By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
http://www.veh-tech.net/
Liberty B4 review from Oz.
http://www.autoweb.com.au/start_/showall_/id_SUB/doc_sub0109201/article.html
Bob
I can't look at that B4 review. I just can't.
-juice
Bob
Having said that, would (could?) such an arrangement be feasible (practical?) using Subaru's boxer engine as a starting point?
Again, packaging would the the key motivation. If you add extra cylinders to the current boxer, the engine becomes longer, putting more weight in front of the front axle; not exactly an ideal situation. If, however, you add extra cylinders, at a 15 degree angle (just like VW) just above the current cylinders, you get an 8-cylinder engine, that's barely longer than the current 4-cylinder engine, and the center of gravity—while not as good as a "pure" boxer—will still be quite low.
What do you think? Is this something Subaru should think about, if ever they should decide to enter a market slot that would require an 8-cylinder engine?
Bob
Piech may be going a bit too far, IMO. He's blowing money like there's no tomorrow.
VW/Audi has too much overlap in its engines. The 1.8T engine in the Jetta now actually makes more power than the VR6 upgrade engine! Ridiculous.
I know, the VR6 is getting an upgrade to 201hp soon. Hurry it up, VW. Still, look at the overlap:
2.0: 115hp
1.8T: 170 or 180hp or 225hp (TT)
VR6: 172hp or 201hp
3.0 V6: 190hp
3.2 V6: 220hp
2.7T: 250hp
W8: ???
The base engine is a weakling, and should just be dropped or upgraded. I think it's still an 8 valve design, even. Every serious competitor is making at least 130hp. VW has a 1.8 engine without the "T", i.e. a non-turbo 1.8 making 125hp in other markets. This high-tech mill should be their base engine.
The 1.8T is a nice engine, but it requires premium fuel.
The 2.8l V6 is weak and should be dropped. It burns premium and lots of it, and is slow.
The VR6 is nice and torquey, so keep it. Tune it to run on regular at 201hp.
The new 3.2l V6 seems to be quick in the new Audi A4, so why bother with the W8? Sure, it may be expensive to build and not fuel efficient, but at least it's slow also!
So I say revise the line to include only:
1.8: 125hp
1.8T: 180hp
VR6: 201hp
3.2l V6: 220hp
You cut the number of engines in half. That has to reduce costs overall. Piech needs a little Inaki Lopez influence to stop spending money.
-juice
As for VW, my sense is that at some point all their engines will be modular and based upon the "W" concept.
Bob
It seems the W8 also has low MPG to go with it's other Virtues(?).
If that's the case why didn't VW pursue that route instead of developing a "W" layout? Do you think it's more for the publicity factor, meaning that VW is sure to get a lot of press over this engine? That could be very risky if it doesn't pan out.
Bob
Then again, any platform big enough to need an H8 ought to have a big enough engine bay for one.
Let's look at Subaru's engine lineup. There are many variations, but I'll include the ones I can think of:
2.0l N/A 125 to 156hp
2.0l Turbo 168hp, 215hp, 227hp, 280hp
2.0l Twin Turbo 280hp
2.2l 137hp
2.2l Turbo 280hp
2.5l 165hp
2.5l VVT 170hp
3.0l H6 212hp
Some are limited production. The US lineup is at the very edge of CAFE standards, so I kind of like the idea of that 156hp 2.0l in some base models.
I'd like to see a LPT 2.5l offered, plus an upgraded H6 to be used in top-line cars and up coming vehicles. The lineup I propose:
2.0l 156hp (Impreza TS and new TS sedan)
2.5l VVT 170hp (replace all current ones)
2.5l VVT LPT 200hp (for Forester, STX, Legacy)
3.0l H6 212hp (Outback exclusive)
2.0l turbo 227hp (WRX exclusive)
3.0l H6 LPT 250hp (VDC sedan and wagon)
2.0l twin turbo 280hp (Blitzen and WRX STi)
VVT=variable valve timing
LPT=light pressure turbo
Honestly, with that engine lineup the only tough thing would be deciding which one would be my next Soob!
A Blitzen and a turbo Forester. No, a WRX wagon and a VDC. Wait, maybe an BRAT and an economical Impreza wagon. Or...
See what I mean?
-juice
271hp, I was missing that data. 7.8s to reach highway speeds is completely unremarkable. Though we do have to consider it has AWD and it's an automatic.
Superchargers can be good or bad. The Kompressor in the Benz 230 Sport Coupe is coarse and unrefined, but others are much better. I like the idea of a light-pressure turbo much better. Volvo's engines are smooth and torquey. VW's 1.8T is easy to modify, which I would find appealing.
-juice
If Subaru (and GM) decide to offer an alternative to the Toyota Tundra and the upcoming Nissan full-size truck—because the current GM trucks don't appeal to those customers. Remember, the Tundra is aimed more at Tacoma customers that need something larger, than Silverado customers... And, if they decide it should labeled a Subaru, and not a Chevy—I think it would need an engine that at least "hints" of being from a Subaru.
Also, as to costs and complexity that Chuck mentioned; turbos and superchargers are also rather expensive and quite complicated too. So I'm not so sure there would be a cost savings going that route.
Bob
Bob
I doubt they will. The one thing GM does well is trucks. They are home-runs, and I doubt they'd even be willing to share the platform. If you want one, buy a Chevy.
I know you're looking further down the road than me. I'd be happy with a Foresterized Outback. Maybe they could do a bigger BRAT off that.
Subaru should stay in niches, always offering something different.
-juice
The four engins I would use are
2.0 T
2.5
2.5 T
3.0
Subaru is "tip-towing" into the truck market with the BRAT. They may discover it's a much bigger and lucrative market than they originally anticipated; and with GM's help, deep pockets, and manufacturing capability, decide to go for it.
If they should decide to do this, it still would be a niche vehicle, much like the upcoming VW full-size pickup.
Finally, with so many cars about to offer AWD, I think Subaru needs to look to other niche markets to develop. They're obviously going to go where they see the most future market potential. And, as I said, the truck market continues to sub-divide into new niches, almost daily.
Bob
Also, they'll have CAFE fines unless they can improve the efficiency of those engines.
The alternative, and one I prefer, is to make 5 speed automatics across the board.
I criticize VW for spending piles of money, but they have side curtain air bags even on the Jetta now, and 5 speed automatics with tiptronic control.
-juice
Bob
I'm not convinced, however that a larger (still niche) pickup is out of the question. Remember the Tundra is really a full-size-lite truck. GM really doesn't have anything in it's truck arsenal to compete with it. Same with the Dakota; a Subie pickup (based off the upcoming MPV) in that size range could compliment GM's full-size trucks, not compete with them.
Bob
Impreza: 3735, up 102%
Legacy: 8594, down 5%
OK, what does this tell us?
Forester is a design about to be replaced, and has a bunch of new competitors. 165hp used to be 2nd only to the Jeep Cherokee I6, but now it's average, if that. Solution: make variable valve timing and 170hp standard, 200hp optional, to compete at the top of the class like the 1998 model did.
Impreza: turbos are back. A torquey base engine is desirable. WRX is a halo car that likely generates sales even for lesser models. The pricing strategy was key. Pop the champagne, it's a hit.
Legacy: the H6 launch was more or less a failure, at least from a marketing stand point. Would you be happy if you increased costs by developing a new powertrain only to reduce sales? Competition has increased, from folks with deep pockets. The MSRP was way too high, even if transaction prices aren't. This was a huge mistake - the press told people to avoid the $33k H6 when they really start under $27k.
So, what can Subaru learn? A lot, to be sure. The more mainstream markets are more competitive, so stay in your niches. Subarus just have to offer a great value - $30k may be the limit for now. Turbo power is very much desirable. A Blitzen could sell like crazy if priced carefully, and may even create more base model sales by increasing show room traffic and sparking interest in Subaru. Forester needs a powertrain upgrade option to remain competitive.
-juice
Bob
So again, I pose the question, should Subaru call the Legacy-based turbo, something like "Turisimo" or "Atura," rather than a Legacy GT turbo, or Legacy B-4, etc.?
It (a new name and separate marketing) certainly helped the Outback, could it do the same for this model?
Bob
So, you really think they should go after Ford and Chevy in the pickup arena? They are much, much more likely to fail.
I vote for the name Blitzen.
-juice
-mike
Blitzen is good. In fact it's an excellent name; and drop all reference to the word Legacy?
Bob
I also agree that Audi/VW's engine offerings are getting a little confusing. The base 2.0 engine (aka 2-slow by VW owners) in the VW's really need an update. The 1.8T has upped it's performance range to 180HP so it's confusing to many on paper. As a VR6 owner who's driven both, there is quite a difference in driving experience between the two. There is noticeable lag in the 1.8T and it's a lot less refined. The VR6 is silky smooth with tons of torque. Even though ours is mated to an AT (for the wife), it's extremely responsive. Perhaps when the 24V VR6 comes out, things will be a little more clear.
The W8 positioning is a little confusing too. Since it's offered only in the top trims of the Passat, I see it as VW's attempt to steer it's flagship model away from the Audi's. The W8 won't offer the performance of the Audi 3.0 V6 or 2.7T, but I would imagine it's very smooth. At least that's consistent with how they want to differentiate the two model lines.
Yes, the H6 launch did fizzle and I agree that the problem was pricing. The engine and tranny (except the 4-speed AT) were great for competing in the near-luxury class. The problem was that Subaru had to stretch a mid-$20K vehicle by adding trim items like leather and fancy stereos. I think it could have been more successful if it were offered as an add-on option vs. a separate model.
Ken
-mike
So, you think the S-10 is going to get larger than it currently is?
Bob
Yes the new S-10/15 will be larger than the current ones.
-mike
Frank
Bob
-mike
Sorry, but badge-engineering is bad, pure and simple. You'll never convince me otherwise. You can argue all you want about it allowing Acura to bring an SUV to market quickly and relatively easily. In my mind all it did was lower my opinion of Acura; same with the Passport.
Bob
-mike
Bob
Lots of possibilities
Frank
-mike
Sorry Mike, no double standard intended.
BTW, how'd we end up here, when all I asked was whether a "W-H" engine configuration made sense for Subaru to explore? Talk about subjects drifting...
Bob
-mike
People with heavy duty needs won't shop Subaru, IMO.
In fact, GM really wants to do the Borrego, so the BRAT would be a step-up from that.
Ken made some interesting points. I recall that Audi's job is to tackle BMW, while VW goes after M-B. I'm not sure if that's wise, but they're still peeved about the A-Class trying (and failing) to go after a segment owned by the Golf. So the W8 "fits" in this strategy. It's just an expensive one.
Platform sharing - OK if you do what VW did with the Golf and the Audi TT (amazing differentiation). I would actually like to see Subaru give us an SVX coupe off the Impreza platform, and toss in a roadster while you're at it.
Hot topic, eh? Way to go!
-juice
Just as people outgrow the Impreza, and they want to stay with Subaru, so they get a larger Legacy or Outback as their next vehicle. The same type of choice should be available to BRAT customers, down the road.
I really hope that when the BRAT debuts, it will offer enough capability that folks won't feel a need for a larger truck, which is what you're suggesting. I just not as confident as you are, that that'll be the case.
I'm not sure I agree with VW's marketing either. I see VW, Audi, BMW and MB all competing against one another; not as they've outlined, with VW vs. MB, and Audi vs. BMW.
Platform sharing is far different than badge-engineering, and I'm all for that. The sharing that VW and Audi have done is an excellent example of how it should be done, IMO.
Bob
Ken
Bob
The crew cab class is new, so I guess we'll see who the customers are.
I don't care what they call a drop-top SVX, I'd want one. It could replace my Miata. Then get a Blitzen for the wife, and I'd be all set. If we need more room I'll just buy a utility trailer.
-juice
Ross
4.0l VVT H8 Twin turbo rear engine 2-seater SVX with 6-speed manual, and VCD AWD with adjustable diff and front+rear LSD and <3400lbs and around $50,000...
Mmmm...
*End dreaming*