Subaru Crew - Future Models II

goldencouple1 · February 2002

the 2003 Forester will be available...when? March or April...or late May?

rsholland · February 2002

at the NADA convention, it sounds like late May.

Bob

rsholland · February 2002

I just spoke to a long-time salesman at one of the larger Subaru dealers in my area, and he indicated that Subaru may be considering a larger 2.8L H-4, as an option! Something with about 190 HP. He didn't say this was certain, or if it is certain, as to when it might appear.

If Subaru is considering this, I would also think they would bump up the H-6 to at least 3.3L. Otherwise the engines would be too close in size, IMO. Also, large 4 cylinder engines have always been known for the shakes. I'm guessing the a larger boxer is probably less prone to this however, because of its inherit natural balance.

"Really big" 4 cylinder engines are not new. Porsche had a 3.0L 944. Mitsubishi had a 2.6L a few years back. Nissan just introduced in Australia, a 3.0L 4-valve, DOHC diesel pickup. So, I guess a really large H-4 is not out of the question. It certainly would be the least expensive alternativecertainly less expensive than a turbo.

This guy also did confirm the H-6 Legacy tooand NO H-6 for the Forester, BTW.

Ah, something new to contemplate...

Bob

locke2c · February 2002

Bob,

I doubt the existing H4 could go that large. Aftermarket tuners--who care nothing about factory durability and longevity-- do not recommend more than 2.6 to 2.65L.

That means either a) your salesman was speaking jibberish or b) FHI is building a new, bigger H4 block. I doubt b) considering the EZ30 is only slightly longer and less than 100lb heavier than the 2.5L, but I suppose anything is possible.

-Colin

cptplt · February 2002

could they be referring to the OB in that report about OnStar as Subaru always reports sales figures as Legacy and the term OB is only used later in the details when the OB is several fold more popular than the Legacy.
I thought the new Legacy was coming in 05 or something, 03 will be fine by me, just in time to replace my 92!

kens · February 2002

Interesting news about the H-6 Legacy. I wonder if they're refering to both the Legacy L and GT line.

I'd be game for an H-6 Legacy GT.

Ken

rsholland · February 2002

If you think in terms of a cost-effective solution to getting more power, a larger 2.8L H-4 makes sense. A larger H-4 is probably not much more expensive to build than the current H-4, and certainly less expensive than either an H-4 turbo or an H-6.

What surprises me most is: I didn't think Subaru would even consider a larger H-4 than the 2.5. I think we've all been thinking either another H-4 turbo, or spreading the H-6 around to more models.

Do you know if the current 2.5 H-4 is built on a separate block that is different from that used on the 2.2 H-4, or 2.0 H-4? As you know, in Japan they also have a 1.5 H-4. I'm assuming that block is not related to the larger H-4s?

Bob

locke2c · February 2002

Bob,

The EJ series that has made it to the US is all the same basic engine block from 1.8-2.5L. In fact, the 1.8L and 2.0L share the same stroke and same crankshaft. (someone on the iClub broke an expensive WRX STi motor they imported and replaced it with a lowly 110HP 1.8L crank... lol)

Anyway, you have to remember that Subaru is a pretty low volume player so engine designs are costly. The H4 in my opinion doesn't need to go above 2.5L because at that point it should be turbocharged or the H6 should be used. Anything above 2.0L in most of Europe and Asia is hit with pretty hefty taxes.

-Colin

p0926 · February 2002

Bob- I gotta agree with Colin. Why would Subaru spend the money to develop a whole new block that would support a 2.8 H4 when they've already got the 3.0 H6? Also, sales people aren't known to be the most reliable sources. Especially considering that Subaru does an excellent job of keeping a tight hold on future product info (as Patti can attest).

-Frank P.

ateixeira · February 2002

If you think about it, the "new" engine design is the 3.0l H6. Scale that down to 4/6ths and you have 2.0l. Plus, the walls in the block are more narrow, so there is less room for adding displacement to that new block design.

I say add technology like AVCS instead. They are already at the CAFE limit. Subaru hints at this by calling the Forester "more fuel efficient". We all expected it to be quieter and more refined (as the Impreza was), but it's already getting 21/28 or 22/27 mpg. If it gets better, it'll actually exceed the ratings for the lighter Imprezas.

How? AVCS seems like the most logical answer to me.

Legacy 6 sounds good. I hope they don't give it a ridiculously long name like "Subaru Legacy GT Limited H6 3.0". That's more like a sentence.

OK, I caught a piece of bad news. We're all aware of the 2005 SUW, but now they were specific about the date and said calendar year 2005, model year 2006. So it's even further away.

-juice

ateixeira · February 2002

I think that a 2.8l H6 is more likely than an H4 of the same displacement.

Why? You can't stroke the 2.5l H4 much, because there isn't space. So you can bore it out a little, though I seriously doubt you could reach 2.8l. So you'd need an entirely new block, therefore a new crank, new headers, lots of re-engineering.

They could build a 2.8l H6 from the existing 3.0l engine, and either shorten the stroke (new crank) or use a smaller bore (new pistons and cylinder sleeves). Either way, that's fewer new parts to engineer.

-juice

rsholland · February 2002

(from Member's Forumsince deleted)

It wouldn't surprise me that Subaru is looking into this possibility. I'm sure they look into all sorts of possible powertrain alternatives that we never hear of. The question is: Do they think it's worthy enough to put into production?

As to the salesman: Normally I would agree. However this guy has been around selling Subies for years, and he's from one of the Balt/Wash largest Subaru dealers, Heritage Subaru (which also owns Tisher Subaru). I've seen pre-production models on their lot before they hit the streets, left there by SOA reps, for service or inspection. The H-6 Outback comes to mind. Still you could be right, he could be blowing smoke...

Bob

rsholland · February 2002

(from Members Forumsince deleted)

An H-4 would be cheaper to manufacture... less parts than an H-6 or H-4 turbo. This would be the low(er)-cost alterenative to getting more power.

Bob

ateixeira · February 2002

He may have heard 2.8l and assumed it was an H4 (instead of an H6). Or it could be that he heard more power and torque are on the way for the H4s and he assumed it would be with more displacement vs. AVCS.

To US buyers, a 4-banger is still just a 4-banger. It would do little or nothing to improve the image of the models that got a 2.8l. Even it it was quicker and better, many would still say "it's not a six".

That stigma, plus worse mileage to hurt CAFE, makes it seem unlikely IMO.

-juice

rsholland · February 2002

about that. He was certain it was a 2.8 H-4, not an H-6.

While I agree with what you're saying, a 2.8 H-4 would be cheaper to market than a 2.8 H-6. I think that's how Subaru would approach itmore bang for the buck with the larger H-4, especially in this highly competitive and very price-sensitive market segment.

He also thought, if this were to come to pass, it would not be this year. So I don't expect to find it in the new Forester, at least not yet.

Again, this engine configuration may have made Subaru's "short list" of possible directions to go. It doesn't mean it will happen at all.

Bob

p0926 · February 2002

Bob- "a 2.8 H-4 would be cheaper to market than a 2.8 H-6"

Only if Subaru can bore out the current EJ block to 2.8. It makes no economic sense if Subaru has to develop a whole new block.

-Frank P.

rsholland · February 2002

There will be development costs associated with any new engine. Even if it requires a new block, I think there are many parts that could be used from the current 2.5 H-4. Plus, an H-4 has to be cheaper than an H-6 to manufacture. There are less parts to contend with.

Bob

rsholland · February 2002

Wednesday at 10:45...

Bob

ateixeira · February 2002

That would leave too many engines for such a small manufacturer. I really think they can do fine with the existing engine lineup (especially the JDM models). I'd focus the R&D funds on new trannies.

Two days!

-juice

jimmyp1 · February 2002

= please give me the gift of a B4, SoA, please?!? Even the ANNOUNCEMENT of one will be fine.

Jim

rsholland · February 2002

57th, so SOA, like Jim I too need a new B-4.

Bob

ateixeira · February 2002

Looks like the announcement of the 2003 Forester is more likely. I hope they give you the following:

* same prices as 2002 models
* little/no weight gain
* stiffer structure, more refinement
* better materials (visor, carpet, head liner)
* AVCS for the 2.5l engine
* 2.5l turbo by January 2003
* seats from WRX, with height adjusters
* rear suspension from the Outback
* 16" wheels standard

I'm hoping it gets all those things.

-juice

1subydown1togo · February 2002

is my birthday also! (52) ...I'll take a B4, please!

kens · February 2002

Happy birthday fellas!

Another way to meet CAFE standards is to offer that 5EAT and 6MT that we've been asking for. Spread out the gearing a bit so that the engine revs lower in the highest gear.

A 2.8 4-banger would be wild, but I would have a hard time choosing between that and the H6 unless price was an issue.

So is that 10:45 CST?

Ken

ateixeira · February 2002

10:45 Chicago time, right? How different from the east coast are they?

-juice

silface · February 2002

From the veh-tech.net website, they mention Suzuki will equip the XL-7 with a 3 liter V6 engine in North America. I hope Subaru is one step ahead of them and introduces the H-6 in the Forester. Can't wait for Wednesday!
Sil

armac13 · February 2002

Bob, Serge, Jim. We had quite a group in October, now another little blip in February. Any others hiding out here?

Ross

hypov · February 2002

to y'all Feb Fellas!!!

I really think they got Patti in the dungeon again. Just like before the Baja announcement.

-Dave

1subydown1togo · February 2002

and Ross wants to send me there also! (not a bad place to be!, Patti and I can share dog stories)
Serge

paisan · February 2002

I turn 28.

-mike

ateixeira · February 2002

I bet Hyundai follows Suzuki's lead. The Santa Fe will end up with the 3.5l engine from the Sedona, along with its 5 speed auto. Watch.

Subaru had better keep up.

-juice

1subydown1togo · February 2002

Happy Birthday, Mike, and many more (wins)

Serge

rsholland · February 2002

has introduced a 5-speed sport-shift automatic version of the home-market Evo VII. I'm sure that'll make it State-side, along with the manual version.

Hope Subaru will have their 5-speed automatic ready by then.

Bob

http://www.apexjapan.com/

kens · February 2002

The Evo with a 5-speed auto will certainly put pressure on Subaru to do the same!

Ken

ateixeira · February 2002

The auto WRX is significantly slower than the manual, so it could really benefit from that tranny. With taller gearing it takes longer for it to spool up and get going, vs. the 5 speed.

-juice

cptplt · February 2002

I just came across the Legacy brochure when I was shopping for my 92, they had a 2.2 turbo then (160hp instead of 130 for the NA 2.2). If they could turbocharge the 2.2 back then and get almost 25% more power, couldn't they do that to the 2.5 and get almost 200+hp???
How about a 2.5 turbo Legacy GT wagon with 200hp, VTD-5EAT, WRX seats ?? I'd be buying one in a split second.

locke2c · February 2002

yes, the could do that but the problem is motivation.

subaru was highly motivated to compete in FIA world rallying and when they came in 2.2L was the max displacement (audi Quattro Sport = 2.2L for the same reason).

the legacy turbo of course was a warmed over version of the rallycar, making only 160HP with the same tiny IHI RHB52 turbo used on the EA 1.8L engines (GL, loyale, DL, etc.).

today the WRX is a 2.0L turbo instead of 2.5L because of rallying and taxes. mostly rallying.

subaru would have to think they could sell a whole lot of 2.5L turbos to justify building one. they also have to think they have a gearbox capable of surviving behind one, and honestly I think only the six speed manual could do that.

-Colin

jei · February 2002

I wonder if the same beefy 5 speed automatic that would allow a 6 cylinder Outback or Forester to tow 4,000 lbs and get decent CAFE mileage would be stout enough for a 2.5L turbo? Just another choice for the broader market. One thing GM does very well is build automatic transmissions...

John

subypower · February 2002

33,000 miles. I use it as my commuter car. The thing is still in excellent shape and can fly for an older car.

They did come out with a Legacy GT turbo in Autstralia I believe. I think you will see it in the pipeline in the states in the near future along with the Minivan and the 7 passenger Audi looking wagon from the Tokyo car show.

rsholland · February 2002

It's in the works, but currently all Subaru automatics are 4-speed units.

Bob

jimmyp1 · February 2002

You've got a gem there at less than 3k a year. What's your commute? A block or two? Actually that's not unheard of, it's what my Mom's commute has been for 20 years. I have a 1994 Turbo Sedan. I was very disappointed to see the Legacy - High mileage repairs board go to read only ( a testament to Subaru quality, I guess - they set them to read only after not being used for a certain amount of time), but I can sneak issues into General Maintenance and repairs, I guess.

Cptplt - I think everyone has responded correctly to your post. I also think the 2.5 could generate nearly, if not over, 200 hp without a turbo. Easily. Juice's comments on variable valve timing come to mind. But, then again, maybe a light pressure turbo and no intercooler (cheaper, possibly more reliable?) would be desirable, dunno. Maybe a combination of the two. I have to say I'm skeptical of the "rumored new engines". Subaru seems to have all the layouts they need in one form or another.

Jim

locke2c · February 2002

I agree Jim, over 200HP from a naturally aspirated but variable valve timing 2.5L can be done. Wouldn't even be that hard...

The problem is that such an engine would be high rpm, which even with gearing is definitely not what you want for an Outback or Forester, and probably not even a Legacy.

A low-pressure (say 10psi or under) 2.5L super- or turbocharged model would offer considerably more low-end and midrange torque which is exactly what the Outback & Forester need...

Kinda unlikely given the H6 in my opinion, even though a low-pressure 2.5L would be all over the 3.0 H6 for low-end and midrange.

-Colin

bkaiser1 · February 2002

Sorry, I couldn't bit my tongue on this...GM build builds smooth transmissions that feel great, until they fail outright which, in my experience, is quite early. I bought a new Chevy pickup in 94 -- the trans began disintegrating at around 33K miles and was toast by 35,900.

I took it in for service just before the warranty expired to discover they would be replacing the entire transmission. After all the other problems I had with that truck, I never got it out of service...I traded it in while it was in the shop and bought a Mazda. When it shifted, though, it shifted beautifully well.

My very good friend is now on his 3rd (!) transmission rebuild on his Blazer with 80K on it...that's inexcusable. I remember in the 80's, too, my friends with GM trucks ALWAYS had transmission troubles. Smooth, yes, but not very durable (like most everything else GM touches).

Brian

cptplt · February 2002

I realize that there are major savings from having a large production run but given that Saabs total car production output is less than Subarus N America sales, you would think a market for a 2.5 turbo is there. Plus if you count in the EU and many places in Asia where engines are taxed on displacement or CO output I would think a 2.5 Turbo would do better than a 3.0.
But then again maybe the reason Detroit owns Saab now is that they were bankrupt!

francophile · February 2002

The 6 is what we'll get in the Legacy, that seems eminently clear. It doesn't weigh much more than the 2.5L 4, and the extra 8HP the Japanese Legacy 6 gets shows that it obviously has tweaking potential, so I'm not disappointed by getting the 6.

It does probably mean that there will be no turbo Legacy though, at least not anytime soon. I can live with that if they put enough sportiness into the 6. Actually, I might even consider *gasp* getting an automatic -- if they make it a 5-speed, and if it's the only way to get the VTD center diffy. Dream combo would be a 6-speed manual with the spiffy diff. My fear however is that they're aiming at the near-lux folks such as Acura TL and Lexus 300, and so will tend towards lux instead of sport. I hope not -- that segment really needs an affordable driver's car, and Subaru has a lot of experience and a justified international reputation for building that kind of car.

As for other displacements in the 4-cylinder range, didn't I read somewhere that the new 6 was the first in a family of motors, and that there would be 4-cylinder versions?

Rgds,
-wdb

subypower · February 2002

snagged the 91 Legacy Turbo when it was traded. Nice car. Complete record of oil changes every 3 months because it came before the mileage change. Also did the 15 and 30k services before I got it. Nice car.

paisan · February 2002

I too have heard good things about them.

My Rodeo went 120K on the GM transmission built in France. (never even changed the fluid) and so far the Trooper has 35K good miles on it. Both did extensive towing.

-mike

jimmyp1 · February 2002

massaged it's website with a teaser link that says come back tomorrow for stories and pictures (edit: on the Chicago Auto Show). They mention that the Forester will continue to be built in Japan. Was that a topic here a while back or was that regarding a different model?

Jim

artdecho · February 2002

On the official site, there are a couple of webcams up & running. Camera 3 can be swung around to the Subaru display, unfortunately it's at a bad angle......I can only make out a Baja and one of the rally cars.....imagine the Forester would be under wraps 'til tomorrow anyway. Not much longer......

hypov · February 2002

it's not Wednesday today?! =p
Dang, the week just became a day longer...
well another day to look foward to hearing.seeing about the 2003 Forester.

Is it Wednesday tomorrow? :-)

-Dave

Subaru Crew - Future Models II

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles