

rsholland · July 2005

'06 Impreza Exterior Accessories
http://japanparts.com/shop/shop.cgi?mode=itemlist&maker=Subaru&type_car=Impreza+WRX+2006&t- - ype_second=Interior+and+Exterior&type_third=Exterior+%2d+others

Different grilles for the '06 Impreza:

European Mesh Grille (AKA OBS grille)

Sporty Mesh Grille

Colored Mesh Grille

Bob

rsholland · July 2005

Since this is labeled "European," I think it's safe to assume that the European 1.6i, 2.0i and 2.5i (assuming there is a 2.5i) will all come with this grille. So far I think only Germany offers an Outback Sport, but that could change.

Bob

lark6 · August 2005

Not sure the best forum for this post - maybe Cafe better? - but given the hopes of some for a Subie roadster I'll go here.

I was in a store yesterday when someone pulled up in the parking lot in a new Pontiac Solstice. Delaware tags with "D" prefix (dealer?); dark blue metallic paint with black convertible top and interior. I asked the driver if it was a prototype and he replied no, that it was a production car and that they were due in dealerships beginning this week. He addded that the Saturn Sky version would begin to arrive a month later, with prices for both starting "under $20K." IIRC the driver was a GM employee, but I didn't grill him as to exactly what he did.

I got to sit in and run my hands over the Solstice and was impressed with the fit and finish, though I suspect this isn't the best color scheme for the car. He demonstrated lowering the manual top, which stows beneath the combo trunk/deck lid/headrest fairing. Easy enough, but with the top down not even enough cargo room for a carry-on bag. You'd need soft-sided duffles or canoe/kayak drybags that could be molded around the top.

All that said, without actually driving the car it left a favorable impression on me. For GM's sake, in particular the folks working in the Wilmington plant, I hope it's a hit.

Ed

rsholland · August 2005

This from Carter Subaru. Is this their first '06 Impreza? It's got an MSRP sticker on the side window. it's a base WRX sedan (non-Limited model).

http://www.cars101.com/subaru/impreza/impreza2006photos.html

Bob

ateixeira · August 2005

I confess, you got me. Guilty as charged.

4 days with a good NAV system with voice commands and I'm convinced of its usefullness, particularly for my wife, who visits clients and often follows faulty MapQuest directions. Plus it could be our trip car. She naps so she's not much of a co-pilot. I can't fuss with paper maps while I drive, so I try to memorize the trip, which is tough.

Brand-new Subies with NAV are pricey, a GT limited with Nav is close enough to a Tribeca that we would just get that, but neither is in our price range. We want to spend *zero*, i.e. trade even for 2002 Legacy.

We might trade used for used, 00-04 for the universal double-DIN space in the dash. Automatic tranny too, this time around, on this car.

-juice

jeffmc · August 2005

Bob, photos of an STi also up now at that site. I also found reference there to a "260 watt" CD changer, which would be a HUGE bump up in power from the 160-watt changer used in Tribeca, but it is likely an error... Subaru's press release says 140 watts.

rsholland · August 2005

http://www.japanesecarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2050805.002

Interesting in that the base Euro-Imprezas will be badged 2.0R (using an "R" like the 3.0 models), and not 2.0i, as here in the USA.

Bob

rsholland · August 2005

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/08/05/139508.html

No mention of Spec B. That model is due out in October, so I guess closer to that release date we will see a PR on it.

Bob

ateixeira · August 2005

Note that torque is up slightly. 169 lb-ft.

Also, it makes more power (175 vs 173) and torque (169 vs 166) than the 2.5l in the Forester and Impreza.

Since the Baja is unique, that means they are making 3 different states of tune for the EJ255 engine! That seems silly.

-juice

ateixeira · August 2005

Cheapest way to get factory NAV is a GT Limited sedan, automatic only, and that's $32,620. :mad:

-juice

alpha01 · August 2005

Juice, are those numbers SAE certified or are they the old method of measurement?

~alpha

rsholland · August 2005

230 HP 2.5 turbo. 17" tires still an option, however. Prices remain the same as last year.

http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewp- - - ressreldetail.do?domain=502&docid=17195

This is sort of a surprise,as I didn't think the Aero (turbo) would return. The only real advantage that the Aero has over the WRX Limited is the availabilty of optional HIDs.

Bob

kens · August 2005

Probably my misunderstanding, but I thought Saab wasn't going to offer the 9-2X anymore after lower than expected sales.

Ken

rochcom · August 2005

I have been busy with a major project lately and have not used the Subaru boards much, so I guess I missed something. When I go to my bookmarked page, I get the very first page of Subaru board topics, rather than the most current, as I used to get. When I go to the last page, to try to find current forums, I see a bunch of boards listed as "New" even when some are read-only and have had not had an entry in two years. It is very hard to find the right discussion. What's with the clutter?

ateixeira · August 2005

With employee pricing sales picked up. In fact in some regions it was hard to find an Aero. They went for $19.4k, while WRXs were $22k and up with no free service.

I heard prices are higher for the '06 but I'm not sure by how much.

alpha01: I'm not sure if Subaru is using the new SAE methodology, someone said there weren't (yet).

-juice

bigelm · August 2005

Aero's have HID's, Leather, Sports Suspension, 17"s, Moonroof, Side Curtain and looks better. Of course, some are options but they're available and cheaper than the WRX with the GM discount. Now they are lowering the prices on the '06's with rebates on them while they're barely getting in the showrooms.

Have you seen GM's "I Promise" commercial. It's kinda entertaining.

ateixeira · August 2005

HID availability, you mean.

WRX offers the rest of that stuff. OK, the 9-2x arguably looks better, I'll give you that.

What are the employee prices on the 06s? It went from $17.4k when it was the true employee-only price, to $19.4k, to what now? I'm curious.

-juice

rsholland · August 2005

http://www.nikkei.co.jp/news/sangyo/20050811AT1D0902G10082005.html

Here's a translated version of the above Japanese site:

Fuji Heavy Industries has developed its next generation electric car utilizing high efficiency lithium-ion batteries. The cost to drive run one will be minizmized to one-eighth of that of a gasoline powered "K" car.

Within this year FHI will commence practical use tests on public roads, and aims at 2009 for commercialization of the electric car.

Though Fuji Heavy Industries lagged behind in the development of technologies using both engine and motor, such as hybrid and fuel cell cars, it plots a rally with its next generation electric car.

The electric car FHI has developed is a "K" car - the "Subaru R1" - combining it with a high efficiency lithium-ion battery and driving motor developed by a joint investment company held with NEC - NEC Lamilion Energy.

Since the electric car does not use gasoline, its CO2 emissions are less than half of a gasoline powered car. Set in nighttime electric power mode, it is said that running costs of the electric car will be one-eighth of a gasoline powered car and one-fifth of a hybrid car.

Up to now, electric vehicles have had a negative image associated with limited driving range on one charge, high maintenance costs, and the necessity to replace the battery once every two years. The new FHI electric car has a maximum driving range of 200 km on one charge, the battery does not need replacement for ten years, and maintenance costs are inexpensive.

Bob

jeffmc · August 2005

Wow! That's fantastic news. Put my name on the waiting list, please. Also, in the translation, I think when they say "K" car, they mean "Kei" car. I wonder what "nighttime electric power mode" is, and what auto show will get first peek. It's nice to finally see a big development utilizing their NEC advantage.

rsholland · August 2005

I suspect this is for the JDM market, if they're using the R1.

Bob

jeffmc · August 2005

Yah, probably so. I still want one, though.

bat1161 · August 2005

Bob,

Sounds like a promising design, however I believe you are correct that the US will probably not see this. The range has to be increased as well - approx 132 miles per charge won't get you very far. Although it does make it a good commuter car.

Mark

rsholland · August 2005

I've been thinking about hybrids a lot recently. I guess you thank the high gas prices for that.

In any event it dawned on me that hybrids, as they currently are designed, for the most part use the electric motor to "assist" the gas engine.

What if the gas engine was only used to recharge the battery, and the only power source for the vehicle was the electric motor? I would think if that were the case, that the gas engine could be much smaller. My guess is the gas engine could be the size of those used in electric generators, or maybe a bit larger; but I doubt you would need a 4 or 6 cylinder engine. I would think 500cc  1000cc gas engine would be more than sufficient just to recharge the battery of an electric engine. That being the case, gas mileage would be a whole lot better than it is now with hybrids.

Bob

bat1161 · August 2005

That sounds plausible, if it can be done. It's funny with the Hybrid market. Everyone is announcing the are getting inthe game, but most of them are using the technology to improve performance, not gas mileage. Recently the NY Times did a comparison between the RX330 and the RX400H. If I remember correctly, they had the same gas mileage for roughly $4000 more in the hybrid model. Why can't they combine improvement in the performance with better gas mileage?

Mark

ateixeira · August 2005

Poor range = limited appeal here in the US.

Also, wonder what they mean by "Set in nighttime electric power mode", is that with the A/C off and no radio in no traffic? It just doesn't mean much.

I mean, my gas engine gets 100 mpg going down hill with the A/C off. So what?

Tell me how it will do in rush-hour traffice with the A/C and radio cranked.

-juice

once_for_all · August 2005

it is a nice thought but doesn't pencil out. Maybe I can explain the analogy best by comparing it to an irrigation pump.

Electric drive overall efficiency = 91% motor x 75% pump = 68% overall

Diesel drive overall efficiency = 37% engine x 75% pump = 27.8% overall

Diesel generator x electric drive: 37% engine x 95% generator x 91% motor x 75% pump = 24% overall.

The reasons hybrids work better overall, is because the different power units engage at their most efficient contribution, and there is regenerative power on braking and shutdown while idling.

If you just only continually power a generator, you lose efficiency by putting in the generator and electric motor inefficiencies of about 86 percent of what the engine shaft horsepower has available.

It still might come close to the engine direct though, if there is regenerative power and engine shut down (which would tend to recover some of the wasted fuel incurred by an engine only unit).

Sense?

John

jeffmc · August 2005

Sell this drivetrain in R1 and R2-type cars to urban/suburbanites for under $18k and I think you'd really have something. I think you'd need the R2 to appeal to folks with a family.
Those who commute more than 130 miles a day must be a VERY small minority. This type of car would work as a commuter for nearly everyone... you'd just need a trip car to go along with it (like a nice Tribeca!). Many people don't even take many long drives... renting a vehicle for the dozen or so times a year those people would drive farther would be even more economical than owning a trip car in addition to an electric commuter.
As a country, we need to wake up and realize that this type of vehicle would meet nearly all of our everyday driving needs. *stepping off soapbox now* Whether it would meet nearly all of our everyday driving wants is another story.

p.s. I still want one!

rsholland · August 2005

John, I'll take your word for it. Does it make sense for me? Not one bit, as I'm not an engineer. In fact I'm about as far away as you can possibly get from being an engineer.

Bob

jeffmc · August 2005

Must... resist... making... joke... AARGH! It's no use!

"I'm about as far away as you can possibly get from being an engineer."

Does that mean you're the caboose?

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

samiam_68 · August 2005

Don't diesel powered locomotives actually use the diesel engine to generate electricity to power an electric motor which in turn drives the wheels? That is a pretty efficient setup considering how much cargo a locomotive can haul over great distance.

rsholland · August 2005

No, it's more of a right-brain/left-brain thing.

I'm a graphic designerand surely not someone who deals with engineering and/or mathematical equations.

Bob

once_for_all · August 2005

yep, it is because torque in an electric motor is at its maximum at next to zero speed. Can you imagine the clutch/tranny issues a big locomotive pulling a long train would have? Electric motors eliminate that particular problem.

John

once_for_all · August 2005

ever see the carton with the tire swing on the tree and the various professionals that came up with totally disfunctional but technically correct designs?

We need designers like you Bob, we would get it all goofy if left to ourselves.

John

locke2c · August 2005

were on a grid or rail system and were computer controlled with no user interaction, then that type of drive system would make sense. of course, the vehicle itself wouldn't make much sense because then you are talking about a series of small trains, not cars. if they're all going one place, use mass transit! if they have custom routes, that sounds like a lot more sophisticated infrastructure than a car takes, and I already don't like my tax burden paying for simple asphalt and concrete.

the combustion engine, or hybrid combustion and electric, is well suited to the way a car is actually used.

~Colin

njswamplands · August 2005

jeffmc · August 2005

I wonder if there's really any new news here or if this is just a re-hash of two-year-old information about the Subaru R1e from the 2003 Tokyo Auto Show. About the only new information seems to be that FHI will be doing practical use tests this year. Has the technology really been ready since '03 and Subaru's been sitting on its hands this whole time? These types of tests should've been done two years ago if the battery technology was ready then. Subaru could be rolling out something really unique and useful just as we're all starting to pee our pants (figuratively, people!) over the cost of gas here in the States. Stick that up your Prius.

I had forgotten how similar the R1 looks to Tribeca... the same, only smaller (and a little sportier)! Grill, tail lights, rear window shape, overall profile, all virtually the same.I still can't believe how sharp it looks (not so much with the R2, though). Rear wheels sticking out the back are hard to get used to, but everything else... WOW!

I wonder if these could be imported on an individual basis, and how much that would cost. I'll take a Tribeca & R1e in matching colors with license plates reading DREVIL & MINIME.

jeffmc · August 2005

Never noticed this before... R1 and Tribeca even share the little windows located between the A-pillar and the side mirrors.

rsholland · August 2005

The "new" news here is the fact that Subaru is going to put it into production. The R1e was just a concept car with no indication of being anything beyond that. Since the R1e's show debut, they have introduced in Japan a production R1 (and a 4-door R2), which looks very much like the concept R1e, but it has a 660cc gas engine.

Bob

ateixeira · August 2005

Some folks are saying gas is gonna hit $5 per gallon, if they knew that for certain I bet Subaru would give serious consideration to bringing the R2 at least.

I would actually consider a tiny car like that if it were fun and especially if it had a folding top or at least a large moonroof of some sort.

-juice

rsholland · August 2005

I'm curious as to how these prices are affecting car purchases, more specifically those that run on premium?

I understand Colin's point about the savings being equal to the price of a good dinner out, but there's more to it than that. Besides the roughly $.20/gal gap between 87 & 91 octane, there's the overall rise in fuel cost over the past few years (not just the recent rapid rise in cost). When you take that into account, it's not just the price of a night out on the town, but for some (many?), it could the difference between cutting back on some weekly groceries. The fact is people's income has not risen in proportion to the steep rise in fuel costs.

So, are people who were considering a Legacy GT, which requires premium, now considering a Legacy 2.5i, or 2.5i SE which run on regular? I'm wondering if SOA has noticed a shift in buying patterns over this past year, as the cost of fuel rises?

Bob

bigelm · August 2005

That's why I said:
Of course, some are options...

Official prices for the '06's haven't been out yet but you're around that price range for the new models.

Subaru Crew - Future Models II

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles