Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Subaru Legacy GT- Is a turbo coming soon?



  • subewannabesubewannabe Posts: 403
    i need a cousin in the business , too!
    There has been a lot of difference from dealer to dealer on availability of the WRX STI and the new Forester XT, but , so far, some dealers are selling the Forester XT at near invoice prices and ask thousands over MSRP for the STI. I am guessing the Legacy GT turbo wagon could be the next "it" car of the decade, and I hope to get in on the ground floor. I have seen some sites saying spring 2004 availability, others fall 2004. I dont have a lot of confidence that my ole' '94 Explorer will make it to fall ' then it will have approx 175,000 miless on it! Any word on the tranny/trim (i.e., leather , moonroof) packages that will be available in the turbo version? I am part of an army of folks who curse SoA about the limitation on the leather/moonroof in the forester XT to auto tranny only.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Some time in 2004. The Outback will debut in January, at the auto shows.

  • subewannabesubewannabe Posts: 403
    I went to the Subaru Global site and built myself an '05 Legacy GT turbo wagon with the leather interior, MT and Graphite Black paint, even threw in a dog barrier. That is one sweet -looking machine, and nobody would guess that it would smoke anything in that class, regardless of cost,regardless of road conditions, including the currently available Audi S4 and BMW 5 series wagons. Passat wagon with a V6 and 4 Motion???? A diminishing speck in the rear view mirror!
      I am still searching the globe for a Forester XT with the MT and Premium package, but now I'm not so sure I'm gonna marry her if I find her...another girl has caught my eye!
  • If you desire a sleek and powerful wagon, stay chained in the basement until the new Legacy arrives!! She's a beaut!

  • Wow, wish I would have gotten in on this a bit sooner (RSholland directed me over here)...

    Jon[CT] over on NASIOC pointed out a reputable site (on the Subaru directory) listing the new H6 coupled with both 5MT and 5EAT.

    Now lets just hope we get everything from the 2.0GT in Japan, but in LHD (of course) with the 2.5GT detuned from the STi to about 250-280hp as speculated.

    I agree with many though, the H6 really need not be in the Legacy line, at least not now until it shows sales and want can make it a good investment. Outback only for now is a good idea.

    Oe other idea... Who would like to see a version of the 2.0R in Japan, except pushing about 200hp/200ft-lb with equally good dyno curves out of an EJ25, running regular fuel for something to bridge the gap in an all 2.5L Legacy line?

    $19-21k...Legacy S (sport) 2.5 NA SOHC 165/166
    $21-23k...Legacy ST (sport touring) 2.5 NA DOHC AVCS 200/200
    $25.9-28k...Legacy GT (grand touring) 2.5 turbo DOHC AVCS 250+/240+

    Any ideas?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    You think they can squeeze 200hp out of the N/A 2.5l?

    I think we'll see something like this:

    base 2.5l, 170hp w/AVCS
    turbo 2.5l, 250hp

    In the Legacy line, for now.

  • The reason I think they can squeeze 200hp out of the 2.5L in naturally aspirated form at compression allowing 87-89 octane fuel is because a number of tuners have been able to easily get about 225-230 on stock compression, reliably, on 87-89 octane fuel. The limitation was the intake manifold limiting numbers to about 230, with 11.0-11.5:1 they were able to squeeze another MAYBE 5hp out, but that was limited. Using a revised design, like that on the EJ20R high-output NA model in Japan, the intake manifold may not be a problem. I wholeheartedly feel they could get a very responsive and torquey 2.5L DOHC AVCS-equipped high-output naturally aspirated model with the 200/200 figures. I will tell you the tuners were able to get nice numbers north of 200ft-lb of torque too. I wish I had those dyno graphs still on my computer, but I can't find them. In any case, a ~10-15hp bump over the JDM model's near 190hp (out of 2.0L) and a another ~35ft-lb of torque over the current SOHC engine is very doable, mostly with exhaust, and intake work and work in the heads, a similar solution to that in the 2.0R except tuned for more torque and just slightly more hp with similar hardware.

    This engine would really boost, no pun intended ;), Subaru's image being able to use this in the Forester XS, all base Outbacks, perhaps the RS, and a set of midrange Legacy models (sedan & wagon) if the H6 is reserved for the 7PAX and Outback models. The 200/200 2.5L engine would really give the baseline a good value and the competition something to scramble for.

    Sorry for hijacking the turbo model ideas. Yeah, I'll take one of both. :D
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,788
    While squeezing "X" amount of horsepower out of an engine may be possible, I think an equally important issue is how to market that within existing engines in production.

    I too think 200 HP is possible out of a N/A 2.5. But how does that play with a 210 HP 2.5 turbo, or a 212 HP 3.0 H-6? If you market a 200 HP N/A 2.5, then you're also going to have to bump the HP ratings all the other engines too, IMO.

    Yeah, it can be done, but that could tax a small company like Subaru to bump all those engines at once.

    My guess is you will more likely see a "trickle-down" bump in HP, rather than a "trickle-up" bump in HP. By that I mean the 2.5 turbo and H-6 will get a (significant) HP bump before the N/A 2.5. I'm thinking of this from a marketing standpoint.

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I dunno how much more they'll squeeze the N/A 2.5l, gaskets are already an issue. Stress it more and I'd have concerns of reliability and longevity.

    Seth - have you driven the Forester XT? That engine is a gem, the 210hp is understated IMO. Plus it's ready for more given the semi-closed deck block and forged internals.

  • Here is my two-fold answer.

    Engine stresses:
    The majority of the engine components that would be changed to create more power would be actually to be reducing stresses and increase efficiency. Creating better intake and exhaust flow by efficiency alone will produce more power. Keeping compression ratio as close to 10.0:1 would both allow for use of regular 87 to a midgrade 89 fuel requirement and also place similar forces on the inside of the combustion chamber in both compression and power strokes. That shouldn't create as much extra stress on the engine as you may think. Look to is as an efficiency make-up versus just adding crude boost to a turbo engine.

    Well as I'd love to see this engine this coming spring, I know it is far from feasible. As Bob said, with the XT engine so close, that may prove a problem in marketing. It appears that starting in 2005 the only H6 engine that will be in use is the more powerful and efficient 240+hp version which appears to have a good, clean distance from a 200hp 2.5L NA engine. We'll see how the turbo Forester turns out, but perhaps that would give way to pushing the XT a little farther up the scale, perhaps 230/230, that would give a good 30-35hp spread between each. And yes I have driven the XT in both 5MT and 4EAT form, and generally being a stick driver, I was impressed with the auto quite a bit. But that manual just pulled like crazy, talk about a little sleeper! If only they could wring a little more efficiency out of it in mileage it would be great.

    I think this 2.5L DOHC AVCS NA engine could be ready to start in the Legacy and OB in MY05, and perhaps MY06 for the Forester XT and Impreza RS-type models, or wait until 07 for the new Impreza. I see an engine like this very capable of making good on the up-scale image Subaru seems to be looking at obtaining. That would work if one is already done. I know in the BE/BH models in Japan I think they were pushing 170PS with little/no modifications like the 2.0R, but in 2.5L form. I seriously think the 2.5L engine would not have any problems attaining a VERY streetable 2.5L configuration that would meet emissions, mileage requirements, and not cost near as much as the turbo engines do with associating hardware.

    I really have to get in on the chat later. :)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I loved the 5 speed XT, too. Almost bought one. If it had a moonroof I might have bought it on the spot. We kinda need a bigger ride, but we'll see.

    Gearing is the secret, the final drive is very short. They could dial it back to 3.9:1 and get much better EPA mileage numbers.

    You think they'll keep evolving the EJ25? Or will we see new engines based on the EZ30?

  • I agree on the final drive ratio. If it bumped EPA figures by 2-3mpg on each end, I'd think about getting an XT. I'd rather see a 3.900 or 4.111 as well. The WRX has a 3.900 and does fine, why does the XT need such a short FDR?

    As for the EJ25, I see it as far from showing what it can really do. The technology is available, they are using it in several of their other designs. Why not show how innovative and capable Subaru really is? 200/200 is an increase of 35/34 over current. As I've said there are several cars running around with the stock block and mostly intake/exhaust and cam upgrades (ported/polished heads which won't be a factory option) push levels and capability much higher. By increasing the efficiency, I can see Subaru potentially (when you don't get hard on the accelerator) actually increasing mileage possibly slightly as well, since we are basically increasing overall efficiency of the design. People running full header-back exhausts, CAI, and even Cobb Tuning's Street Performer cams have said to get 1-2mpg better fuel economy. Similar to the ECU reflashes on WRX's, while getting more power, the overall tune of the engine increases dramatically with response and as wierd as it is, fuel economy increases too. I see one main area that needs to be addressed, Engine Management. Subaru builds great cars. I don't think we'd mind spending an extra couple hundred for more efficiently tuned and smoother running vehicles.

    I don't sound excited at all about these technologies, do I? After seeing what they were doing with the Legacy 2.0R in Japan, and knowing what enthusiasts have been able to do over here in VERY streetable form, it's hard not to get excited! I know Subaru can do this as long as the marketing and production areas can get figured out.

    I'll speak more about this when I return from class.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    You seem to have done plenty of homework on the issue, so I'll take your word for it.

    I think even 180hp would be plenty for a base engine. Step up to a 210hp light pressure turbo, then whatever engine beyond that, it'll be out of my price range!

  • Well, ateixeira, I wouldn't look at it like that. Look at what Japan has so far.

    2.0i (base)
    2.0R (2.0 high-output midlevel)
    2.0GT models (performance)

    The current 2.5L SOHC engine can work quite well, especially if they can tune it for better emissions/economy. I know they have SULEV and PZEV rating making essentially zero emissions, not sure if economy is increased, but power is reduced to 160hp. The base models could all recieve this ultra-low emissions engine with hopefully a slight bump in economy to perhaps 22/30 EPA rated. Good for CAFE and EPA #'s.

    The GT will get it's 250hp engine.

    The middle is what I am getting at. With the way things are these days, why not spring for an efficient, lower priced fuel burning machine. Now I know Subaru says they want to move somewhat upscale, but does that mean maintaining costs as well? Fitting a very responsive, smooth naturally-aspirated 2.5L engine in the Legacy (a lighter one by a good margin) to bridge the gap between base and turbo would be a good thing. Make it similar to the L SE in packaging but with brakes from the current GT, slightly sportier suspension, and 17" wheels from the GT, 16x7" minimum. This could produce one very fun, yet very affordable grocery getter. :) It would be less to produce for Subaru while being a better cost to purchase and maintain over the GT. Probably one of the best values they would have.

    As for your ideas of 180hp AVCS and a 210 light hp turbo... I'd just like to see the one turbo engine in the Legacy lineup (aside from any future STi models), and the 200/200 engine in the Legacy ST midrange model. Would fit the range rather well as well as having good potential for the Forester XS and Impreza RS models in the near future. The 2.5 light pressure turbo could be exclusively used on the Forester XT and potentially the revised WRX and Baja if it lives much longer. Make it as simple as possible while being very value oriented. Max 3 engines per range. This 2.5 DOHC AVCS engine could also be the base engine for the Outbacks with an increase in power to handle the extra and making that extra cost worthwhile.

    So I could see:

    2.5 S Sedan/Wagon (160/16x 2.5L SOHC NA)
    2.5ST Sedan/Wagon (200/200 2.5L DOHC AVCS NA)
    2.5GT Sedan/Wagon (250/250 2.5L DOHC AVCS Turbo)
    2.5GT Limited Sedan/Wagon (250/250 2.5L DOHC AVCS Turbo)
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,788
    • I think having a 2.5 SOHC (170 hp) as an "entry-level" engine makes sense for the following models: Impreza TS, Forester X, and Legacy L (or whatever it will be called).

    • I can see a 2.5 DOHC AVCS (190 hp) being used on the following models: Impreza RS, Outback Sport, Forester XS, Baja Sport and mid-level Legacy (L-SE equivalent)

    • I can see the low-boost 2.5T (bumped to ~ 220 hp) being used on the Forester XT and Baja turbo; and perhaps(?) also on the entry-level Outback.

    • I can see the mid-boost 2.5T (250 hp) on the Legacy GT, Outback GT and WRX.

    • The H-6 (~ 240 hp) an Outback exclusive.

    • Keep the 300 hp high-boost 2.5T a WRX STi exclusive

    • Down the road offer a 350 hp 3.0T Legacy STi.

  • Bob, we can get that 190hp in the 2.0R in Japan (well, actually about 188 with PS conversion.) Why would you rather lessen very marketable and very achievable numbers? I think we can agree on most of that, though I'd see the low-boost turbo in the XT raised to 220-230 and exclusively for the WRX and XT/Baja Turbo. Still keep the slightly higher-priced Legacy GT something in it's own. After all, it is mean't as a step up from the WRX. It would be nice to keep some kind of definition there. Having slightly more power will also make people want to buy the more expensive one. Making the same power available for $3k less will make a bit less profit for SOA from individuals figuring the WRX is a better cost with same engine. I'd see (changes as noted with '**')...

    • I think having a 2.5 SOHC (160-170 hp) as an "entry-level" engine makes sense for the following models: Impreza TS, Forester X, and Legacy S (or whatever it will be called).
    ** I can see a 2.5 DOHC AVCS (200 hp) being used on the following models: Impreza RS, Outback Sport, Forester XS, Baja Sport and Legacy ST, base Outback models
    ** I can see the low-boost 2.5T (bumped to 220-230 hp) being used on the Forester XT and Baja turbo; and WRX.
    ** I can see the mid-boost 2.5T (250 hp) on the Legacy GT, Outback GT.
    • The H-6 (240-250 hp) an Outback exclusive.
    • Keep the 300 hp high-boost 2.5T a WRX STi exclusive

    • Down the road offer a 350 hp 3.0T Legacy STi.

    I really think that gives good model definition and affordability. Turbos in everything is more expensive for initial cost and ongoing cost of maintaining (including fuel.) I know they want to move upscale and that is fine, but offering a good level of affordability is still key, particularly in todays auto markets.
  • The current issue of AutoWeek features a "First Drive" of the 2005 Legacy. They drove the Japanese version. The new legacy is 200 lbs. ligher than the old model with an aluminum hood and supension parts. Even the moon roof has been lightened by 15 lbs. Combined with a lower engine a much lower center of gravity is achieved. The 2.5 non turbo is boosted to 170 hp, the 3.0 to 240 and the 2.5 turbo detuned from the STi will be about 250-270 hp. 17" and 18" wheels will be available. The interior is upgraded and the price may reach $35,000 on the most expensive model.
  • The more they talk about the prices going up significantly the more I hate it. I'd rather have a new Legacy wagon over a WRX wagon. Regardless, I hope/think they'll be wrong. Most said the STi with 2.0L 270+ hp engine would be $35k too IIRC. Guess we'll have to find out.

    Too bad they likely won't have a 200hp/flat 200ft-lb of torque, 2.5L version of Japan's 2.0R. I'd probably buy one over a turbo model for better efficiency with still some good capability.

    That is the basic 3-engine line-up I have heard of too. I know the 2.5NA model probably won't be much more responsive than my BD GT w/ Cobb Cat-Back & similar weights, but that engine will be the economical solution to keep in compliance with both CAFE and EPA. Hmm, I wonder how much the H6 versus 2.5T price gap will be? Wonder if either will come in at $26k or less w/ a manual transmission. I'd rather have cloth, but we'll see how premium it starts for the U.S. market. I hope they don't kill the people who used to be able to easier afford these models.

    The wait is killing me!
  • About the aggressive gearing in the XT, I hope that this is a sign that they will put similarly aggressive low gears in the Legacy but luckily have a 6th gear to help out the fuel economy. It still strikes me funny that the XT and WRX need to swap their final drive ratios or both compromise to a 4.110 to wake up the WRX and tame the Forester.

    Seth, I hope that there is a base and a limited version of the GT to allow more enthusiasts to get the power without the luxury items. My only "fear", as I've said, is that they may force the luxury items as a way of separating it from the WRX.
  • I think we are on the same track. I don't really care much for luxury, I'd rather not be grouped with the rest of the American population that feels like they need all those good power heated leather seats and such though I don't mind my moonroof (had it open for my roadtrips this weekend.) The GT as they used to have it with the GT and GT Limited was an excellent split, I just hope they do it again. Even if the standard GT items being no all-weather package and no leather power seats were a delete-only option available only by special order. It still gives customers the option to not be caught up in the American syndrome of luxury is better than sport.

    I can only wish and hope. Are you listening Subaru?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Same here, gimme a nice, grippy cloth seat, with manual adjustments, too. Save weight and cost there.

    Or, if they do make the GT full-on luxury, at least offer a decontented "GT Sport" model, like the Baja Sport.

  • I'm not ashamed to say that I prefer leather. It's easier to clean, but it takes extra maintenence. The only reason that I would want cloth manual seats is to put in some more aggressive leather buckets. Katskinz (sp?) will surely have a kit to buy rear seat cover. This is my favorite: 237.36&cat=Seating&brand=Cobra&prodID=204
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,788
    I too like seats that grip well. In fact I'd be happy if the seats were upholstered in Velcro. Might be tough to get out of however, not to mention noisy. :)

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The Ecsaine on the STi is awesome, but probably expensive. So give me cheap ol' cloth.

  • I said I want to be first on my list at my dealership. 05 Wagon or Sedan (if I can flip for a wagon) in silver with the 6MT and cloth if available, will settle for leather though. I'm excited! Sort of can't wait to get rid of my 97 GT, long story of issues stemming in the last 2 months (before that she had been great.) Cummon Subaru, money in hand.
  • If the seat fits you right, you could be sitting on slime and you won't move around. Maybe in an STi, I think it would be great to have a leather & Escaine/Alcantara interior like the S4 did. Maybe offer black/blue, black/silver, or black/black.

    While we're talking about our wish list, somebody get in touch with Subaru to make them offer a dark gray paint! How is it that they don't offer this on any car? In copying Porsche's seal gray, it could be dolphin gray. I can't think of an good rally inspired color, but maybe British. How about London Sky? ;) I'm kidding on the names but dangit, I like dark gray colors- dark and neutral but not such a biotch to clean like black.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Yes, a dark gray, maybe a light metallic blue too.

  • I 3rd the dark grey. Sorta like this...

    That would be one heck of a popular color IMHO.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 22,655
    i just wanted to chime in on the seat thing. See, I DEMAND a power driver's seat. And its not because I want the power adjustment. Hell, I find that kind of annoying because it moves so damned slow and its just more crap to break. HOWEVER, it has to do with the design of these things. For some silly reason, power seats have more fore/aft travel than their manual counter parts as well as more tilt travel. So in order for me to be comfortable in a car it has to have a power seat because that is the only way it moves far enough for me to get in there and be comfortable for more than an hour at a time. So, anyway, just because someone wants a power seat doesn't mean they want it just for luxury.

    '17 F150 Crew 2.7; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '09 LR2 HSE. 44-car history and counting!

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Never thought about that, but then again I don't need the seat all the way back, usually.

    Cool color, call it gunmetal.

This discussion has been closed.