Subaru Crew - Future Models II

ateixeira

Automotive News had a similar article, I shared with Bob off line.

Both hint at a CVT for the Forester, but why not for 2011 models?

Instead we get innovation at a glacial pace. Sales growth will stall if they don't continuously improve on things. August sales were down (-23%) even more than a bad market (-21%), though 2010 was C4C.

xwesx

Is that for Subaru in total, or just Forester? I would think there are many that are "holding off" for the 2011, either because of changes or because they're hoping to get the 2010 for a discounted price. The lack of incentives (other than financing) does impact buying decisions when it is time for a new model year.

ateixeira

That's for Subaru overall. It's only the 2nd - I have yet to see a press release from Subaru (though it may come out any minute...).

rsholland

News of a "sporty SUV" to launch next month at the Sydney, AZ auto show. Perhaps a Forester WRX?

http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/forester-wrx-topselling-suv-could-get-more-gr- unt-20100907-14ybh.html

Also interesting that the current Forester turbo makes up 15-20% of Aussie Forester sales. That's pretty high, I think.

Bob

ateixeira

He can finally replace his Forester turbo, if we see a manual here in the US.

It's funny that Subaru led the segment in performance, then abandoned it.

xwesx

In June and July, the Forester averaged roughly 230 sales, well above Subaru's initial volume estimates.

230 sales? I hope there is a digit or two missing there! :surprise:

ateixeira

Daily, perhaps?

rsholland

233 diesel Foresters, not just Foresters.

After three months of sales, Subaru has moved an average of 233 diesel Foresters every month, helping to contribute to a record haul of 1400 Forester sales last month.

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/49DEE398F16BFBB8CA257797000469- - - 3C

Bob

xwesx

Wow; that is a TINY market, yet they have the diesel?! There is something seriously backward about America. Disgusting. :mad:

volkov

The avoidance of diesel passenger cars does put the US a little out of step with the rest, but OTOH, this still isn't a clean diesel so its importation isn't even an option for SOA or consumers to consider. Maybe the US isn't so backward afterall - dirty fuel efficiency isn't necessarily a step forward.

rsholland

Actually Australia is their second or third largest market.

Bob

ateixeira

Good point - Subaru has to add urea injection before that diesel would even meet CARB rules.

colin_l

They would? Trucks and SUVs use urea injection, but 2008-up cars have been using particulate filters.

ateixeira

What I've read is that Subaru's current diesel would not meet CARB standards, and urea injection is what that same article mentioned.

There's more than one way to skin a cat, though.

Bob drove a 335d Bimmer over the weekend so maybe he can chime on on the state of modern diesels...

ateixeira

It was more like a mini version of the Pretty Good Driving Event, give the small parking lot and short autocross course they had set up, but I met Bob over the weekend to sample some cool AWD sedans: BMW 328xi, Lexus IS 250 AWD, Benz 300 4Matic, and Audi A4 2.0FSI Quattro.

Funny thing is it was pretty much the same lineup that Audi had at Summit Point for their driving experience, except Audi used a V6 model there, which was sort of cheating (they argued pricing was similar to the 328xi). BMW used entry-level engines and models with no options, so no sport packages (Audi's Dynamic setting was absent, for instance).

Basically we got 2 laps in the Bimmer, twice for a total of 4 laps. Each of the other cars for 2 laps as well, so 10 laps total, on a short course. Not enough driving, but some quick impressions.

Benz: lots of body roll. V6 engine was fairly linear. The trans is a 7 speed but it was the slow-poke of the bunch, never holding the right gear long enough.

Lexus: also plenty of roll, dive and pitch. The small 2.5l V6 is just not powerful enough, so it didn't matter that power delivery was linear, there was never enough of it. Oddly enough I was smoothest in this car, but probably because speeds were slowest. The brakes were also the weakest.

BMW: best handling by a wide margin. Even with all seasons and no sport package, it's a good basic platform. The engine is linear, responsive. Much less brake dive than some of the others. Nicely balanced sums it up. Smartest trans, too, held the right gear throughout the lap.

Audi: by far the most disappointing. The V6 Audi I drove in a similar comparo a year or so ago was a match for the BMW 328xi when you used Dynamic mode, but the 2.0l turbo lags badly with the automatic trans. It simply MUST be had with a stick shift, which would surely have helped reduce the substantial lag. To make matters worse, it had dive and pitch and body roll as bad as the Lexus, even worse, due to the sudden on/off engine surges.

The Audi simply had to be wrestled around the track, so disappointing that it wasn't even fun to drive. May as well take my minivan around the cones. Yes, that bad.

I dunno if BMW snuck underneath and unbolted all the sway bars, or let the air out of the tires, but it was really no contest. I did read that the DSG is a 7 speed, so we drove the worst-performing 6 speed slushbox tranny, but still - major disappointment. I wouldn't even want one, at all.

rsholland

Yeah, juice and I were at a BMW event yesterday. I was able to drive a new 335d for maybe 15 or so miles, and yes, it was an eye-opener.

This car had the same horsepower (265) as my WRX, but had 425 lb-ft of torque, and only comes with a 6-speed automatic. Very impressive, to say the least; and nothing like diesels of days gone by. It only sounded like a diesel (and barely, at that) at idle. The car has plenty of power, at virtually any rpm, with very little if any turbo lag. I floored it on the highway, and hit 90 mph before I realized it. It's significantly quicker than the 328i models, but not as quick as the 335i models. Still, it's very impressive—especially when you consider the range this car has, which is around 535 miles per tankful (EPA 36 mpg highway).

The down side? The diesel is not available in AWD, unless you opt for the X5 model; and the price starts ~ $44K.

Bob

ateixeira

FWIW the 0-60 time per C&D is exactly the same, 335d vs. 328i.

But I imagine it feels faster...

rsholland

Not according to the BMW brochure, which I picked up yesterday. The diesel is quicker 0-60.

328i (manual) 6.3
328i (auto) 6.9

335d (auto) 6.0

Bob

ateixeira

I'm going from memory but I think C&D made it in 5.9 seconds for both, though I'm pretty sure the 328i was a manual.

colin_l

I've posted in one or two of the diesel-specific topics here on Edmunds about it, but I definitely think that the 335d is overpriced which is significantly hampering the take-up rate compared to Volkswagen TDIs and their gas engine models.

I have no complaints whatsoever about the diesel powertrain.

rsholland

http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/09/spy-shots-2013-subaru-impreza.h- tml

Bob

xwesx

Oh, geez. I seriously hope that doesn't end up being as ugly as that car hints. I know what Subaru should do with all their extra profits from the last year.... hire a decent styling designer! :sick:

rblnr

I'll withhold judgement. If it's the designer who did the hybrid tourer, I think we're in good hands.

rsholland

How can you comment on the styling of a car that's covered from head to tail with foam padding?

Bob

xwesx

Ah, well, I just look past that and imagine the contours underneath. Like I said, it *hints* at being an ugly car, just like the Outback did when it was similarly clad. What do you know... the Outback is ugly! :P

The Hybrid Tourer was stunning, so maybe we'll get lucky after all. Based on the current gen Outback's sales, though, it seems today's buyers like ugly. :sick:

Speaking of the Outback, I saw a red Outback and, coincidentally, Legacy for the first time (in person) yesterday, both on my way home from work. It was a perfect, sunny day and both cars were spotless. That color is gorgeous! I'm thrilled that Subaru finally offers a nice red on that line, even if it is a generation late in coming.

rsholland

I bet the new Impreza will have a grille that is quite similar to that found on the Subaru Hybrid Tourer Concept, although a bit smaller, but clearly influenced by it.

If you look at the cut line of the lower front edge of the hood, it notches up onto the hood, much like that found on the concept. The oval logo seems to be positioned in about the same place too. The Dodge-like vertical mass directly under the logo is just there to throw people like us off. They both even share a similar honeycomb grille pattern. The headlights appear to be a cross between what they now use, and that of the concept. Finally, that tiny front Honda Fit-like side window is also on the concept.

I'm excited. I think this could be a good looking car.

Bob

xwesx

That's funny, Bob... you were focusing on the front end of the car and I was focusing on the back! Looking at the front more closely, I think there's a strong chance you are right about those details. I didn't even notice that little window in the front of the door. I'm not sure what the point is, but as an old truck guy, I like it!

As for the back, it looks to me like it has an awkward transition between the pillar and the side (ala Outback), as well as a sort of "bloated [non-permissible content removed]" look to the rear bumper. In other words, the hatch is small, and everything around it is really big (amplified, of course, by the cladding). That's just what I see, though.

rsholland

I suspect the rear will be pretty much an evolution of the current styling theme, at least for the hatchback version. While all-new, I think it will be easily recognized as a Subaru. Unlike the current 5-door, it has "red" tail lights. The clear tail lights, currently being used, have been an issue for many.

Who knows what the sedan will look like.

Bob

ateixeira

I sure hope the front looks like the hybrid tourer! Great looking car.

Window behind the C pillar will likely be very small.

rblnr

'Impreza: The compact sedan and five-door model will be redesigned for the 2012 model year with bodies created by new design chief Osamu Namba'

This is the designer of the Hybrid Tourer, so maybe there's hope.

Read more: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20100910/CARNEWS/100919998#ixzz10GuZk62g'

rsholland

http://www.fhi.co.jp/english/contents/pdf_en_60853.pdf

From what I've heard, the next US-spec Impreza will get the 2.0 version (not the 2.5), at least in non-turbo applications.

Bob

ateixeira

146hp for the 2l. I was hoping for more than that!

The 1990 Sentra SE-R made 140hp from a 2 liter engine. That was TWENTY ONE years ago!

volkov

But that HP number is comparable to other's. I think it makes sense to go smaller and try to improve FE relative to the competition. I always thought the 2.5 was overkill for the Impreza given the segment. The recurring knock for the Impreza in reviews has always been the FE - that and not HP are what's more important to most buyers in that market. Heck VW sold tons of cars in the last decade with that pitiful 115hp in their 2 litre.

ateixeira

Comparable, sure, but this is a brand new engine design and as-is it breaks no new ground, despite double AVCS and a long stroke design (which could make access to spark plugs tougher), and a higher compression ratio. 0 hp gained!

I agree that 2l for an Impreza is fine, and going for FE makes sense.

You mention the 2.slow - it's back! VW is once again putting that weak engine in the Jetta.

volkov

I forgot to add, that the SE-R was considered a budget rocket aka Civic Si scorcher at the time. Not an appropriate comparison.

ateixeira

That was Nissan's regular mid-sized 4 banger, though. The NX got it, the Infiniti G20 got it, it was not just for the SE-R.

saedave

The 1990 Sentra SE-R made 140hp from a 2 liter engine. That was TWENTY ONE years ago!

And probably twenty one times the pollutants generated. Absent the need to design for low emissions, output could be much greater....say 200HP without direct injection.

Somewhat off topic: The reduced bore (if bore centers remain the same) might make a lower cost die cast block adequate. Are bore centers the same as before?

colin_l

Haha, I realize you were just being facetious, but 21x the pollutants from a SR20?

If you take us back to a four cylinder from 1980, maybe so. But the 140 HP SR20 engine had port fuel injection, evaporative purge canister and a catalytic converter.

That's decidedly off-topic, however. The point is that a 146hp gas engine is not going to move any modern Subaru product with anything resembling respectable pace. It's very disappointing... baffling, in fact.

saedave

The point is that a 146hp gas engine is not going to move any modern Subaru product with anything resembling respectable pace.

That presumes that weight is not significantly reduced. We can hope.

ateixeira

Let's see...

The current Impreza starts at just over 3000 lbs.

I wonder if the new blocks will be lighter. The intake manifold went from metal to plastic composite. Bore is smaller, stroke is longer. I think it could shave off a few pounds, but not a lot.

Even at 2900 lbs we're talking about 20 lbs per horse. Even my 1998 Forester had 19 lbs per horse.

The Subayota coupe is supposed to be 2700 lbs, so that would be 18.5 lbs/horse, but that's supposed to be sporty so I doubt we'll see that powertrain in that model.

I can appreciate the lighter intake manifold, the convenient oil filter position (up top, with a cup to capture spilled oil, brilliant), the increased efficiency and the lower emissions, but anything 2.0l powered will be doing 0-60 in over 10 seconds, which nowadays is slow.

All I will say is that 2.0l Impreza had better surprise us with well over 30mpg highway. The Legacy at 31mpg was a pleasant surprise, but nowadays the Sonata makes 35mpg and the green 2.0l coming to the Mazda3 is rumored to get 40mpg. Even with the AWD handicap the Impreza will have to be mid-upper 30s to impress.

saedave

but anything 2.0l powered will be doing 0-60 in over 10 seconds, which nowadays is slow.

But years ago a 3000 pound 1948 Chevy took about 14 seconds and had a real top speed of 82 mph. When everyone else is also slow, no one will notice.

The new Sonata at 198 HP from 2.4 liters has 13% more HP per liter, perhaps the amount that Subaru could get from direct injection. Sonata's 6-speed auto trans certainly helps performance too. It undoubtedly has a considerably wider ratio spread than the Subaru CVT, so don't expect performance from Impreza CVT.

ateixeira

I think the Impreza can appeal to people in two opposite ways:

Performance - WRX and STI
Economy - 2.0i

The problem is, once you decide to build a "slow" car, over 10 seconds, consumers are going to be cross-shopping based on MPG. The AWD handicap is probably 2 mpg or so.

So how is Subaru going to expand the appeal of the Impreza if those customers will be turned off by the mpg?

The WRX does well because that buyer puts mpg as a lower priority.

saedave

So how is Subaru going to expand the appeal of the Impreza if those customers will be turned off by the mpg?

Perhaps it can be merchandised as the alternative to an SUV that has AWD. Where there is enough snow, the choice may be obvious. In Florida, alternatives will win. And in really deep snow the lack of ground clearance will suggest a Forester instead.

How many Imprezas are sold now in the sunshine states?

rsholland

Exactly. Subaru doesn't have to have the best gas mileage, it just needs to be competitive—and offer the AWD as frosting on the cake.

Bob

ateixeira

My fear is with the 2.0l the Impreza is going after the AWD Suzuki SX4, which has never sold well.

Right now the Impreza stands out as having more standard power than the class norm. With the 2.0l it won't. Nor will it stand out for fuel economy.

It may not matter much - the cash cows are the Forester and Outback, that's where Subaru has done their volume and probably will continue to.

saedave

My fear is with the 2.0l the Impreza is going after the AWD Suzuki SX4, which has never sold well

That is because it is called a Suzuki, no model of which sells well. Most people remember their high mpg Chevy-labeled VERY SMALL car. The Impreza is in a larger and sturdier class. The SX4 is close in size perhaps, but not in image, noise vibration and harshness or ride quality. However SX4 styling is good and we have yet to see the new Impreza.

rsholland

Also, Suzuki has a very meager dealer network and almost nonexistent marketing.

Bob

robr2

Perhaps it can be merchandised as the alternative to an SUV that has AWD.

Hmm - I wonder how Subaru could pull that off? Hey I know. They could put some cladding on it and name it after some barren land in the Southern hemisphere. Maybe they could get a cliche celebrity to endorse it.

Nahh - it'll never work.

colin_l

Hard to argue with that when the #1 Suzuki dealer in the nation is Wichita, Kansas. Wichita's other brand dealerships don't likely make the top 100.

lucien2

same deal here. I am nursing along a 150k Outback for a couple of more years in the hopes that SoA will catch up a little. Frankly I have zero use for an Outback's off roadiness, and there is no Legacy wagon anymore, so we'll be taking a hard look at Jetta wagons and also the used scene...we both value handling and brakes over power, ground clearance, or brute size. MPG is an issue too. We're delirious over how much fun our Mini Clubman S is at 30.2 mpg average. Too bad a Countryman is likely too small and too $$ for our growing family.

oh, so while we're on the topic, I have a tech question, because I have been living under a rock.

What is the Crew's preferred AWD system: viscuous clutch (6MT), planetary gears (5EAT), or mutli plate (CVT, which sounds a lot like lame-o "real time" awd)?