Subaru Crew - Future Models II

once_for_all

what do we really want in a pickup? Is it just the "look" and impression that we are an outdoorsy, rugged guy even though we commute to the office everyday?

I want the bed for dirty shovels, getting into my tool chest easily, not breathing fumes from what I am hauling, carrying a 10' length of something, loading recycle plastic, aluminum, motor oil, dead batteries, etc.

For my regular needs, even the tiny Baja bed would work fine. The Baja problem for me is that the cab is too small.

Joh

kens

Over at Legacygt.com a member posted a brochure of preliminary MY06 Forester X info. The engine is described as a 2.5L SOHC with Variable Valve Lift meeting LEV2 standards. Peak power is TBD but HP peaks at 5600RPM and Torque at 4800RPM.

Is this old news?

Ken

ateixeira

That's new news. Very interesting news.

VVT is only on the XT right now, so that should make the base engines a lot nicer, even if absolute numbers don't jump up.

Put that together with the sheet we saw earlier, which seperated the Baja, and that tells me the Baja is the only 2.5l base engine that will not get the updates.

I hope so, that would mean the Forester, Outback Sport, and Legacy 2.5i would get a much needed power boost!

Right now power peaks at the same 5600, but torque peaks at 4000. So it looks like they improved the breathing some what to keep torque from dropping off quicly at higher revs.

The Phase II was never as good a revver as the DOHC Phase I, so this might address that.

Wonder if it'll be DOHC too?

-juice

bluesubie

If the Zapped Forester comes out in '07, I wonder if we'll get the facelifted Forester for '06? Or maybe the JDM Forester will be redesigned for '06.

I recall reading, or maybe hearing from the B9 rep at the Philly show, that FHI wanted Zap to recreate the Alfa look for Subaru.

-Dennis

c_hunter

JDM got the facelifted Forester at the end of January. We're getting it this summer (announced in ~2 weeks at NY is the rumor).

If Subaru continues their normal cycle, the totally new (Zapped) Forester will appear here in spring/early summer of 2007 as an 08 model.

Craig

rsholland

http://img228.exs.cx/img228/9947/forester06verso8bx.jpg

kens

I believe the brochure specifically mentioned SOHC.

Interesting. I thought they would just bring over the JDM NA 2.5 with AVCS. I believe that model has DOHC.

They must have designed an engine just for the USDM.

Ken

locke2c

I think the VVL on the engine is the one shared/licensed from Nissan. It is radically different from AVCS.

~c

mayberryguy

The 2006 Leg/OBK will get an "improved" version of the N.A. 2.5. As of now I have not heard any numbers because they are waiting on final tune spec to set numbers. I have heard projections of at least 5% to as much as 10% HP increase with around 5% increase for torque.

Also Navigation system appears to an option on at least the VDC and possibly LL Bean. I can't tell from the new model codes.

No 6 speed manual for 2006

jon_in_ct

From locke2c, "Subaru Crew - Future Models II" #16278, 15 Mar 2005 6:25 pm

I think the VVL on the engine is the one shared/licensed from Nissan. It is radically different from AVCS.

Why would you think FHI is using Nissan's VVL system? I imagine the new 2.5 SOHC uses a variable valve lift system that's the same as the one used in the EZ30R engine in the Outback VDC and LL Bean. That one's a 2-stage system.

In the diagram, the image on the left depicts low-load operation and the one on the right shows high-load or high RPM operation.



It seems to be an alternative to Tumble Generator Valves.

ateixeira

Caught that later, SOHC it is.

Forester redesign should come in MY2008, they may have meant calendar year 2007.

5 to 10% is 8 to 17hp or so. Could be anywhere from 165+8=173 all the way up to 168+17=185. I'll guess 175 for the fun of it.

-juice

ateixeira

From that file:

Occupant sensing air bags
Multi-reflector lights
Multi-function center console
Engine specs are totally in bold (VVL)

Basically some Legacy stuff, the lights sound good though.

How much po-wahhh?

-juice

rsholland

This is the other side of the SOA emissions testing sheet I posted.

http://home.gci.net/~maddog20/pictures/subaru/Other/06-im2.jpg

It states 2007 & 2008, and for both those years the Baja is still listed. I bet we see another "new" Outback-based Baja for MY07.

Bob

Bob

ateixeira

If the Baja will continue they'd better update it soon. The current Outback has been around for a year or so, they should have had the Baja ready by now.

Perhaps we'll be surprised and see one late this year, maybe in LA since it moves forward to November?

-juice

frog

Here in Mid Coast Maine there are a number of new bajas running around, including a couple of B-turbos. I think they are sharp, with the mag wheels and the stock tinted cabins. Nice. Granted they are a far cry from a work truck. More of a college kids toy, or a midlife crisis runabout.

With a lift and a slightly bigger bed, this could be a great truck. See Toyota Tacoma.

I dont think it will ever be Subaru bread and butter though. The segment is too packed with quality offerings. My response- buy a 500$ trailer.

rsholland

I could see myself with a turbo Baja—if it were done right, which is probably why I keep posting so much on this vehicle.

BTW, I've already got the trailer. The current Baja could tow it, but I'd feel better if the next Baja's towing could be rated at 3500 pounds.

Bob

ateixeira

Next Baja needs a bigger cabin even more than it needs a bigger bed. It only seats 4 and lacks leg room in the back and head room in every position.

They should think about making the moonroof optional (I can't believe that I, of all people, am saying that).

-juice

njswamplands

ateixeira

Good one swampy.

But as interesting as that Honda is, I see plenty of room for improvement. The middle rear seat is rock hard, the interior seems a bit cheap, and the styling is a little over the top.

I think they will be leap-frogged by a competitor's next generation truck, the question is who will that be?

If you look at the Ody, it was dominant, but then the Sienna showed up with windows that roll down, seating for 8, and AWD. 3 significant improvements.

I predict the same will happen to the Ridgeline.

-juice

rsholland

But as interesting as that Honda is, I see plenty of room for improvement. The middle rear seat is rock hard, the interior seems a bit cheap, and the styling is a little over the top.

Not sure I agree with that.

Can't comment on the middle of the rear seat, but even if it is hard, so are most of the competitors. The two outside rear seats are very comfortable, at least in comparison to midsize crew cabs.

I completely disagree about the interior looking cheap. It looks very purposeful—and is extremely well thought out, like all Honda. It's not trying to pretend to be a luxury car, because it isn't. It's a truck, and as such, very well done. I'm especially intrigued by the clever expandable front center console. There's very little I'd do to the Ridgeline's interior. Offer more colors? Maybe...

Styling? Well, it ain't great, but I can live with it.

I know you're not in the market for a pickup, but you really ought to drive one—and examine it closely. It's really pretty nifty.

Bob

ateixeira

I look specifically at the 5th seating position because we have a nanny. Only a few vehicles are truly comfy there. I just saw an opportunity for improvement.

-juice

rsholland

I understand where you're coming from, but again, the middle rear seating in most vehicles is sub-par.

Are there any vehicles, other than fullsize domestics that offer comfortable middle rear seating?

Bob

ateixeira

Scion xB, believe it or not. More comfortable than a Lexus LS430 in that particular position.

They are few and far between, but a vehicle that wide should easily be able to accomodate a 5th person comfortably.

Sienna and Expedition can.

-juice

once_for_all

absolutely. For a simple MR delete, I would be in a Baja right now. Probably the Baja Turbo.

John

once_for_all

I have to believe that an independent rear suspension and AWD is the future in this category, because of handling, safety, etc.

Who is prepared to do it? We have Honda, Subaru, and the 2007 Sportrac.

I don't see anyone else giving up their solid rear axle. Toyota, Nissan, and the Avalanche are all locked in with their solid axle. It will take a major success by Honda to change their minds.

John

robr2

That's what I was about to say - who is going to offer an IRS truck that is let's say 80% as capable as their normal trucks? Will Toyota, Nissan, Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Mazda all of a sudden come out with a new truck that touts the importance of FWD/AWD, IRS, and passenger comfort? They've been promoting the toughness of their tradtional trucks for years.

I see someone like Hyundai/Kia entering this market - they don't have any truck history either. Subaru most likely. A Scion would probably make more sense than a Toyota. And perhaps Lexus and Infiniti.

rsholland

John, I agree. However both Ford and Nissan could do it right now, as the Expedition and Armada have IRS. Putting that on the their fullsize 1/2-ton pickups would be easy. It's more of a "marketing" issue than an "engineering" issue, as selling the idea to to truck owners will be tough. Once it proves it can work on those SUVs, the sales job for pick ups will be much easier.

Bob

once_for_all

Bob, I didn't know the Armada was IRS. I see more and more of the big SUVs with this feature. Nissan may be reluctant to abandon their new Frontier design, which from what I hear is quite a nice package.

Another question-- is Armada AWD?

John

rsholland

Another question-- is Armada AWD?

Yes, well sort of... It's an on-demand AWD, with a 2-speed transfer case, much like what the Expedition has. It's normally RWD, but sends power forward upon slippage. I believe it also has a part-time, center dif locked position too.

Bob

rsholland

Bob, I didn't know the Armada was IRS.

Yep. Armada, Q56 and new Pathfinder too.

Bob

njswamplands

besides IRS standing for tax dudes what else does it stand for?

robr2

Independent Rear Suspension

ateixeira

Didn't the Expedition go IRS? I think it did. They'll soon engineer an IRS that can also handle HD work.

Bob beat me to it.

Armada as well.

Titan and F-150 did not, but I think the light-duty versions of those pickups might next time around. Don't be surprised if they do.

Oh, and taxes are due April 15. :-)

-juice

rsholland

both the Armada and Expedition have higher GVWs than do their pickup cousins. I know you can get a HD F-150 with an 8100 GVW, but I'm not talking about that model.

So the only reason for the pickups not getting IRS is do to marketing concerns.

Bob

locke2c

quote: it seems to be an alternative to Tumble Generator Valves.

whaaat?

now I'll fully admit two things here:

1) I did not do any specific research regarding the Nissan connection I spoke of before. I just recalled that Nissan and Subaru had used the same VVT on some Japanese-only market vehicles in the past.

2) I definitely did not know this technology already existed on the 3.0R. That changes things.

however--

this is definitely not at all related to a tumble generator valve! those were built for emissions compliance only. they alter airflow in the intake port with a butterfly-- that's nothing like altering the valve timing or lift.

what you've linked an image of is clearly cam-profile changing vvt that draws its roots to honda's first VTEC from around 1990. there are many companies doing this sort of vvt today where the lifter has a hydraulic piece of it that elevates and causes it to follow a different cam profile.

~Colin

kens

Would you explain the difference between AVCS and VVL/VVT?

Ken

ateixeira

Doesn't AVCS act on the intake valves only?

VVL would vary the degree of lift, i.e. how high the camshaft pushes the valve.

VVT would vary the timing or duration of that lift.

AVCS is a form of VVT I believe.

Honda's VTEC is actually VVTLEC, variable valve timing and lift with electronic control. So they're more advanced in that regard.

-juice

jon_in_ct

From locke2c, "Subaru Crew - Future Models II" #16305, 16 Mar 2005 5:27 pm

quote: it seems to be an alternative to Tumble Generator Valves.

whaaat?

now I'll fully admit two things here:

1) I did not do any specific research regarding the Nissan connection I spoke of before. I just recalled that Nissan and Subaru had used the same VVT on some Japanese-only market vehicles in the past.

2) I definitely did not know this technology already existed on the 3.0R. That changes things.

however--

this is definitely not at all related to a tumble generator valve! those were built for emissions compliance only. they alter airflow in the intake port with a butterfly-- that's nothing like altering the valve timing or lift.

what you've linked an image of is clearly cam-profile changing vvt that draws its roots to honda's first VTEC from around 1990. there are many companies doing this sort of vvt today where the lifter has a hydraulic piece of it that elevates and causes it to follow a different cam profile.

First, variable valve timing (VVT) is unrelated to variable valve lift (VVL). Subaru calls its implementation of VVT Active Valve Control System and those interested in how AVCS works should read the article about it in the most recent issue of Subaru's Drive magazine. Subaru's AVCS requires Dual Overhead Cams (DOHC).

There are two general types of large-scale movements the air/fuel mixture can make within the cylinder. Whirling in the cylinder whose axis is perpendicular to the cylinder axis is called "Tumble." Whirling in the cylinder whose axis is parallel to the cylinder's axis is called "Swirl."

Subaru's Tumble Generator Valves, used in all its current turbocharged engines, obviously produce tumble. So how does one produce swirl? Simple - only open one of the two intake valves. If you look back at that diagram I posted, you'll see that one of the two valves is essentially closed in the "low load" state and the motion arrows indicate swirl.

Here's what my Internal Combustion Engine Handbook says about tumble and swirl:

Swirling flows remain during intake and compression (strokes) and dissipate only during expansion (power stroke). ... Tumble flows generally last up to the time of compression and decay into microturbulences close to ignition top dead center.

Figure 15-33 shows engine behavior when there is external exhaust gas recirculation of swirl and tumble flows in a 4V(alve) engine. The charge swirl was created by shutting off an intake valve. In contrast to the tumble approach, the swirl variation has a much shorter ignition lag in this type of engine. Because of the large charge movement, the flame core can more quickly reach a larger mixture area after the start of ignition and induce a detectable energy conversion. The combustion phase is also faster in the swirl approach than the tumble approach. The faster energy conversion during the swirling means that less preignition (spark advance) is required, thereby resulting in more favorable ignition conditions at the moment of ignition. Cyclic fluctuations are much lower as the exhaust gas recirculation rate increases in the swirl variant. The improved combustion stability and the short combustion period give the swirl variant its advantage in fuel consumption.

Hence my statement that Subaru's VVL appears to eliminate the need for Tumble Generator Valves.

robr2

My wittle head is hurting so badly. Can we start talking about the Tribaja again?

Edit - Tumble Generator Valves? Isn't that what Doc added to the Delorean in Back to the Future?

ateixeira

Dilithium crystals in the flux capacitor definitely help the tumble generator valves to their periodic vortex shedding.

No doubt.

-juice

p0926

kens

jon,

Thanks for the link. Come to think about it, I don't recall getting my Winter 2005 Drive.

I thought it was interesting that Subaru used diagrams with pistons in a vertical position.

Ken

rob_m

robr2

LOL!! Though Votex Shedding sounds dirty.

jon_in_ct

QUOTE:

I thought it was interesting that Subaru used diagrams with pistons in a vertical position.

That was a good idea because engine terminology presumes that orientation and doesn't make much sense, otherwise. Examples include: cylinder head, overhead cams, top dead center, bottom dead center, etc..

varmint

"Would you explain the difference between AVCS and VVL/VVT?"

Take a look here. This starts with basic theory, which I'm pretty sure you have a decent grasp of, but takes it further by describing many of the VVT and VVL systems on the market. Then compare that with the link Jon provided.

ateixeira

I guess for Subaru it's Right/Left Dead Center? :-)

-juice

ateixeira

Subaru's AVCS as the 2nd type, cam-phasing VVT.

But I wonder what the EJ255 engine will get, they pretty clearly say VVL. That implies it varies the amount of lift, not the phasing/timing.

-juice

locke2c

sorry-- I don't have time at work for a long response to Jon's post.

however I will say this. the type of variable valve timing he linked an image to a bit ago and discussed in his last 2 posts is made to optimize fuel economy. it simply won't offer more performance-- there is no way that using 3/4 of your valve area will produce more power than using all of it. when you have 1 valve shut you will get more swirl, possibly more port velocity on the one valve still opening, but there is no way you'd get more flow than if both intake valves were open. using a hydraulic 'peg' to switch cam profiles is one thing, but the images I see depicted are not that we're changing from a mid-rpm profile to a high-rpm one-- it's more like 'normal' and 'cruise'. during cruise it switches to a flat lobe which leaves a valve shut because you don't need flow.

honda, again, has done this first. in fact they have a motorcycle using this technology, the VTR 800 sport-touring.

~Colin

ateixeira

Emissions are a big reason for a lot of this technology, too.

-juice