Why is it so good? Lower center of gravity, which promotes excellent handling. So, yes, there are very real benefits to that engine design.
Yes there are - but few people recognize that.
To be prefectly honest, the advertising I see for Subaru is either focused on AWD (TV) or to wordy (print) to read through to get to the message about the boxer engine.
Perhaps they could do something like I found in my Automobile last night. Porsche did a 2 page ad consisting of a black page (one of their colors) and on the backside less than 50 words about the Cayenne S with a response card glued to it. It said very little and drove a great message IMHO.
If the want to promote the boxer, do it all by itself. It gets lost in their overall message.
Perhaps, but that's their marketing that's at fault there. So, yeah, I could see more targeted marketing focusing more on the benefits of the boxer engine.
Maybe they need to be a bit more clever with their ads. They certainly need more variety. I'm getting sick to death of their "Dust in the Wind" Tribeca commericals. Enough already!!!
when I bought my OBS, there was a 2-page spread in the middle of the sales brochure about the advantages of the boxer. I showed it to my dad, pretty much the only person I know who thinks more about cars than just basic transport. He never even got the concept. We went round and round for 20 minutes before we gave up. The closest I ever got to getting him to understand was saying that on most engines the pistons go up and down either vertically or at an angle, while on the Sube they go side to side. By then he was tired of the subject. His response: "so?"
I sure hope the future of the Subaru brand does not rest on its use and the public's awareness of boxer engines, because then it is doomed. Among car buyers, there are precious few people beyond these walls at Edmunds that understand enough about engines to "get" (understand) any potential advantages of the boxer design.
I like it because it DOES improve handling - that is not just hype - which is important in a vehicle that is also equipped with long-stroke suspension. Subie also mounts theirs longitudinally (with the dimensions of the 2.5, it would be pretty weird if they mounted it transversely!), which makes it much easier to change your own belts and stuff.
I like that Toyota has pledged to be hands off, and that any joint ventures will be just that - JOINT. I think jointly developed cars between Toyota and Subaru could be just excellent, and certainly better than joint Toyota-GM projects have been.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Well it sounds like we're in agreement that Subaru has not been "effective" in getting the message out about the boxer engine's advantages.
With AWD the advantages (to the great unwashed out there) is that you either get stuck in snow or you don't. That's pretty easy to see. With the boxer engine the advantages are harder to see without having a direct side-by-side driving test. This is clearly a challange for their marketing people.
Not always superior product wins (Intel, Windows, VHS to name the biggest winners), but one with best combination of specs, price and marketing.
Boxer 4 engine is in many ways superior (from the technical side), but it is probably expensive and there are probably zilion other reasons why inline 4 is the king in that department. Similarly, everybody knows 6-in line is "the best" config, but at V6 prevailed for simple space limitations.
What I try to say is it doesn't really matter if something is "better". It is actually very painful truth for me cause as an engineer I like products that are technologically superior. But customer votes with their feet, for better or for worse. They usually don't ask whether it works one way or another. To digest one needs not to know anatomy. As long as they believe it works better and the price point is acceptable, they will buy it. Insisting on something can get you only to a point. If you are not flexible, you will die with pride of being the best.
Boxer is part of Subaru DNA. Dinosaurs also had a DNA and got extinct because could not shed some integral part of it. Is boxer threatened? I don't know, nobody does. My guess, nothing is for granted. Audi does arguably equal or getter result with AWD mated to 4 in line and V6 and lives. So it can be done. Time will show.
Dinosaurs also had a DNA and got extinct because could not shed some integral part of it.
Hopefully Subaru has marketing people than did the dinosaur.
No, nothing is forever; but I'm not giving up on the boxer just because FHI hasn't gotten the message out to the masses very well (yet). Yeah, us car guys know about it, and most Subaru owners like the way their car handles—even if they don't understand that the engine type has a lot to do with that good handling.
Whatever Subaru does, they have to extremely careful that they not harm their core image."
To a point, I agree that Subaru should protect their core technologies. Which is the basis for the question you're having trouble with.
According to the AutoWeek link you provided earlier, Subaru would not share platforms without using both the AWD and the symmetrical drivetrain. Here's the quote.
Fuji's self-image undermined its alliance with GM.
Takenaka and other senior Fuji executives were convinced that the horizontally opposed engines used in Subarus were every bit as integral to the brand's identity as its use of all-wheel drive. That made platform sharing with Saab and other brands that use standard inline-4 or V-6 engines almost impossible.
Almost six years after GM and Subaru linked, they do not share a single platform. Fuji does rebadge the Subaru Impreza WRX as the Saab 9-2X.
So, my question is this... How does sharing the entire drivetrain protect their core technologies, but sharing pieces of it gives away the secret sauce? I think that reasoning is pure horse pucky. It doesn't add up. Something else was going on.
If the boxer drivetrain is so integral to Subaru's appeal, then selling only the AWD system shouldn't be a problem.
Yeah, I agree with that. The Lexus mid-engined Boxster-fighter that I mentioned earlier would use the H-6, the Euro Spec B (or STI) tranny. It wouldn't have AWD though.
My earlier "truck/trucklet" scenario, on the the hand would have used a beefed up AWD (with a dual range and perhaps other trick traction technology), however. Maybe it uses a new specific transfer case? I don't know? All I'm saying is if it were me I'd share some of the goodies from the Subaru parts bin—if it would benefit both parties.
I have long wanted to see a true Subaru truck of some sort. Maybe, with this new alliance this might be possible, using a combination of Subie and Toyota parts? Maybe new parts would need to be developed to enable this to occur? Again, I don't know? I would love to see a Subaru Ridgeline, but I don't think Subaru could do it with GM, or by themselves. Now maybe they can?
I just think there are a lot of possibilites (new market niches to explore) by combining forces here.
I just read a favorable review and it had me salivating. I live on Long Island and just can't deal with the stick. They FINALLY offer leather and heated seats. I am still surprised there is no VDC option. I also love the fact the interior is quieter.
to see what Subie might do with the Tacoma platform, in terms of making a proper BOF truck, but perhaps one with AWD rather than a two-speed transfer case? Or maybe with a transfer case they use in their home market? Subie could use a real truck, they could modify and shorten the platform for their own use. Sell a true compact truck, rather than the midsize Tacoma, and make it sportier than the Tacoma. Maybe both brands (Sube and Toyota) could have a version of it.
One this is for sure: there ARE potential "synergies" between these two companies, whereas there was never any possibility of that with GM.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
but perhaps one with AWD rather than a two-speed transfer case?
There's absolutely no reason why AWD can't have a 2-speed transfer case. In fact Subaru offers a dual-range 5-speed manual on N/A Foresters, Imprezas and Outbacks in every market other than North America. Besides, I think a 2-speed transfer case would be necessary (as a selling feature, at the very least) on a "truck." That's the big shortcoming the Ridgeline has: no low range.
Besides, all full-time 4WD SUVs (with 2-speed transfer cases) are AWD, at least in high range (and some in low range too). "AWD and "full-time 4WD" are one and the same. It's nothing more than "marketing," plain and simple. The Pilot, CRV, Highlander, RAV4 and other high-range-only vehicles are marketed as "4WD," not as "AWD."
Perhaps Toyota's purchase of GM's stake in Fuji Heavy Industries will bode well for Subaru. Perhaps we will finally get a Subaru Forester Hybrid to compete with Ford's Escape Hybrid. The biggest thing missing from Subaru's line-up of vehicles is a hybrid option.
The folks at SIA are happy because Saab was never going to sell a lot of cars built in Indiana. 9-2x only sold when the prices plunged, and still in low numbers. 9-6x would have had to be priced higher than the Tribeca and that would also have limited sales.
Toyota will probably use the SIA plant for extra capacity, watch.
Remember, that's why Subaru was losing money - when the Rodeo and Axiom production vacated SIA, they could not make up the volume by growing quickly enough to make up for those two. At one point the Rodeo was the best selling import SUV in the market (think about that for a minute).
Subaru did what they could, but it wasn't enough to replace that. No way will a Tribeca do the kind of volume the Rodeo used to do.
Now this is fun - to think about what Subaru could do with some of the platforms available, if they go in that direction.
I'm talking basic platform only, no engines or transmissions. Subies have to keep a boxer engine and AWD.
My wife likes the Avalon - imagine an AWD model with a little more character infused in it. Maybe the H6, stroked a bit (which would easily fit in that wide platform)?
Small cars like the Toyota Aygo could make it here. Look at the styling - it fits right in with the Tribeca's. Center grille with wings, it might as well be a Subaru.
Then consider the Tacoma frame, or even the new FJ. Again, basic platform only, with Subaru mechanicals.
I hope they can differentiate well, that's the key. Vibe is good but it's not a Pontiac. Same with the Nova and Prizm.
But I'll take a large Avalon platform over another Epsilon clone from GM, any day. Subaru can keep its compact and mid-size platforms, but share development on a large and maybe small platform with Toyota.
Subaru will need to offer something to compete against Honda Fit and Toyota Yaris here in North America, as the Impreza and Legacy move further up-market. Could Toyota and Subaru share the Yaris (but with AWD), as Subaru did with the Justy, which was a AWD version of the Suzuki Swift?
Even though I hate badge-engineering (and the fact that this does not have a boxer engine), it could be a stop-gap model for North America until Subaru (with Toyota's help) could design and engineer a "proper" Subie for this market slot. Even the Aygo, as juice mentioned, could also work, I would think.
We know they are seriously considering bring over the Subie R1 and/or the R2, but these are much smaller (660cc) cars. While I would like to see that happen, they really need something in the 1500cc range too.
If you ask the non knowing on the boxer engine the first response may be what is it and what does it do. After filling in the blanks you will get a big fat NO from everyone. That would be like asking people what would happen if the took away the Honda VTEC engine same response at first from many.... M/F
no rebadging occurs, even if it IS rebdaged Toyotas. I would very much like to see what they could come up with if they worked together on a joint project, and I do think that in the shorter term Subaru could borrow the Avalon (lengthened Camry)and upcoming FJ (shortened version of the Tacoma/4Runner) platforms and do something very useful with them.
Wouldn't a wagon on the Avalon platform, a jumbo Outback, be cool? Something long and low, a reincarnation of a 70s Country Squire, not raised up like a Tribeca.
And a lighter duty, smaller Tacoma on the shortened platform,with a Sube boxer and better handling - that would be in a class of one (the Ranger certainly wouldn't give it much trouble). The two could each use their own engines, share the platform development, maybe not manufacturing.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Buyng back shares is usually not a good thing - it often means that the company is shrinking and the management has no vision where to go and would rather spend the cash on its own shares than development
well there you go then, you can tell I missed Econ 101! :-P
The reason Subaru hit the news in the first place was huge gobs of red ink spilling out of the Subaru plant in Indiana, so at least the Toyota purchase may mean they can finally utilize the plant to full capacity, by building some Toyotas there too.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yaris will come here as the next Echo, in fact a hatch is expected this time around. I doubt Subaru would invest in a new powertrain for a vehicle category that isn't profitable to begin with, though. We'll see.
I mentioned Aygo because of the styling fitting in, and because Toyota doesn't sell it here, so it would not be redundant.
"We are moving towards becoming a premium brand without premium prices. We don't want to be 'a small-car, small profit importer' so vehicles like the Subaru Justy will have no part in our future plans."
That's an ambitious goal. I can't think of any car company that showed up with a premium product without first proving themselves to the masses. At least, no company which did it and succeeded.
I can understand moving into more premium territory (like Toyota, VW, and Honda here in the US), but none of them dropped the base models, and all of them started out that way.
We are moving towards becoming a premium brand without premium prices. We don't want to be 'a small-car, small profit importer' so vehicles like the Subaru Justy will have no part in our future plans."
I also see it as an ambiquous goal - premium brand without premium prices. Does Subaru want to be the new Hyundai??
I know, I know - it's marketing speak for "we want to offer a premium product but we just haven't figured out how to get people to accept higher prices".
Even Hyundai has a way to go before they're considered "premium". They're currently a mainstream bargain. They were a bottom-feeder in decades past, and have worked effectively to build up their reputation through better-built products and customer-friendly programs (that warranty). But can you imagine what would happen if they ditched the Accent and Elantra?
Subaru can go ahead and kill of the Justy, but they need to keep some kind of car to replace it. No one is going to accept Subaru as a premium manufacturer just because they say so. First, they need to build public trust and pull ahead of the competition.
You need to have a hit on the charts before you can call yourself a diva.
US Dealer lobby is powerful, that would never happen here. Look how badly Daewoo failed when they tried to reinvent the sales model here.
Enough with the "premium" talk already, Subaru. Stop talking about it. People see premium product and they know. Just do it. Cut the hype.
Do what? How about:
* stability control still missing from most models * NAV option still missing from most models * HIDs are still only on a couple of specialty models * where's the iPod jack? * telescoping wheel, perhaps? * power up/down windows? * rear backup camera for at least the Tribeca
Even Hyundai has more standard airbags nowadays (on entry-level models).
Honestly? I think they had plans to move forward, but the market is also moving forward. It's a moving target, and they have kept up, but not moved ahead into a premium position. They are about where they were back in 2003. Or 1998 even.
Example...
Forester was first in class with standard ABS, 1998. Forester was first in class with head air bag protection for the driver, 2003.
Now? Forester might just be last-in-class to get side curtains. It probably will be the last model in its class to get stability control. And NAV. And an iPod jack. That's a long, and significant, list.
So premium is the wrong word. That's not it at all. I'd say they offer bang-for-the-buck, performance leadership in the turbos models especially. Sure, I'll give them the performance crown, but not the premium crown.
even the Tribeca, the newest and most expensive model in the line, doesn't have auto-up windows. OTOH, the $18K Jetta does. $18K cars of various sizes and guises out-equip Subarus costing thousands and thousands more in many little ways, not just this.
The base Tribeca, at a sticker of more than $30K, has cloth seats. Premium competitors in that price range have leather. Not premium.
Maybe all the premium talk coming from Subaru is just their way of saying they have decided what the posters here did - that they can't keep the AWD in and offer a less expensive model than the Impreza, so they are "premium" in the sense they really have no entry-level car.
I would like to see them borrow HSD from Toyota in this new "synergy" and offer it in all their models - the weight is already there anyway because of AWD, what's a little more? And it sure would be nice to see some Subarus with numbers clearing the 30 mark for EPA rating. I noticed that when they dropped the variable valve lift in the 2.5 this year, most of the EPA ratings dropped a point. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
For every feature you can nit-pick about the Forester lacking, you can find another making it unique. Sure, it doesn't have side curtain airbags, but it does have that monster moonroof. When compared with others in the class, it does offer top notch fuel economy. It also offers a uniquely fast turbo model. I mean, the first generation CR-V was certainly a success, but it never offered any moonroof at all.
So, no, I don't think being behind by one or two yeas on a few specific features is really the problem. Everyone is behind by a year or two in some way.
I think the problem with moving to the premium level is one of image. Subaru is still known largely as a wagon company. While "sport-tourers" may be gaining ground, wagons still ain't sexy. The outdoorsey image they cultivated in the US was a strong selling point to middle America, but not necessarily the premium crowd. The boy-racer street cred earned with the WRX certainly gained some momentum for the brand, but it's not premium material.
I just think they need to achieve that image before they can stop selling base models. There's no doubt that Subaru can build premium cars. They're just having trouble selling them.
Subaru still sells a base Impreza 2.5i. However, for a "base" model, it is very nicely contented. For a bit over $18K you get alloy wheels, AWD (of course), 173 HP, 205/55x16 tires, power windows/locks and an outside temperature guage. It's a very nice package. My son is looking at one right now.
to see Subaru make side airbags standard in the Outback Sport this year (standard on all Impreza models? I don't know), which is a car I am sorta considering picking up. And of course, the big Outback has standard SAB AND curtains since '05, and all Subarus have had standard ABS for a while, so you are both right, there is certainly a flip side to the coin. They could complete this complement by adding stability control to more vehicles, at least as an option.
The thing is, you don't CALL a brand "premium", the public does. They decide what is premium and what is not, ultimately. And of course, most premium brands are set apart in the U.S. now with a seriously upgraded after-purchase experience from the dealer. I don't know when or how Subaru will be able to achieve that. It would help if more dealers were stand-alone, rather than Subaru just being one of a dozen brands (exaggeration alert) they were attempting to sell and service.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yes, front side airbags are now standard on even the cheapest Impreza (see the link I posted).
I agree, the "public" decides what is, or is not premium. They're working on getting more stand-alone dealers, but that doesn't happen overnight, as you know.
:confuse: I am concerned that my 2004 Forester XT has very black exhaust pipe soot after 33000 miles. It has been serviced by the dealer according to Subaru recommendations. My experience has always been that exhaust pipe output should be a light brown. My mileage is about 20mpg and even on trips, never exceeds 21-22 mpg, so I thought perhaps something was running too rich. My service manager assured me that all turbos have black exhaust soot and unless a light comes on, all is well. Otherwise, the car runs fine - I love it.
Not working very hard, though - Legacy/Outback line was slaughtered in GT trim, where if you want turbo, you have to have everything else. No stick shift of Wagon Legacy GT (only Outback). If this is working hard, I just don't even try to imagine working lazy
Here in the US, the Impreza is comparable as a base model. However, the article which launched the discussion was referencing the markets overseas. Over there, the Justy is the entry level car and the Impreza is more like a mid-market car.
In my mind, dropping the Justy over there would be a lot like dropping the Impreza here. If Subaru is going to reach enough buyers to convince the public at large, that Subaru is a premium brand, they'll need cars priced affordably.
The only company selling in the U.S. with a base model as expensive as the Impreza is VW, and their "move upmarket" is viewed with great skepticism by the press and posters here alike. So far, the only move that has happened for them is the one to less sales. And even then, I think the base New Beetle is a bit cheaper than the Impreza 2.5i, but I would have to check that. Of course, the Beetle is also smaller, with a lot less utility and no AWD. But price is very important to prospective buyers. There are lots of compact cars, including 5-doors and wagons like the Impreza, available for thousands less. Including a couple of AWDs even, the Aerio SX (as long as they keep that on the market, not much longer, apparently), and the Matrix AWD.
Anyway, that's old territory, just some thoughts responding to varmint's comment that Impreza is comparable as Subaru's base model here. Never mind Justy - within 6 to 9 months the Fit, Yaris, and Versa will all be on sale here, as well as a revised-for-'07 xA. I guess there will be no answer to these vehicles from Subaru? Because it just can't afford to sell a car in the $12-16K range? I do wonder if this makes the brand seem more premium to anyone.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Since R1 & R2 apparently fit into a premium image in Japan, it can't be that the Justy''s size keeps it from being premium, or its economy, so it must be Justy's style, performance and/or quality. If SOA's considering R1 & R2 for our shores, they must feel those are "Premium" despite their size. So yes, let's have a new premium vehicle that slots between R2 and Impreza.
That's kinda my point. I think VW is considered a premium brand (not luxury, just premium), but they are having a very difficult time of it. And VW has a much wider audience and longer history here in the US. Subaru hasn't built that base yet. They have less than 1% market share in most of the US. I think they need to have that base before they can position themselves any higher on the food chain.
I agree for the most part but think lack of a true entry car and poor reliability are what did in VW's growth plans. Phaeton was a PR fiasco. It'll be interesting to see what happens next, but like Subaru, if they can offer more product, they'll grow. I'm glad they're not being as ambitious as VW was. Phaeton showed VW could build it, but couldn't make anybody want it. It's a lot easier to control your product than to control public perception of it. Subaru's just gotta keep on consistently building high-quality driver's cars, and the reputation will follow. I do think Subaru could use some self-generated news, like retaking their speed/endurance record they set with Legacy in '98 (recently broken by Mercedes). They've got some great accomplishments in their history, but they really need to publicize them! Throw the public some impressive trivia.
I agree about VW's reputation for poor reliability as hurting them becoming a true premium brand. That fact alone has kept me from seriously ever considering one; that and the fact that my own experience with the VW brand has also confirmed that reputation.
It seems a lot of manufacturers are trying to go premium/maintain a premium image.
There's Buick, which has ditched all it's bottom-feeders (Century, Skylark), Chrysler (going upscale with the 300, Pacifica), Volvo (always has been a cut above), VW (which over here in Australia for a long time has been considered premium/exclusive), Honda (in the UK, the Accord is being marketed as a compact executive. Over here, it's a step above a Camry for sure), etc etc
This means that certain companies (Ford, Dodge, Chevrolet) can just swoop in eventually and take all the downmarket sales.
Buick and Chrysler, for most of their product history, have always been premium brands; at least when compared to the othe brands out there at the time. I'm going back 40, 50, 60 or more years ago.
I think I was having a bad day. But I'm still glad I got that off my chest. :P
Jetta does have a lot of premium features, but VW has its own issues, mostly that service/reliability is not up near premium levels. Not even average, for that matter.
It's like varmint said, I guess you could nit-pick any car. Even that Jetta gets plastic hub caps at that price. VW ought to bring the Polo so that it can allow the Jetta to truly go premium.
Any how, the Jetta V launch was a disaster so the last thing you want to do is copy VW. Brand new model and sales are way down?
Subaru might only be able to truly move the Impreza up if something else slots beneath it.
BTW, while they did add side head/chest air bags to the front, curtains are still missing, even both Hyundai and Kia have those in their entry-level cars now.
If Subaru wants to stay in the $18k price range, maybe a car slotted below the Impreza is the way to go. The B5 TPH hints that it will get bigger and go upscale.
Comments
Yes there are - but few people recognize that.
To be prefectly honest, the advertising I see for Subaru is either focused on AWD (TV) or to wordy (print) to read through to get to the message about the boxer engine.
Perhaps they could do something like I found in my Automobile last night. Porsche did a 2 page ad consisting of a black page (one of their colors) and on the backside less than 50 words about the Cayenne S with a response card glued to it. It said very little and drove a great message IMHO.
If the want to promote the boxer, do it all by itself. It gets lost in their overall message.
Maybe they need to be a bit more clever with their ads. They certainly need more variety. I'm getting sick to death of their "Dust in the Wind" Tribeca commericals. Enough already!!!
Bob
I sure hope the future of the Subaru brand does not rest on its use and the public's awareness of boxer engines, because then it is doomed. Among car buyers, there are precious few people beyond these walls at Edmunds that understand enough about engines to "get" (understand) any potential advantages of the boxer design.
I like it because it DOES improve handling - that is not just hype - which is important in a vehicle that is also equipped with long-stroke suspension. Subie also mounts theirs longitudinally (with the dimensions of the 2.5, it would be pretty weird if they mounted it transversely!), which makes it much easier to change your own belts and stuff.
I like that Toyota has pledged to be hands off, and that any joint ventures will be just that - JOINT. I think jointly developed cars between Toyota and Subaru could be just excellent, and certainly better than joint Toyota-GM projects have been.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
With AWD the advantages (to the great unwashed out there) is that you either get stuck in snow or you don't. That's pretty easy to see. With the boxer engine the advantages are harder to see without having a direct side-by-side driving test. This is clearly a challange for their marketing people.
Bob
Boxer 4 engine is in many ways superior (from the technical side), but it is probably expensive and there are probably zilion other reasons why inline 4 is the king in that department. Similarly, everybody knows 6-in line is "the best" config, but at V6 prevailed for simple space limitations.
What I try to say is it doesn't really matter if something is "better". It is actually very painful truth for me cause as an engineer I like products that are technologically superior. But customer votes with their feet, for better or for worse. They usually don't ask whether it works one way or another. To digest one needs not to know anatomy. As long as they believe it works better and the price point is acceptable, they will buy it. Insisting on something can get you only to a point. If you are not flexible, you will die with pride of being the best.
Boxer is part of Subaru DNA. Dinosaurs also had a DNA and got extinct because could not shed some integral part of it. Is boxer threatened? I don't know, nobody does. My guess, nothing is for granted. Audi does arguably equal or getter result with AWD mated to 4 in line and V6 and lives. So it can be done. Time will show.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Hopefully Subaru has marketing people than did the dinosaur.
No, nothing is forever; but I'm not giving up on the boxer just because FHI hasn't gotten the message out to the masses very well (yet). Yeah, us car guys know about it, and most Subaru owners like the way their car handles—even if they don't understand that the engine type has a lot to do with that good handling.
Bob
Whatever Subaru does, they have to extremely careful that they not harm their core image."
To a point, I agree that Subaru should protect their core technologies. Which is the basis for the question you're having trouble with.
According to the AutoWeek link you provided earlier, Subaru would not share platforms without using both the AWD and the symmetrical drivetrain. Here's the quote.
Fuji's self-image undermined its alliance with GM.
Takenaka and other senior Fuji executives were convinced that the horizontally opposed engines used in Subarus were every bit as integral to the brand's identity as its use of all-wheel drive. That made platform sharing with Saab and other brands that use standard inline-4 or V-6 engines almost impossible.
Almost six years after GM and Subaru linked, they do not share a single platform. Fuji does rebadge the Subaru Impreza WRX as the Saab 9-2X.
So, my question is this... How does sharing the entire drivetrain protect their core technologies, but sharing pieces of it gives away the secret sauce? I think that reasoning is pure horse pucky. It doesn't add up. Something else was going on.
If the boxer drivetrain is so integral to Subaru's appeal, then selling only the AWD system shouldn't be a problem.
My earlier "truck/trucklet" scenario, on the the hand would have used a beefed up AWD (with a dual range and perhaps other trick traction technology), however. Maybe it uses a new specific transfer case? I don't know? All I'm saying is if it were me I'd share some of the goodies from the Subaru parts bin—if it would benefit both parties.
I have long wanted to see a true Subaru truck of some sort. Maybe, with this new alliance this might be possible, using a combination of Subie and Toyota parts? Maybe new parts would need to be developed to enable this to occur? Again, I don't know? I would love to see a Subaru Ridgeline, but I don't think Subaru could do it with GM, or by themselves. Now maybe they can?
I just think there are a lot of possibilites (new market niches to explore) by combining forces here.
Bob
One this is for sure: there ARE potential "synergies" between these two companies, whereas there was never any possibility of that with GM.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
There's absolutely no reason why AWD can't have a 2-speed transfer case. In fact Subaru offers a dual-range 5-speed manual on N/A Foresters, Imprezas and Outbacks in every market other than North America. Besides, I think a 2-speed transfer case would be necessary (as a selling feature, at the very least) on a "truck." That's the big shortcoming the Ridgeline has: no low range.
Besides, all full-time 4WD SUVs (with 2-speed transfer cases) are AWD, at least in high range (and some in low range too). "AWD and "full-time 4WD" are one and the same. It's nothing more than "marketing," plain and simple. The Pilot, CRV, Highlander, RAV4 and other high-range-only vehicles are marketed as "4WD," not as "AWD."
Bob
Toyota will probably use the SIA plant for extra capacity, watch.
Remember, that's why Subaru was losing money - when the Rodeo and Axiom production vacated SIA, they could not make up the volume by growing quickly enough to make up for those two. At one point the Rodeo was the best selling import SUV in the market (think about that for a minute).
Subaru did what they could, but it wasn't enough to replace that. No way will a Tribeca do the kind of volume the Rodeo used to do.
-juice
I'm talking basic platform only, no engines or transmissions. Subies have to keep a boxer engine and AWD.
My wife likes the Avalon - imagine an AWD model with a little more character infused in it. Maybe the H6, stroked a bit (which would easily fit in that wide platform)?
Small cars like the Toyota Aygo could make it here. Look at the styling - it fits right in with the Tribeca's. Center grille with wings, it might as well be a Subaru.
Then consider the Tacoma frame, or even the new FJ. Again, basic platform only, with Subaru mechanicals.
I hope they can differentiate well, that's the key. Vibe is good but it's not a Pontiac. Same with the Nova and Prizm.
But I'll take a large Avalon platform over another Epsilon clone from GM, any day. Subaru can keep its compact and mid-size platforms, but share development on a large and maybe small platform with Toyota.
The possibilities are endless.
-juice
-juice
Yaris link:
http://www.japanesecarfans.com/photos.cfm/photoid/3050913.003/toyota/1.html
Even though I hate badge-engineering (and the fact that this does not have a boxer engine), it could be a stop-gap model for North America until Subaru (with Toyota's help) could design and engineer a "proper" Subie for this market slot. Even the Aygo, as juice mentioned, could also work, I would think.
We know they are seriously considering bring over the Subie R1 and/or the R2, but these are much smaller (660cc) cars. While I would like to see that happen, they really need something in the 1500cc range too.
Bob
Wouldn't a wagon on the Avalon platform, a jumbo Outback, be cool? Something long and low, a reincarnation of a 70s Country Squire, not raised up like a Tribeca.
And a lighter duty, smaller Tacoma on the shortened platform,with a Sube boxer and better handling - that would be in a class of one (the Ranger certainly wouldn't give it much trouble). The two could each use their own engines, share the platform development, maybe not manufacturing.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2018 430i Gran Coupe
The reason Subaru hit the news in the first place was huge gobs of red ink spilling out of the Subaru plant in Indiana, so at least the Toyota purchase may mean they can finally utilize the plant to full capacity, by building some Toyotas there too.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I mentioned Aygo because of the styling fitting in, and because Toyota doesn't sell it here, so it would not be redundant.
-juice
Bob
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
That's an ambitious goal. I can't think of any car company that showed up with a premium product without first proving themselves to the masses. At least, no company which did it and succeeded.
I can understand moving into more premium territory (like Toyota, VW, and Honda here in the US), but none of them dropped the base models, and all of them started out that way.
I also see it as an ambiquous goal - premium brand without premium prices. Does Subaru want to be the new Hyundai??
I know, I know - it's marketing speak for "we want to offer a premium product but we just haven't figured out how to get people to accept higher prices".
Subaru can go ahead and kill of the Justy, but they need to keep some kind of car to replace it. No one is going to accept Subaru as a premium manufacturer just because they say so. First, they need to build public trust and pull ahead of the competition.
You need to have a hit on the charts before you can call yourself a diva.
Enough with the "premium" talk already, Subaru. Stop talking about it. People see premium product and they know. Just do it. Cut the hype.
Do what? How about:
* stability control still missing from most models
* NAV option still missing from most models
* HIDs are still only on a couple of specialty models
* where's the iPod jack?
* telescoping wheel, perhaps?
* power up/down windows?
* rear backup camera for at least the Tribeca
Even Hyundai has more standard airbags nowadays (on entry-level models).
Honestly? I think they had plans to move forward, but the market is also moving forward. It's a moving target, and they have kept up, but not moved ahead into a premium position. They are about where they were back in 2003. Or 1998 even.
Example...
Forester was first in class with standard ABS, 1998. Forester was first in class with head air bag protection for the driver, 2003.
Now? Forester might just be last-in-class to get side curtains. It probably will be the last model in its class to get stability control. And NAV. And an iPod jack. That's a long, and significant, list.
So premium is the wrong word. That's not it at all. I'd say they offer bang-for-the-buck, performance leadership in the turbos models especially. Sure, I'll give them the performance crown, but not the premium crown.
-juice
2018 430i Gran Coupe
The base Tribeca, at a sticker of more than $30K, has cloth seats. Premium competitors in that price range have leather. Not premium.
Maybe all the premium talk coming from Subaru is just their way of saying they have decided what the posters here did - that they can't keep the AWD in and offer a less expensive model than the Impreza, so they are "premium" in the sense they really have no entry-level car.
I would like to see them borrow HSD from Toyota in this new "synergy" and offer it in all their models - the weight is already there anyway because of AWD, what's a little more? And it sure would be nice to see some Subarus with numbers clearing the 30 mark for EPA rating. I noticed that when they dropped the variable valve lift in the 2.5 this year, most of the EPA ratings dropped a point. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
So, no, I don't think being behind by one or two yeas on a few specific features is really the problem. Everyone is behind by a year or two in some way.
I think the problem with moving to the premium level is one of image. Subaru is still known largely as a wagon company. While "sport-tourers" may be gaining ground, wagons still ain't sexy. The outdoorsey image they cultivated in the US was a strong selling point to middle America, but not necessarily the premium crowd. The boy-racer street cred earned with the WRX certainly gained some momentum for the brand, but it's not premium material.
I just think they need to achieve that image before they can stop selling base models. There's no doubt that Subaru can build premium cars. They're just having trouble selling them.
Here's the sedan:
http://www.subaru.com/shop/overview.jsp?model=IMPREZA&trim=25I_SEDAN&command=overview
The wagon has the same MSRP as the sedan.
Bob
The thing is, you don't CALL a brand "premium", the public does. They decide what is premium and what is not, ultimately. And of course, most premium brands are set apart in the U.S. now with a seriously upgraded after-purchase experience from the dealer. I don't know when or how Subaru will be able to achieve that. It would help if more dealers were stand-alone, rather than Subaru just being one of a dozen brands (exaggeration alert) they were attempting to sell and service.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I agree, the "public" decides what is, or is not premium. They're working on getting more stand-alone dealers, but that doesn't happen overnight, as you know.
Bob
2018 430i Gran Coupe
In my mind, dropping the Justy over there would be a lot like dropping the Impreza here. If Subaru is going to reach enough buyers to convince the public at large, that Subaru is a premium brand, they'll need cars priced affordably.
Bob
The only company selling in the U.S. with a base model as expensive as the Impreza is VW, and their "move upmarket" is viewed with great skepticism by the press and posters here alike. So far, the only move that has happened for them is the one to less sales. And even then, I think the base New Beetle is a bit cheaper than the Impreza 2.5i, but I would have to check that. Of course, the Beetle is also smaller, with a lot less utility and no AWD. But price is very important to prospective buyers. There are lots of compact cars, including 5-doors and wagons like the Impreza, available for thousands less. Including a couple of AWDs even, the Aerio SX (as long as they keep that on the market, not much longer, apparently), and the Matrix AWD.
Anyway, that's old territory, just some thoughts responding to varmint's comment that Impreza is comparable as Subaru's base model here. Never mind Justy - within 6 to 9 months the Fit, Yaris, and Versa will all be on sale here, as well as a revised-for-'07 xA. I guess there will be no answer to these vehicles from Subaru? Because it just can't afford to sell a car in the $12-16K range? I do wonder if this makes the brand seem more premium to anyone.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If SOA's considering R1 & R2 for our shores, they must feel those are "Premium" despite their size.
So yes, let's have a new premium vehicle that slots between R2 and Impreza.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Subaru's just gotta keep on consistently building high-quality driver's cars, and the reputation will follow. I do think Subaru could use some self-generated news, like retaking their speed/endurance record they set with Legacy in '98 (recently broken by Mercedes). They've got some great accomplishments in their history, but they really need to publicize them! Throw the public some impressive trivia.
Bob
There's Buick, which has ditched all it's bottom-feeders (Century, Skylark), Chrysler (going upscale with the 300, Pacifica), Volvo (always has been a cut above), VW (which over here in Australia for a long time has been considered premium/exclusive), Honda (in the UK, the Accord is being marketed as a compact executive. Over here, it's a step above a Camry for sure), etc etc
This means that certain companies (Ford, Dodge, Chevrolet) can just swoop in eventually and take all the downmarket sales.
Bob
Jetta does have a lot of premium features, but VW has its own issues, mostly that service/reliability is not up near premium levels. Not even average, for that matter.
It's like varmint said, I guess you could nit-pick any car. Even that Jetta gets plastic hub caps at that price. VW ought to bring the Polo so that it can allow the Jetta to truly go premium.
Any how, the Jetta V launch was a disaster so the last thing you want to do is copy VW. Brand new model and sales are way down?
Subaru might only be able to truly move the Impreza up if something else slots beneath it.
BTW, while they did add side head/chest air bags to the front, curtains are still missing, even both Hyundai and Kia have those in their entry-level cars now.
If Subaru wants to stay in the $18k price range, maybe a car slotted below the Impreza is the way to go. The B5 TPH hints that it will get bigger and go upscale.
desh: try one of the problems threads.
-juice