Subaru Crew Cafe

14344464849343

Comments

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I know what you mean, I just think it's more of a statement that a commitment.

    Noone can hold them to it because by then they'll have replaced CEOs twice, most likely. ;-)

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    http://www.indystar.com/article.php?isuzu11.html


    Subaru and Pontiac may build "tall wagon" in SIA plant if Isuzu bails. Makes sense since Subaru has figured out how to duplicate Pontiac's cladding quite well, as the Baja attests to...


    Bob

  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    http://www.car-truck.com/chryed/buzz/b102402.htm


    I still think Subaru (with Isuzu's help?) should consider offering a boxer turbo diesel.


    Bob

  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    That's not a stretch, there have been rumors that pontiac will re-badge the WRX in it's lineup for about a year now.

    -mike
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Any particular reason you guys are so hung up on diesel boxers? Isuzu already makes the best diesel engines out there, no reason to mess with a formula that works.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Subiac is OK, I just don't want to see it the other way around.

    I think Subaru itself could absorb the extra production, if they shuffle the lineup like we talked about in future models.

    They're already complaining about a shortage of H6s, so just make more.

    A boxer diesel would be fine. I'm curious, how well does the TDI engine sell in the VWs?

    -juice
  • lucien2lucien2 Member Posts: 2,984
    I see TDis around. Maybe 1 for every 40 Jettas I see.
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Subiac...LOL!

    I read in an article several weeks ago about how the Toyota Matrix outsold the Pontiac Vibe despite the fact that they're the same vehicle. Interesting what brand equity can do.

    Ken
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'd say it's more like 1/20 in my 'hood, but that's still a very low percentage.

    The US needs to start using Euro-spec diesel fuel before we see more of those here. But it would definitely help Subaru meet future CAFE standards.

    Pontiac should sell a rebadged Outback to replace the embarassing Aztek.

    -juice
  • subearusubearu Member Posts: 3,613
    I would not care to see a Pontiac WRX. Nor do I care to see a Subaru version of anything Pontiac.

    -Brian
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    If it ain't a boxer, it ain't a Subaru.

    Besides, Subarus are engineered for boxer engines, and not any other form of engine configuration. If you stick some other engine layout in there, you'll most likely have to re-engineer the whole front end, if not the whole car.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Yep, AWD boxers only. Once you start bending that rule, and allow exceptions, they'll be selling Subaru Grand Ams.

    The boxer ensures it's a Subaru powertrain, designed specifically for AWD and a longitudinal layout.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    One of the (big) problems GM and Subaru is having in coming with a joint-venture vehicle is the boxer engine layout. Cars that are designed to work with this boxer engine configuration, are very difficult to convert to other driveline configurations.

    The boxer layout has many advantages, as we all know. Flexibility in swapping engines is not one of them (unless it's another boxer).

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    GM has 325 divisions with zero distinction. Let Pontiac sell rebadged models that share nothing with Chevys. They could offer:

    * Pontiac Borrego 2 seat pickup
    * Pontiac Vibe wagon
    * Pontiac Outbiac
    * Pontiac GTO

    That's it, drop all others. GM spends nothing to develop any models, yet they have a completely distinct lineup. Subaru can spread its costs and doesn't have to sell any GM junk (just ask Bravadajon about how Subaru AWD and Autotrak compare).

    -juice
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    What if...Pontiac took the WRX platform and squeezed a V6 in there?

    Do you think it would sell?

    Ken
  • dudedude Member Posts: 123
    To me, GM produces V6 engines that are not efficient at all. My fiancee has a Malibu with 3.1 V6 which only produces 170HP. That 3.1 engine is used by GM in Chevys, Pontiacs and Buicks I think.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    If the engineering was possible...even then, no.

    The 2.5RS produces the same power as that V6, and it's cheaper and lighter, not to mention smaller.

    -juice
  • dudedude Member Posts: 123
    Oh, I almost forgot, doesn't gm/suzuki produce 2.5L V6 for the Grand Vitara/Tracker which only makes 165HP?
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    dude,

    that's because they are pushrod. old crap.

    gm's 4-valve designs are mostly decent, except the old "quad four" based 4 cylinder. the new 2.2L is far superior.

    of course the competition is way beyond that, with many of them offering variable valve timing.

    -Colin
  • grahampetersgrahampeters Member Posts: 1,786
    G'day

    I ran a Merc Diesel for more than four years. Although excellent for the long distance trips I was doing, it did not return the maintenance benefits it was supposed to, developing a savage thirst for oil before 100,000 miles. The fuel itself is also smelly and despite the best efforts of the car's designers, it was still common to find diesel stains below the fuel filler. That problem extends to spilt fuel on the forecourt meaning that when you get back into the car, your shoes are slippery and stink. If you get off on walking into business meetings smelling like an engineering shop, that's fine.

    In Europe, where Diesels are common, there is wide availability of fuel. Here in Australia, diesels are a little less popoular, although having been sold for many years (in fact there was an Isuzu engined Gemini back in the early 1980's). That means that you usually fill up at the pumps used by trucks and farm machinery. Dirty again.

    For appropriate applications, diesels are excellent. However, they inherently have far greater vibration and noise than petrol engines. Given that one of the great benefits of the Subaru Boxer is the reduction in vibnration from its balance pattern, why would you try to add something to make it noisier.

    In addition, the far greater compression and exploive forces (typically compression ratios are about 23:1 as against 1):1 for petrol) means that the head structure must be stronger and heavier. Given that the Subaru has two head assemblies, that means two strengthening and weight adding needs.

    The final problem lies in performance. The Golf GTd and the BMW330d show that high performance can be obtained from a diesel (the BMW got a huge boost to sales when Jensen Button, a F1 driver was booked in France, the ticket showing the diesel was running at 142 mph the advertised top speed of the car). However, mmost diesels are far better suited to constant load situatin, making great truck engines. They are also great in taxis and delivery vehicles. Not so fun however for driving great twisty roads./ Somehow I can't see a WRXd in my future.

    Diesel has the potential for use in cars, although I find it hard to square with the philosophy of the Subaru.

    Cheers

    Graham
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    << What if...Pontiac took the WRX platform and squeezed a V6 in there?

    Do you think it would sell? >>

    As I mentioned earlier, I think to re-engineer any Subaru to handle anything other than a boxer, would be cost-prohibitive.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Your points are well taken. I just think that Subaru has eliminated a very large audience, by not offering a diesel; especially in Europe, where I believe 30% of cars sold are diesels.

    Hmmm a WRXd... I hadn't thought about that. ;)

    Bob
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    This was also posted in the 3 series thread, but I don't think anyone here reads that...

    I brought my M3 in to have new OE shifter bushings installed-- common wear item after 50k miles or so and I have 71k. (The shifter slops about 3/8" either direction when in gear.) I looked at where they go and decided that I didn't want the hassle and I did want a center console free of rattles. Thus, I went to the dealer. They also were looking at a fairly quiet rattle I'd been hearing from the front of the engine or thereabouts, especially when backing out of the throttle after parking or other low speeds.

    They quickly figured the noise was behind the timing cover somewhere but didn't know what. Guessed perhaps the VANOS system, a hydraulic phasing mechanism on the intake cam. Quoted 2.5 hours to teardown and investigate, which seemed reasonable I suppose.

    Even though I bought this car used from them and I'm long out of warranty, they offer free loaner vehicles. I leave in a 2001 Z3 3.0L, manual tranny and 8k miles on the clock. Not bad.

    My car hasn't been problematic-- but I do keep it meticulously serviced and usually I hear back from the dealer before lunch after dropping off my car at 8 AM. But a day and a half passed with no news, so I called them.

    They hadn't contacted me because they were waiting for a callback from BMW's tech group. The noise was coming from the VANOS system, but they feel it was right to just tell me to replace it all. They wanted to know how serious the noise was, if they could fix it without parts, and that sort of thing.

    Today they get back to me and relay that BMW told them it wasn't unusual for the VANOS system to rattle a bit with my mileage, but that it wasn't a mechanical concern. Kinda like lifter noise, if you will. They could replace it all if I really wanted, but at $1600 they did not recommend it. I agreed. They also said that the teardown was easier than expected and it was only 1 hour labor.

    I like this dealer. They could've had the other 1.5 hours of labor because I'd been expecting it. They could've not bothered asking BMW's techs about it and just told me to pony up $1600 or risk whatever might result from the noise. And offering loaners like this sure hasn't been the policy I've experienced with other dealers (none of them BMW, though). Not to mention the loaners aren't 6-year-old worn out Chevys... they are nice cars. Which is fair, because their customers like me are leaving behind nice cars.

    Anyway, just my 2 cents. Joe Self BMW in Wichita isn't half bad. I liked my purchase experience there too, but this is enough for one email. ;-D

    -Colin
  • jfljfl Member Posts: 1,398
    Colin, if I knew for sure that I'd get a dealer like yours, I'd strongly consider a bimmer too! 8~)

    Jim
  • subearusubearu Member Posts: 3,613
    I've seen someone at work with a decent BMW loaner (a 5 series). But, it's got the dealer's name and "Loaner" on the back window in 1" letters (advertising of course).

    If only all dealers (not just BMW ones) acted this way. *sigh*

    -Brian
  • lucien2lucien2 Member Posts: 2,984
    Yea like my dealer, instead of shtumping me for $400 to change plugs and do an oil change, then CALL MY HOUSE to tell me my car is overdue for its "52,533 mile service." Uuuhh, you mean OIL CHANGE?! Sorry I had it done around the corner instead of driving 30 minutes and then sitting around for half a morning.
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    Brian, the loaners at my dealer don't have any special marking at all other than the dealer plates. I've seen two 5 series, a sedan and a wagon. I presume they loan those to people who have bigger cars and let all the smaller car folk use the Z3s and 3ers.

    oh yeah, I saw a Z4 today when picking up my car. they got in two, steel grey and some sort of light blue. the grey was out on a drive, and I didn't get a chance to do much with the blue because a couple were looking at it. it's rude to walk up and start nosing around... but from 10 feet, it actually doesn't look as bad at the pics in magazines. kinda like the 350z, better in real life. still not a beauty contest winner though!

    too bad I couldn't drive one of 'em.

    -Colin
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Another thought on why I think Honda will offer 8 and/or 9 passenger seating on the next Odyssey, is that all the other next-generation minivans will offer a folding 3rd-row seat like the current Odyssey, leaving Honda with little advantage in that all-important area over the competition.


    So, how does Honda maintain their lead/edge in the minivan market? The most obvious solution to me is to add more seating.


    They've done that in the Philippines with their CRV, which seats 10 people! That's no misprint. It seats 3 up front, 4 in the middle, and 3 in the rear; in a vehicle no larger than the CRV sold here. Check the following link:


    http://www.hondaphil.com/crv_specs.asp


    If you scroll down to "Other" you will see the seating capacity listed. If you scroll down further, to "Interior," you will see pictures of the seating.


    So... Honda could very easily decide to up the ante in the *seat-race* in the minivan market here, in order to maintain their lead in that market segment. It may not seat 8 or 9 *adults* comfortably, but that won't matter. It will still give them braggin' rights.


    Bob

  • felch1felch1 Member Posts: 19
    I have a 2000 Legaacy GT limited.
    Can someone give me some advice on what all season tires you would recommend for this vehicle?
    Thanks
  • dudedude Member Posts: 123
    Felch, I got Yokohamas All Seasons on my 98GT, they are pretty good.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Isuzu is going to bail out of SIA. They will sell their share to Subaru.


    http://www.auto.com/industry/iwirg26_20021026.htm


    Bob

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Quad Four, how redundant.

    I bet pretty soon the majority of cars in Europe will be diesels.

    Colin: let's hope that noise is harmless. Good to hear they were so honest about it all.

    My wife's loaner was a Mitsu Mirage, not too horrible but not nearly as nice as our Legacy.

    Looking at the Z4 in action in the previews for the BMW Films, it looks better. I agree, no supermodel, but head and shoulders better than the droopy Z3.

    Can't say the same about that RL, though. Looks like an Uglified Alfa 164. FWD V6? Get ready to be creamed by Lexus once again.

    The Latitude on the same page looks interesting, if a little homely. Space efficiency is amazing, though. I hope the 2005 Subaru SUW is similar, except make it pretty.

    The Lexus RX330 gets a 3rd row before the Highlander does? Maybe both at the same time. That GS is an improvement over the current car, which has all the little details wrong.

    The Jetta looks odd. Photochop, probably. The Passat coupe looks better, but even that looks like a photochop of a Holden Monaro greenhouse on a Passat sedan lower half.

    The 2.slow engine is gone. Bob - remember I said VW had way too many engines? The 1.8l normally aspirated engine is offered in Brazil in the A3. I've said all along VW should drop the 2.slow and use that instead, looks like they finally will follow my advice. 6 speed manual and auto? Wow.

    The Mazda 9 looks like a bar of soap. C'mon, square that rear off, so it has come cargo space. The Murano has the same problem, so does the current RX300. You could get more space from the same platform with a square back.

    The TSX looks like a carbon copy of the Mazda 6, except the 6 got the details a little better. Still, it's handsome. But no V6? That price had better reasonable.

    The Scion looks very "econo-hatch". I don't see why Toyota thinks it'll succeed where Echo failed. Same stupid center cluster for the speedo, duh! At least it's boxy and offers more practicality.

    Better than the bbX we saw in NY, eh Bob?

    Avensis is interesting, but it looks like it belongs in the Hyundai lineup.

    That CR-V with a 3rd row is for short folks, I doubt there is acceptable leg room. The Latitude looks roomier, perhaps because it's FWD and sort of minivan shaped.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    How can the Odyssey improve? I have a couple of simple ideas.

    First, the track for the sliding door is an eye sore. Most vans have managed to hide that better, just below the window. Previa was first, then Dodge, now everyone seems to do it.

    Honda's excuse was the power doors, but again others have power doors and manage it. Top it off, Honda's doors aren't even reliable. Lame excuse. Fix that.

    How 'bout windows that go down? In a car meant for road trips and sight seeing, this is a big plus. I love that features on the MPV.

    The 3rd thing I'd want them to address is the powertrain. Power is fine, number of tranny ratios fine, etc. But make it more robust, durable. That stuff from the tow package should be made standard (tranny and PS coolers).

    People like captain's chairs, so I'm not sure if a 9th seat would matter much to most people. In fact, in SUVs where seating for 9 is offered, most people still opt for captain's chairs, even paying extra for it.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    knowing Honda, if they offer a 9-passenger version, I bet it (3-across seating) will have some very unique feature such as fold-away capability. Yes, a lot of folks like that walk-through feature found on all 7-passenger minivans, but if Honda can find a way to keep that&#151;and also give them 9-passenger capability when desired, they'll have a real winner. Remember, Honda is a master of interior packaging. I bet they can do it.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Fold down from the ceiling? LOL

    Just teasing. I like the seat/console on the Tuarus. They could do something like that. A wide arm rest with cup holder and a power outlet for a notebook PC on one side, a seat on the other.

    I don't know about a walk-through, though. Maybe it could recline all the way back or something?

    I dunno, I just see some practical improvements Honda could make. My cousin just wants better paint, for instance. The 3rd seat is also heavy, maybe they could take a page from Ford's book and make it power operated?

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    will need to make a big *statement.* The fold-away rear seat of their current minivan is such a statement. That feature alone, blew away the domestic competition, which dominated that market, until the current Odyssey debuted. They will again have to offer something (important!) that no one else offers.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    But Honda doesn't always make a statement - in fact, they usually lag 3-5 years behind the market, then arrive late to the party, admittedly crashing the party with a solid offering.

    Looking at supply and demand, though, tells me they don't need to change a whole lot of the basics. My guess is they'll add features, and people will line up to pay whatever they charge for them.

    For starters, allow a DVD *and* a Navigation system. Those must be cash cows, and consumers want 'em. Then add a power folding 3rd seat and hatch.

    Some dealers still have a 2 month wait list, so that's more than enough. Unless they increase supply substantially.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    with the current Chrysler minivans. The redesign was very conservative, and they took a huge hit from Honda. Chrysler learned its lesson. Expect the next-generation to be a much bolder statement. Honda better not rest on its laurels...

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    OK, but Honda has all the fundamentals right already.

    Chrysler doesn't, they just added a bunch of features to an old design.

    Not to mention, Honda's supply is much smaller, Chrysler still outsells Honda by a wide margin.

    -juice
  • nygregnygreg Member Posts: 1,936
    The future trend is not with bigger minivans. I understand more seating isn't necessarily bigger. What I see as the next big people mover is the Volvo XC90 "SUX" (not sure what X is)type vehicle. In other words, a Subaru OB like vehicle only a little bigger. This is going to have a big hit on SUV sales in 5 years and impact minivans too.

    Greg

    BTW, I hope Subaru keeps the current Legacy size.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    didn't have the fold away rear seat. That feature, and the fact that the current Odyssey is the same size as the DC minivans, is what made the new Odyssey such a success. They won't have that advantage next go-around. DC will have that folding rear seat too. Honda needs to have another stay-ahead-of-the-competition feature, to maintain their momentum.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    240hp and 5 speeds. They could even get the 260hp in MDX-like tune.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    it gets a 3.8L engine. That's been rumored for some time.

    People (moms!) can't see that feature however, or may not even care about it. Whatever feature they come up with has to: A) be considered a "must-have," and B) hit the customer square between the eyes, like their fold-way rear seat did.

    Bob
  • jfljfl Member Posts: 1,398
    Actually, it wasn't intended to be redundant. The FOUR meant four cylinders. The QUAD meant four valves per cylinder.

    I'll bet it was innovative when the design concept was first proposed within GM. However, when it was finally introduced, lots of companies already had 4 valves/cylinder.

    Jim
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    To be honest, Bob, I don't know if Honda will be able to do that again.

    It's like the Human Segway Transporter, just because a brilliant inventor strikes again doesn't mean it'll have the same impact as before.

    And remember, the first Odyssey kind of bombed. They don't always get it right.

    -juice
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Jim: I know, that why the 2 valve/cylinder design was later called the Quad OHC.

    It's just a poor naming strategy. It should actually have been the other way around, Quad for 4 valve heads, Four for the number of cylinders. Even then it would adhere to industry norms but still sound redundant.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    been surprising the public for over 50 years. They're the last company I would bet against.

    Bob
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    So did the guy who designed the HST. ;-)

    And we got...a scooter! Whoop-de-doo!

    OK, gentleman's bet. The next Odyssey will have no ground-breaking features, like the current one did, just evolutionary improvements.

    Loser buys the beer at the first auto show in the area where it's shown. Deal?

    -juice
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.