Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
>> For the 2009 models yes, however, I stand by what Subaru Engineering told me for previous versions from 1988-2000
No evidence of 80/20 - 20/80 split. No official Subaru source is available to confirm that. Even serious independent publications are not available to confirm that. Quite contrary: Wikipedia, for instance, clearly says that both generation of Outbacks with 4-speed auto - 1st generation (1995-1999) and 2nd generation (2000-2004) had 90/10 to 50/50 split.
If someone "told" you something it does not mean it's true. May be the guy was plumbing engineer at Subaru. May be he was drinking. One guy told me he is rocket scientist and the Moon walk was shot in Hollywood, so what?
It doesn't mean it's false either, and maybe the plumber knows something. We can each believe what we want, but my money is on Mike, the host.
The "documentation" for the Outlander is more than unclear and makes it seem like an unsophisticated system in spite of the switch on the dashboard with no real direct evidence to the contrary.
.
No, Kdshapiro usually does well racing ladies, remember his story? Racing ladies may even help to win a rally. Speaking of which, Mitsubishi just took the 2nd place on Dakar Series Central Europe Rally. Mitsubishi vehicle was first time equipped with diesel engine for the rally.
Volkswagen came 1st. Subaru came 23rd. Congrats!
Press Release: The drivers of Team Repsol Mitsubishi Ralliart will receive support from Mitsubishi in the form of a Mitsubishi Outlander. The model was confirmed official support vehicle for the seventh successive winning Dakar team. Ralliart receives the Outlander with major safety improvements, however, the engine and transmission remains the same as the production model. The 2008 Dakar Outlander has also been modified with four racing bucket seats with full harness belts, a safety roll-cage, an additional fuel tank, under-body protection, dampers, navigational equipment, and a host of other features. The engine, running gear, and fundamental chassis architecture, however, remain identical to the standard production car. Carrying capacity is up to 1,691 litres. The exterior is finished in the full racing livery of the competition Pajero/Montero Evolutions. The production vehicle comes with AWC (All Wheel Control) technology, electronic 4x4 control system, developed by Mitsubishi. The system utilizes three modes to match the level of traction control to individual preferences and different road conditions.
Until you check back tomorrow and see that someone has edited the page (yet again). Best to always check the footnotes, and still use the salt shaker on those as well.
Carry on...
It's a good starting place but sometimes I think I may as well be reading Uncyclopedia. :P
For real entertainment, skip the Wiki article and go straight to the Discussion tab. The History tab can be enlightening too.
Trust the road report, but don't forget to engage the 4WD just in case.
Allright, in addition to those 2 sources I've already offered, (Wikipedia and NY Times article), which Paisan refuses to accept, I can offer you few more. The all say that 2000 Outback and 2000 Forester have 90/10 to 50/50 split. Are they all wrong?
http://www.caranddriver.com/import_problems/reviews_special/subaru_outback_h6_3_- - - - - - 0_first_drive_review
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/reader_rides/1271046.html
http://www.toad.net/~rrubel/outbackfaq.html#Anchor5
How about the 1999 Edmunds.com "Evolution of a Revolutionary" article? Is it also wrong?
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=44238
So I offered total 6 credible sources. Paisan yet to offer even one. Does he still insists these cars have 80/20 - 20/80 split?
I don't have a bone to pick in this fight but I appreciate that you are finding links.
Maybe it would help to compare two systems currently on sale at the dealers in the showroom. Say, the '09 Forester vs the '08 Outlander?
>> I've known Bob a long time (Paisan too for that matter). So I trust their posts when they say they've talked to Subie engineers.
I do not deny Paisan spoke to them, but we can’t put on record some verbal information. We don’t know the exact quote, circumstances, or context. On the other hand I offer info from several legally responsible and credible publications.
.
>> Maybe it would help to compare two systems currently on sale at the dealers in the showroom. Say, the '09 Forester vs the '08 Outlander?
What do you mean? In terms of current cars we are doing well, I believe. We have response from Subaru Director of Communications and we have official Mitsubishi AWD data. And I think we getting better learning systems specifics.
OMO, both systems are very good, I just think Mitsubishi system is a little better: true full-time AWD with more versatility.
Well, you just talked about the 2000 Outback and 2000 Forester for example. Recent history, but still 8 year old cars. Things change and, hopefully, improve.
And Paisan is already gonna kill me for specifically inviting him over here. :shades:
-mike
At least I'm not driving a vehicle that is fragile to drive. :shades It really doesn't matter how many medals Mitsubishi racked up, does it? Their racing experience didn't translate well by the reviews.
Let's be honest, the Forester may not be everyone. Every vehicle has it's compromises, the Outlander may even have a few (fragile) as well. But the Forester has been reviewed excellently for years, in spite of the manufacturer not winning Dakar.
(Goes back to bench racing)
Bob
Bob
The NY Times source is not valid. You cannot use a chart from 2003 or earlier for a 2007 Outlander or a 2009 Forester.
Heck, it was not accurate back then, imagine now, 6 model years later.
That means it is not meant for non-slippery conditions, i.e. people spend most of the time driving on dry pavement and should not use that mode.
From the Mitsubishi press release linked earlier in this discussion.
In dry conditions, 4WD Lock mode places priority on performance. More torque is directed to the rear wheels than in 4WD Auto mode to provide greater power off the line, better control when accelerating on snowy or loose surfaces, and enhanced stability at high speeds. Rear wheel torque transfer is increased by 50 percent over the amounts in 4WD Auto mode - meaning up to 60 percent of available torque is sent to the rear wheels under full-throttle acceleration on dry pavement. When in 4WD Lock mode, torque at the rear wheels is reduced by a smaller degree through corners than with 4WD Auto mode.
http://media.mitsubishicars.com/detail?mid=MIT2006083040260&mime=ASC
You don't know what your talking about: read previous posts. That was my reply regarding 2000 models of Subaru.
.
>> Heck, it was not accurate back then, imagine now, 6 model years later.
The NY Times article about Subaru split was correct for years before and after 2003. According to multiple publictions I posted earlier, such as NY Times (2003), Edmunds (1999), cars101.com (several years), Wikipedia (several years), Popular Mechanics (2000), Car and Driver (2000) and Subaru Director of communications (2008): the 90/10 - 50/50 Subaru split have not changed since nintees and it will not change for the years ahead, thanks to just introduced 2009 4-speed auto Forester.
As I said Subaru is not much better. The only confirmation in these discussions seems to be the 80/20 and 20/80 split for non-2009 models.
up to 60 percent of available torque is sent to the rear wheels
That means the 0/100 claim made above is wrong, though.
I'm sure enhancements were made between 2003 and now by both Subaru and Mitsubishi, traction control being among those.
Let's test the 90/10 limit first.
You can insert a fuse to make the Forester purely FWD, i.e. 100/0. So right there is proof the 90/10 limitation does not exist.
The Outlander has a FWD mode and this was used to justify how it too can go to a full 100/0 split. For the same reason, the Forester can to, it's just a fuse rather than a knob. How you turn on the FWD mode differs, but the result does not.
So marketing is wrong about the 90/10 limit.
Now let's look at the 50/50 theory. I think the marketing folks are misinterpreting what the engineers say about the design. There is a language barrier (because the engineers are Japanese) and a technical barrier, because the marketing folks aren't trained in mechanical engineering.
So then, what do they mean by an even split? They could mean that the front and rear axle will turn at the same speed, but that does not mean 50% of the power will go to each axle. Where the power goes would actually depend on the traction available.
Think about it, if both rear tires are on ice, and get no traction, even a tiny amount of power to that axle would make it spin. If there is no resistance, the power finds the path of least resistance, and the tires would spin like crazy.
Click this link and forward to 2:48:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t09ExAUgtyE&feature=related
On the ramp, where marketing hype doesn't matter, you can actually see the AWD send power to the rear axle. At first the front tires spin, indicating a front bias, but then power is transfered to the rear axle, enough to move it up the ramp. Note that by the end of the rollers, the front wheels have nearly stopped spinning.
If the front wheels were still getting 50% of the power (86.5 horsepower), they would be spinning like mad. The driver is applying enough throttle for the rear axle to move the Forester up that ramp, yet the front wheels barely spin at all.
Where is the 50% split to the front wheels? Why are they not spinning? 86.5 horsepower barely turns wheels on ice? Can't be.
Then forward to 3:08 on the same video.
That's when the front axle is asked to do the job by itself, while the rear axle has no traction. Notice the rear axle doesn't spin at all.
You could argue that 10% of the available power (now only 17.3 horsepower) may indeed not be enough to make the rear axle spin, but we know that the system is capable of disengaging the rear axle entirely in FWD mode anyway.
As for all the magazines, well, they basically collect press kits from the manufacturers and just regurgitate what the manufacturer claims in those kits. A lot of times you'll notice they even copy/paste the text, which is just lazy.
Personally, I give more weight to the magazines that go out and test these claims, rather than the claims themselves.
All of those magazines also said the 1997 Ford Mustang had 225hp, but Ford downrated it to 205hp when the Cobra models came out. Even the Cobras came up short.
Yet all the press published the 225hp number, because that is what Ford told them. Everyone was wrong.
Same for Mazda with the Miata and RX8. Again everyone was wrong.
Thankfully we have the 4WD ramp and the dynomometer to verify the accuracy of those claims, which are often bogus.
We know the AWD system is capable of sending enough power F<>R, so that if either axle has traction it will make it up.
Now the question is, can the traction control system shift power side to side?
That's what the VDC does. Since the VDC is similar to that on my Armada and the Frontier, I'd hazard a guess that it should be able to tote it up. Only issue might be if that 1 wheel doesn't have enough power to carry the weight of the vehicle up.
I have climbed up slippery driveways where the rear of the A had no traction, and the front was alternating between left and right sides using the VDC. Only thing is the A has 305hp/385lbs torque.
Would be interesting to try it out, my gut feeling is the forester 09 would do it w/o a problem.
-mike
If I can find one I'll invite others to come along and bring their rides.
Again, you don’t follow the discussion, taking phrase out of context. Those last few posts are about the 4EAT power split of 90/10 – 50/50, which has not changed since nineties, according to all the publications I have mentioned.
Traction control does not affect Front/Rear power split ratio. In any case, traction control is not a feature of AWD but a separate system. Traction control and various forms of VSC are standard now even on non-AWD cars.
Subaru traction control/VDC was not introduced after 2003, but it was introduced in 2001 and even mentioned on 2003 NY Times chart.
The media got it wrong all along, that's why they changed the policy about publishing those figures in the first place.
Traction control does not affect Front/Rear power split ratio
Not true. In fact, Toyota uses open diffs and relies on traction control primarily to shift power. It is a reactive system, but it does work.
Traction control systems are often integrated into AWD, in fact Toyota's depends on it entirely.
As I'm sure you know, with 3 open diffs (center, front, rear) all the power would leak out to a single wheel it offered the least resistance, i.e. 1WD.
Can you at least admit they were wrong about "Audi all"?
It's hard to have an intelligent conversation about AWD if you cannot acknowledge the difference between a Torsen and a Haldex. :sick:
Correction the last few posts are about the 80/20/80 split, which hasn't changed lately. Except I'm guessing in the 2009 Forester, based on the latest video, one wheel possibly could drive the car.
No evidence of that, unless you could post some credible links. Quite contrary: all sources I posted suggest 90/10 - 50/50 split since nineties.
Well, untill they revise it, we not going to make stuff up and we use the available info.
>> Traction control does not affect Front/Rear power split ratio
>> Not true. In fact, Toyota uses open diffs and relies on traction control primarily to shift power.
Are you sure or you it's your guess? Forget Toyota, does the Subaru traction control affect the Front/Rear power split ratio?
It's hard to have an intelligent conversation about AWD if you say that VDC is AWD.
Did you review the video posted? Here is a short course on AWD. AWD is an acryonym for all wheel drive. There are many variations of AWD, but it refers to the ability to have any or all wheels powered at the same time. How many wheels are powered at the same time and under what conditions are all implementation details and there are many different ways of accomplishing the end of keeping a vehicle moving. However, some ways are better than others.
The terms for this are on-demand and part-time. In addition some systems give the ability to lock the f/r ratio. However the use of this is very limited and usually results in system damage if used on a non-slippery surface.
In addition, some systems can vary the f/r ratio based on acceleration and deacceleration. Other systems can vary the f/r ration based on accelerator position. Some systems assist with LSD (limited slip differential), others assist with the anti-lock braking mechanism. BMW for example, does both.
Having said that Subaru has multiple types of AWD systems. The ones we are debating are the one attached to the automatic. 2009 has a different system than 2008 and earlier. 2008 and earlier always power 4 wheels. According to the information presented there is always fluctation between front and rear from 80/20 to 20/80. Mitsubishi as Subaru is not very forthcoming with information about their AWD system. But much of that functionality seems to be based on accelerator position or slippage. 2006 Outlander models and earlier seems to be at the level of the RAV4/Highlander, which incidentally call their systems 4WD.
I'm not 100% clear on 2009 Subie system yet, except that I'm guessing any one wheel can power the vehicle.
I hope this short explanation helps with some of the terminolgy and concepts. Feel free to ask additional questions.
This is my final post on this subject.
However the statement from Subaru that Bob referenced was actually from a marketing guy who may or may not know the engineering behind his statement.
-mike
Just to set the record straight, I have been following these forums for a bit and by your posts I know you know what you are talking about.
It's not me who is questioning the veracity on the information given on the Subie f/r split.
I know, just was responding to the thread in general. It's sad that I am here to help folks, yet some refuse to believe me. Frustrating at times actually.
-mike
More than marketing; Mike McHale, being the Corporate Communications Director, is ultimately responsible for anything that SOA sends out to the public in terms of product and corporate information. I'm sure anyone in that position will make sure they have their facts straight before making pronouncements.
Could he be wrong? Of course. He's human after all. Still, knowing how important AWD is to the brand, I'd put my money is on him being correct on this point.
Bob
I've offered up some new info - the FWD mode for the Forester.
Remember, you were the one that said the Outlander could go 100/0 because of its FWD mode, right?
For the same reason, the Forester can, to.
I'm using your own rule to prove that 100/0 is possible, so the 90/10 limit cannot exist.
Let me find a photo of the instrument panel with the "FWD" mode lit up...I'll share if I can find one, otherwise I'll take photos myself next time I see a Forester. I'll go ahead and get the photo of the trailer pre-wiring since you didn't believe that either.
VDC is just a marketing term, and Subaru did use it to describe the integrated systems on the early Outback VDC and Tribeca.
They stopped when they started offering traction/stability control on other models.
It's confusing, yes, but they did use the term VDC early on.
By the way, Nissan has used the name VDC to describe its AWD system.
I'll try to find him. :shades:
Post by Mike or Joe or whoever on some message board is not an evidence. I already posted many links from credible publications. Mike said that 80/20 split was only on 1998-2000 4-speed auto Subaru.
So I offered total 6 credible sources, covering 2000 models of 4EAT Forester and Outback (read previous posts), incl. Wikipedia, NYTimes, Car and Driver, Popular Mechanics and Edmunds.com. They all say that split was 90/10 to 50/50.
Why would I ask questions someone form a message board who is "not clear yet" and who is "guessing"? I would rather get some credible sources.
Well, "believing" in this is appropriate for someone who is into Subaru religion. So, yes, some would believe.
Great point
No need to rely on my knowledge, just check out the video. I'm guessing the 2009 Forester will be able to accomplish the same thing. Have you looked at the video.
BTW, I feel the same regarding one who uses a 2003 NYT article as the gold standard. Doesn't really matter, the 2009 Forester seems to be racking up a number of awards, and for good reason.
-mike