The automatic is more than a few tics slower than the manual. If I was to launch my 5spd wagon by reving and slipping (not clutch dropping) the clutch, in effect replicating the hold the brake technique the reviewer did w/the auto version, I yield about a 5.8 to 5.9 0-60 run. I've done this with my car. The reviewer yielded a best run of 6.7 secs w/the automatic. Launching the auto WRX normally only netted a few tics below 9secs. I can easily get under 6.5 secs w/o slipping my clutch. Of course a driver's talent at getting good launches will make a difference to a point. Additionally, quoting Subiegal (aka: Jamie over at i-club), any fool can go fast in straight line. :-) I just wanted to further dispell the myth that the auto WRX is just a wee bit slower than the manual, and maybe to yank a chain or two on the way, LOL.
I was actually surprised the reviewer didn't get better acceleration figures, at least launched normally. I mean, the test car didn't get much better normal launch acceleration times than the auto OB Sport they tested last month. Ummm....
Please make sure FHI reads this from the Edmunds review: "..Given the sporting nature of the WRX, Subaru would be wise to give the auto a sequential-shift mode similar to Porsche's Tiptronic.."
One JDM sport-shift please. Yeah, yeah, I know it's a pretend manual and it's not the same.
Perhaps it was a green car they used for the test? Every car is wound a bit differently, so it's hard to tell which would be faster when it comes down to split seconds.
With a normal launch, the manual-WRX should yield about 7.5-8.5 secs. With high-rpm launches,it should drop to about 5.5-6.0 secs.
Similarly the Auto with a normal launch should net about 8.0-8.5 secs. With a brake-torqued launch, it should drop to about 5.8 - 6.5 secs.
This is regardless of the 0-60 times obtained by Edmunds, since Edmunds' timings are way off the times obtained by professional drivers at various magazines. Eg. Edmund's timing for my 3.2TL is about 7.4secs 0-60, while Motortrend tested my exact same car for 6.7secs, 0-60. Big difference!!!
No normal manual-WRX driver (including folks on these boards) would ever obtain the times even remotely resembling the ones obtained by professional test drivers employed by magazines, regardless of the wild claims Stephen tends to make.
Also note, that an Auto-WRX has an adaptive automatic transmission. What this means is that a fresh car will behave totally differently from a well-broken in car with an aggressive driver at the helm. The transmission will adjust the shiftpoints according to the driver's driving style. The Auto becomes like a wonderful well-worn leather jacket. Molds to your specific driving style, with time. If someone else drove it, the transmission of the vehicle will need an additional adjustment time to re-adjust to the new driver. The manual trans will not have nearly the same dramatic difference in behavior as time passes. The Auto will consistently net the same time whereas the manual will need a skilled driver with super sharp reflexes to net a good time consistently.
I would predict that if the Edmund's staffers had the same Auto-WRX for a couple of months, the times would dramatically drop to about 6.0 secs or a bit lower, due to the transmission adapting to the aggressive driving mode. Shifts become crisper and more rapid and are held right upto redline.
In all of the above statements, I have been mentioning 0-60 times, which in no way is as important to me, as handling. I would gladly trade 0.5 secs of the 0-60 time for better handling, any day of the week, day or night.
Everything else remaining the same, I personally would prefer the manual car to an Automatic. But in case of the WRX, the manual and the Auto are not remotely the same, even after excluding the transmission from the equation. The Auto has some vastly superior characteristics, which the manual cannot duplicate, with respect to its AWD system. The VC manual AWD is ummmmm...gets the job done, but nothing to brag about....the neighborhood kid with the manual Subaru RS also brags about having the same AWD as the supposedly special manual-WRX !!! Other than Turbo-charging and slightly stiffer rear-sway bars (<$100 ??), is there anything significantly better than the RS of the neighborhood kid, who paid $6000 less than the manual-WRX ?? When compared to the WRX-Auto, the Auto-RS cannot hold a candle to it, when it comes to its AWD system !!!! Well worth the premium over the Auto-RS.
No wild comment here but fact. I had it timed. A manual shift WRX wagon, launched normally (no clutch slipping or dropping)by a driver w/avg talent will yield somewhere between 6.3 & 6.5 secs. That's a fact that you can take to the bank. Frankly your stubborness to the contrary and insistence that your automatic WRX is all that and a bag of chips is getting tiring. Anyone who has ever driven an automatic turbo car vs the manual version is not surprised that there is a significant difference in acceleration times.
As far as your break-in comment...guess what, so would a manual shift and the difference would still remain. Why do I feel this point has been made before? Oh yeah...that's because it has!!
Can we please stop the auto vs manual tirades. It is hard to believe that people get so emotionally charged on a personal preference decision.
My son who is an avid racer (autocross-M3 / track-360 Modena) loved the feel of the car (still in break-in) but thought I needed to go with stiffer shocks and bigger sway bar. I am not going to do anything with the shocks, but I think I saw that the larger anti-sway bar was a good idea. Pros and cons?
He is also trying to talk me into taking the car to a Porsche sponsored driving school at his track in February. Would that be too early for a car that would have probably 2k miles by then? I wnat this car to last a long time with reliable low keyed fun; My son's comments are that these cars are supposed to run hard. Comments?
The Edmund's WRX wagon test really emphasizes the need for the sequential sport-shift AT in the WRX - that is, if Subaru wants to continue offering an AT at all.
All the caveats about driver training, green cars and torqued/high-rpm launches notwithstanding, that's a very significant difference in 0-60 times. Edmund's testers may or may not be professionally trained drivers, but people will read this review and have second thoughts about buying an AT-equipped WRX. Of course, if SoA wants to get people who want/need ATs to move into OBSs, RSs and TSs, then this strategy might work.
I recognize the differing needs of US drivers from their counterparts around the world, but Subaru (and Japanese manufacturers as a whole) need to stop dumbing down their vehicles for the US market. The current WRX is a step in the right direction, but there's obviously room for improvement.
The sport-shift probably wouldn't help 0-60, would it? You'll still have the torque converter lag. Would be great for holding the gear for twisty roads though.
How familiar are you with the roads in Flemington? I'll be at the dealer this Saturday, so I guess I'll give the WRX another spin. I usually just go a few miles north on 31 and hit a couple of side roads. Email me if you want.
You gotta be careful how you say it. Specifically, you can say the rear axle gets 22% more power than the front axle does. But that makes the difference sound like more than it is. For a car with a 5/95 split, you could then say the rear axle gets 1,800% more torque. So it's misleading, and basically meaningless.
Sport shift won't help 0-60. In most cases, it actually slows it down a bit.
The auto needs 5 ratios, basically, same with the H6 models. The turbo has to wait to spool up, and it takes longer with taller gearing. The H6 hits peak torque at a relatively high 4400rpm, same problem.
Subaru has tall gearing for good EPA numbers, but a 5 speed auto with a taller overdrive could maintain those numbers and still results in a quicker car.
AH: you forgot the WRX has a rear LSD and the RS does not, so the AWD system is indeed different. An aftermarket LSD costs about $900, plus labor. That's significant. If you disagree, please send a check for $900 to my address.
"Would be great for holding the gear for twisty roads though." True. I know 0-60 isn't everything but quick launches are often necessary in our part of the country.
I do know the secondary roads in and around Flemington reasonably well but, weather permitting (odd saying that) I will be in SC this weekend. I'm scheduled to fly from Philly to Myrtle Beach via Atlanta tomorrow afternoon. Hopefully Atlanta's snow will have stopped and the runways and deicing equipment is in working order. What should be more interesting is trying to get back here on Monday; this morning's forecast projects that the first snowstorm of the season will hit the Philadelphia area Sunday afternoon into Monday morning.
Will e-mail you with some suggested Hunterdon County side roads shortly.
Instrumented testing, huh ? Wow. Would the instruments you use to get your accurate timings be of the same model used by Motortrend ? Just curious. Also, do you adjust for altitude, humidity, wind conditions etc and average out the results of more than one run ? Hmmmm...
As somebody stated earlier, Viscous coupling is a cheap way of implementing an AWD system, generally used in low-tech applications. Tractor technology, when put not-so-subtly.
The previous generation Porsche 911 used to be plagued with snap-throttle oversteer which was dangerous when coupled with the overpowering power of the turbo. So Porsche had a very sophisticated AWD system (not the current VC), very similar to the AWD employed by the Auto-WRX to tame this dangerous tendency. This sophisticated AWD was mandatory for taming this beast. A VC would have been grossly inadequate.
When the latest version of the Porsche 911 came out, Porsche redesigned the rear suspension, which eliminated the tendency for the snap oversteer and hence they could get away with the cheaper and less effective Viscous Coupling for their AWD. Also, this VC employed by Porsche is a part-time Automatically engaging system, unlike the Subaru manual-AWD. Basically Porsche saved a lot of bucks in the AWD system, when spending those bucks in redesigning the rear suspension.
Incidentally, the World rally conquering Subarus do not employ the viscous coupling under any circumstance. It would be a slaughter in a rally race, if Subaru were to equip the rally cars with the Viscous coupling, since it would be outclassed and humiliated by the others. The glaring deficiencies of the Viscous coupling comes to the fore, when subjected to the rigors of rallying by professional drivers.
The Rally cars employ the AWD system used by the Auto-WRX in a much heavier duty form. Conceptually identical however. So if you admire the WRX for its rally-AWD, you would be fooling yourself if you think a manual-WRX has the same AWD as the rally cars !! It is the Auto-WRX that has it !
If you notice my earlier posts, I just state estimates based on my seat of the pants feel from driving both the manual-WRX (at our local dealership) and my own Auto-WRX. I never state definitively that I tested my car and timed it. Also, I know that even if I were to time my car, a professional driver would be able to shave another second off, of the time that I may be able to obtain, regardless of how skilled I may believe I am.
The 6.7secs obtained by Edmunds for the Auto-WRX is not too bad. Anything under 7 secs is good enough for me. But I would estimate (based on Edmunds' timings for other cars), that Motortrend would (if they were to test the Auto-WRX), be able to shave off the time to a bit less than Six seconds or at least at Six seconds.
All magazines clutch-drop (the manual cars) to get the specific 0-60 times they get at the various magazines. No car owner would be able to get anywhere close to those times, especially if you love your car. Anybody who feels otherwise, I would perceive as not-so-smart. Similarly in Automatic equipped vehicles, the magazines power-torque the car for the launch. Anybody who has driven the Auto-WRX knows that once the Turbo kicks in, the Auto-WRX is a rocket. The same applies to the manual-WRX. Below the turbo-zone, the manual-WRX is a dog. Anyone who says otherwise is either being deliberately dishonest or is joking or is genuinely ignorant (about what being a dog is). Once it hits the Turbo-zone, it rockets forward, like the Auto-WRX. Which is the reason why I state what I stated about the 0-60 timings obtainable by the Auto-WRX. The Auto and manual-WRX should be separated by about 0.5 secs in 0-60 especially with power-torquing or clutch-dropping.
This is ridiculous. I am amazed with all the rave reviews on the WRX (manual always)when its AWD system is a piece of crap. I am also amazed that virtually all reviews I have seen recommend the MT when the auto is God's gift to the automotive world. AH, everyone knows your opinion; you have restated it a thousand times. This thread is being ruined. Can't we create a new thread called "argue with AH" or something, and everyone else move on.
You are obviously not based in the real world. You like to spout about systems etc. But lets get out there in the real world and put em head to head and see what happens. I'm a big AT fan, but while your theory is good the reality is quite different.
I realize that we are all passionate about our cars, but we can't forget that different cars suit different people. People have different tastes. AH, if like your auto, more power to ya! To those who prefer the 5sp, good for you. My point is this ... who cares! What's better: a Camaro, or a Mustang? Some may say one, some the other. Everyone is different and will have different preferences on one issue/topic than someone else. Plain and simple.
Automatics are for pansies and the elderly??? Then I guess they must sit in alot of traffic. Or, maybe they like to eat a five course meal while driving? Or maybe their dog spoke to them and told them to buy the automatic? Whatever the reason, who cares! They chose that car based on some kind of preference they have. Does it really matter what the reason is?
Some prefer taking the shifting of the car into their own hands. Does this mean they are wrong? Does it necessarily mean that they made a bad decision? No. If it works for them, great. If not, then maybe they did make a bad decision. For whatever reason they made that decision, who is anyone to say whether it was a good choice or bad, except for the driver(s) of the car.
My point is this. Problems like this occur when people are not respectful of the right that everyone has to their own opinions. This does not mean that if someone's opinion differs from mine, I make it my life's work to change their view. Sharing your views is one thing, force-feeding them to others, is outright disrespectful. I think we're all beyond that. Sorry for the dissertation.
...I will refrain from making any further comments on this issue, unless someone comes along and makes baiting comments, which would need a rebuttal.
As I say always, the Manual-WRX and every other Subaru are priced very competitively in their respective segments and are worth every penny and more. No one needs to feel defensive about their Subaru purchase (regardless of whether it is a manual or Automatic), since they would not get anything close to it, for the money, from any other manufacturer. So let us all enjoy our cars and "live and let live". Let us refrain from making caustic and condescending remarks on someone else's purchase and/or decision to go with a specific transmission choice.
cptplt - You're welcome. You're right, you probably can't tell that much of a difference in the systems in real world driving. Yes when pushed hard in very slippery conditions, you can tell a little. Last year in about 6-8 inches of snow, I compared my car to my wife's (OB w/regular 4EAT). The tail of my car would get kick out for a split second. That was only after flooring it while turning. You can pretty much control both systems with throttle input.
AH - Why do you continually have to bash the VC? If someone bashes the Auto, bash them. Again, how much experience do you have in driving a manual Subaru in slippery conditions? Exactly how long does it take for a VC to transfer torque? You need to start backing up your wild and uninformed statements with facts.
I agree Mike K. Maybe we should start and Argue with AH thread.
edit: AH, I like how you said you will not say anything else on this issue after you typed about 200 lines of text. Answer my two questions that I've asked you countless times, but have never received a direct answer.
Porsche 911 and Lambo Diablo both use variations of the VC. If it's good enough for exotic supercars...
You say the WRC car is "conceptually identical" to the VTD, but I disagree. WRC cars have a manual adjustment knob that they can use to vary the torque distribution during a race, and I'm sure it get used often.
One more though - the auto costs more. Take that $800 or so and buy a front limited-slip diffy for your manual tranny, and then let's compare similarly priced AWD systems through super slippery conditions. Who knows who would win, it would certainly be fun to find out!
Anyone know how much this would cost? Installation cost? This would make the WRX's awd system, which is already quite good in either form, even better.
Sport Compact Car did a great write-up on this a few months ago on Shiv's project Impreza. Of course, they don't mention price. Maybe you can try an i-club search. edit: I did an i-club search and found this: http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=40034&referrerid=767 Man, that guy ColinL comments on every i-club technical thread. :-D Colin, your thoughts?? IIRC, the SCC article used a Quaife. -Dennis
FYI - Not claiming that anyone here is guilty of this misconception, but there is a general misconception that the manumatics used by Formula One drivers, used in some Ferraris, and in some BMW's, is like the Honda, Chrysler, VW, etc. automatics with buttons, levers, etc for telling the automatic when to shift. The F1 system, Ferrari system, and the high end BMW system (used on some M cars), is a manual that uses ectronically controlled neumatics to shift gears and operate the clutch. These systems are much faster and more flexible than either a traditional manual or an automatic with or without the option for manual shifting. There's an excellent article in Road and Track (Dec or Jan issue, I think), about the BMW's SMG gearbox. I hope someday that these systems will be cheap enough to put in everyday cars.
if nothing else, shifting your own gears involves you much more with the car in the act of driving. Whether or not its the fastest way around the track is irrelevant to me!
I get pleasure from it (most of the time - I'd settle for an auto anytime in a bad traffic jam) - that's all.
I'm sure some kind of voice recognition software could be developed to make the throttle obsolete -you could just say "speed up, slow down" or "go 40" - but I wouldn't want that either.
I should clearify. The BMW manumatic to which I refer in post #790 is not the standard tranny in the 3 and 5 series to which paisan refers. It is the SMG gearbox used in only a few M cars to come.
a front LSD is a very smart idea in a WRX to reduce power understeer. I would recommend a Quaife ATB. $1200 installed is probably in the vicinity, maybe $1400 at most. you could also select a Kaaz 1.5way LSD, but if you have no plans to play in the dirt I'd stay with the quaife.
dennis' link is a good one (boy that ColinL guy knows some stuff, hehe) and here's another good one, more recent:
also in that thread, gearguy answers the question as to why the WRX has a 3.545:1 ring&pinion in the rear connected via a 1.1:1 multiplication box to the front's 3.90:1 r&p. hate to toot my own horn-- nah, I like it ;-) --but it's for increased strength.
I like the comment about involving you in the driving. Must keep you young too. I'm 49 and I really enjoy shifting my 5 speed WRX. I've never owned an automatic and have a hard time when driving one, I keep trying to shift... There is more. My mother is 89 years young and is driving a red 1998 Honda Civic DX hatch with a 5 speed. (Her brother taught her to drive in the 1920's on the family's model T). Anyway she has a good driving record: only two minor fender bender accidents in the last 20 years. I think that still being able to drive like that at her age is truly the fountain of youth.
WRC cars have a manual adjustment knob that they can use to vary the torque distribution during a race, and I'm sure it get used often.
You are correct about the manual adjustment knob in the WRC cars for varying the torque adjustment. The Auto-WRX also has a Torque sensing Planetary gear, whose pitch can be varied to vary the torque distribution. It is just that Subaru has not provided a knob to do the actual pitch variation of the planetary gear in the WRX-Auto. The underlying hardware that enables the variation of torque (of the World Rally Championship cars) is the Torque sensing Planetary gear, which is available in the Auto-WRX.
About one of your questions: I have driven the manual WRX for a few hours but not in slippery conditions.
I would not want to make any comments about this issue again, but I would encourage you to think about the principle of the thing (which should hopefully answer your second question), which is....
System 1 (VTD-AWD):
A direct mechanical linkage with a combination of a Torque-sensing Planetary gear and an electronically controlled (with terrain sensing algorithms built in) 6-plate heavy duty clutch plate with accelerometers, speed sensors, throttle position sensors, gear selection sensors and a variety of other factors that enable it to act before slip occurs.
System 2 (VC-AWD):
On the other side, you find a system, that begins to act only after slip occurs (It needs slippage before it can act !!!) and then and only then, "reacts" (to the slip that has happened) by shearing the Viscous fluid (which is the medium that transfers torque unlike the planetary gear/multi-plate clutch on System 1, which has already acted by now and is readying for the next action), and thickens the viscous fluid, thus locking the differential and then begin to transfer torque. You will feel the slip very distinctly. Also, the quantum of torque that can be transferred to the wheels with grip is much more limited than the broad range of transferability of the "other system", primarily because of the presence of the planetary gear on System 1, and the tendency of the VC to come back to its original state of 50/50 quickly.
Now if you ask me the exact number of millseconds or whatever it takes to accomplish the transfer, I don't have raw data that would support it. But as a man of logic and reason, I can visualize what is happening and hence even in the absence of any data released by Subaru, we can safely assume that there is a lot of difference in the torque transfer characteristics between the 2 systems.
The 3rd AWD system of Subaru is employed by all the other Auto-Subarus and its efficacy would lie somewhere between the 2 systems above, probably closer to the VC (system 2). This does not have a Torque sensing planetary gear of System 1 and has a much lighter duty 4-plate clutch pack (when compared to the 6-plate clutch pack of System 1).
Comments
The automatic is more than a few tics slower than the manual. If I was to launch my 5spd wagon by reving and slipping (not clutch dropping) the clutch, in effect replicating the hold the brake technique the reviewer did w/the auto version, I yield about a 5.8 to 5.9 0-60 run. I've done this with my car. The reviewer yielded a best run of 6.7 secs w/the automatic. Launching the auto WRX normally only netted a few tics below 9secs. I can easily get under 6.5 secs w/o slipping my clutch. Of course a driver's talent at getting good launches will make a difference to a point. Additionally, quoting Subiegal (aka: Jamie over at i-club), any fool can go fast in straight line. :-) I just wanted to further dispell the myth that the auto WRX is just a wee bit slower than the manual, and maybe to yank a chain or two on the way, LOL.
Stephen
-juice
I was actually surprised the reviewer didn't get better acceleration figures, at least launched normally. I mean, the test car didn't get much better normal launch acceleration times than the auto OB Sport they tested last month. Ummm....
Stephen
"..Given the sporting nature of the WRX, Subaru would be wise to give the auto a sequential-shift mode similar to Porsche's Tiptronic.."
One JDM sport-shift please.
Yeah, yeah, I know it's a pretend manual and it's not the same.
-Dennis
-mike
Magazine tests always vary. Like Subiegal says, any fool (or is it idiot?) can drive in a straight line.
-Dennis
Actually, the difference between the front and the rear is 10.
((10 / 45) * 100) = 22.22% additional power to the rear wheels.
Later...AH
Similarly the Auto with a normal launch should net about 8.0-8.5 secs. With a brake-torqued launch, it should drop to about 5.8 - 6.5 secs.
This is regardless of the 0-60 times obtained by Edmunds, since Edmunds' timings are way off the times obtained by professional drivers at various magazines. Eg. Edmund's timing for my 3.2TL is about 7.4secs 0-60, while Motortrend tested my exact same car for 6.7secs, 0-60. Big difference!!!
No normal manual-WRX driver (including folks on these boards) would ever obtain the times even remotely resembling the ones obtained by professional test drivers employed by magazines, regardless of the wild claims Stephen tends to make.
Also note, that an Auto-WRX has an adaptive automatic transmission. What this means is that a fresh car will behave totally differently from a well-broken in car with an aggressive driver at the helm. The transmission will adjust the shiftpoints according to the driver's driving style. The Auto becomes like a wonderful well-worn leather jacket. Molds to your specific driving style, with time. If someone else drove it, the transmission of the vehicle will need an additional adjustment time to re-adjust to the new driver. The manual trans will not have nearly the same dramatic difference in behavior as time passes. The Auto will consistently net the same time whereas the manual will need a skilled driver with super sharp reflexes to net a good time consistently.
I would predict that if the Edmund's staffers had the same Auto-WRX for a couple of months, the times would dramatically drop to about 6.0 secs or a bit lower, due to the transmission adapting to the aggressive driving mode. Shifts become crisper and more rapid and are held right upto redline.
In all of the above statements, I have been mentioning 0-60 times, which in no way is as important to me, as handling. I would gladly trade 0.5 secs of the 0-60 time for better handling, any day of the week, day or night.
Everything else remaining the same, I personally would prefer the manual car to an Automatic. But in case of the WRX, the manual and the Auto are not remotely the same, even after excluding the transmission from the equation. The Auto has some vastly superior characteristics, which the manual cannot duplicate, with respect to its AWD system. The VC manual AWD is ummmmm...gets the job done, but nothing to brag about....the neighborhood kid with the manual Subaru RS also brags about having the same AWD as the supposedly special manual-WRX !!! Other than Turbo-charging and slightly stiffer rear-sway bars (<$100 ??), is there anything significantly better than the RS of the neighborhood kid, who paid $6000 less than the manual-WRX ?? When compared to the WRX-Auto, the Auto-RS cannot hold a candle to it, when it comes to its AWD system !!!! Well worth the premium over the Auto-RS.
Later...AH
-mike
As far as your break-in comment...guess what, so would a manual shift and the difference would still remain. Why do I feel this point has been made before? Oh yeah...that's because it has!!
Stephen
My son who is an avid racer (autocross-M3 / track-360 Modena) loved the feel of the car (still in break-in) but thought I needed to go with stiffer shocks and bigger sway bar. I am not going to do anything with the shocks, but I think I saw that the larger anti-sway bar was a good idea. Pros and cons?
He is also trying to talk me into taking the car to a Porsche sponsored driving school at his track in February. Would that be too early for a car that would have probably 2k miles by then? I wnat this car to last a long time with reliable low keyed fun; My son's comments are that these cars are supposed to run hard. Comments?
thanks
Mike
For more info on this, and most anything, check out http://www.howstuffworks.com/differential.htm
Also: http://www.howstuffworks.com/four-wheel-drive.htm
And for general searching, I like www.google.com.
-Dennis
All the caveats about driver training, green cars and torqued/high-rpm launches notwithstanding, that's a very significant difference in 0-60 times. Edmund's testers may or may not be professionally trained drivers, but people will read this review and have second thoughts about buying an AT-equipped WRX. Of course, if SoA wants to get people who want/need ATs to move into OBSs, RSs and TSs, then this strategy might work.
I recognize the differing needs of US drivers from their counterparts around the world, but Subaru (and Japanese manufacturers as a whole) need to stop dumbing down their vehicles for the US market. The current WRX is a step in the right direction, but there's obviously room for improvement.
Ed
How familiar are you with the roads in Flemington? I'll be at the dealer this Saturday, so I guess I'll give the WRX another spin. I usually just go a few miles north on 31 and hit a couple of side roads. Email me if you want.
-Dennis
Sport shift won't help 0-60. In most cases, it actually slows it down a bit.
The auto needs 5 ratios, basically, same with the H6 models. The turbo has to wait to spool up, and it takes longer with taller gearing. The H6 hits peak torque at a relatively high 4400rpm, same problem.
Subaru has tall gearing for good EPA numbers, but a 5 speed auto with a taller overdrive could maintain those numbers and still results in a quicker car.
AH: you forgot the WRX has a rear LSD and the RS does not, so the AWD system is indeed different. An aftermarket LSD costs about $900, plus labor. That's significant. If you disagree, please send a check for $900 to my address.
-juice
http://www.isrperformance.com/drivetrains.html
So, please make that check payable to....
;-)
-juice
I do know the secondary roads in and around Flemington reasonably well but, weather permitting (odd saying that) I will be in SC this weekend. I'm scheduled to fly from Philly to Myrtle Beach via Atlanta tomorrow afternoon. Hopefully Atlanta's snow will have stopped and the runways and deicing equipment is in working order. What should be more interesting is trying to get back here on Monday; this morning's forecast projects that the first snowstorm of the season will hit the Philadelphia area Sunday afternoon into Monday morning.
Will e-mail you with some suggested Hunterdon County side roads shortly.
Ed
Instrumented testing, huh ? Wow. Would the instruments you use to get your accurate timings be of the same model used by Motortrend ? Just curious. Also, do you adjust for altitude, humidity, wind conditions etc and average out the results of more than one run ? Hmmmm...
Later...AH
-juice
The previous generation Porsche 911 used to be plagued with snap-throttle oversteer which was dangerous when coupled with the overpowering power of the turbo. So Porsche had a very sophisticated AWD system (not the current VC), very similar to the AWD employed by the Auto-WRX to tame this dangerous tendency. This sophisticated AWD was mandatory for taming this beast. A VC would have been grossly inadequate.
When the latest version of the Porsche 911 came out, Porsche redesigned the rear suspension, which eliminated the tendency for the snap oversteer and hence they could get away with the cheaper and less effective Viscous Coupling for their AWD. Also, this VC employed by Porsche is a part-time Automatically engaging system, unlike the Subaru manual-AWD. Basically Porsche saved a lot of bucks in the AWD system, when spending those bucks in redesigning the rear suspension.
Incidentally, the World rally conquering Subarus do not employ the viscous coupling under any circumstance. It would be a slaughter in a rally race, if Subaru were to equip the rally cars with the Viscous coupling, since it would be outclassed and humiliated by the others. The glaring deficiencies of the Viscous coupling comes to the fore, when subjected to the rigors of rallying by professional drivers.
The Rally cars employ the AWD system used by the Auto-WRX in a much heavier duty form. Conceptually identical however. So if you admire the WRX for its rally-AWD, you would be fooling yourself if you think a manual-WRX has the same AWD as the rally cars !! It is the Auto-WRX that has it !
Later...AH
If you notice my earlier posts, I just state estimates based on my seat of the pants feel from driving both the manual-WRX (at our local dealership) and my own Auto-WRX. I never state definitively that I tested my car and timed it. Also, I know that even if I were to time my car, a professional driver would be able to shave another second off, of the time that I may be able to obtain, regardless of how skilled I may believe I am.
The 6.7secs obtained by Edmunds for the Auto-WRX is not too bad. Anything under 7 secs is good enough for me. But I would estimate (based on Edmunds' timings for other cars), that Motortrend would (if they were to test the Auto-WRX), be able to shave off the time to a bit less than Six seconds or at least at Six seconds.
All magazines clutch-drop (the manual cars) to get the specific 0-60 times they get at the various magazines. No car owner would be able to get anywhere close to those times, especially if you love your car. Anybody who feels otherwise, I would perceive as not-so-smart. Similarly in Automatic equipped vehicles, the magazines power-torque the car for the launch. Anybody who has driven the Auto-WRX knows that once the Turbo kicks in, the Auto-WRX is a rocket. The same applies to the manual-WRX. Below the turbo-zone, the manual-WRX is a dog. Anyone who says otherwise is either being deliberately dishonest or is joking or is genuinely ignorant (about what being a dog is). Once it hits the Turbo-zone, it rockets forward, like the Auto-WRX. Which is the reason why I state what I stated about the 0-60 timings obtainable by the Auto-WRX. The Auto and manual-WRX should be separated by about 0.5 secs in 0-60 especially with power-torquing or clutch-dropping.
Later...AH
Just my opinion,
Mike
-mike
Automatics are for pansies and the elderly??? Then I guess they must sit in alot of traffic. Or, maybe they like to eat a five course meal while driving? Or maybe their dog spoke to them and told them to buy the automatic? Whatever the reason, who cares! They chose that car based on some kind of preference they have. Does it really matter what the reason is?
Some prefer taking the shifting of the car into their own hands. Does this mean they are wrong? Does it necessarily mean that they made a bad decision? No. If it works for them, great. If not, then maybe they did make a bad decision. For whatever reason they made that decision, who is anyone to say whether it was a good choice or bad, except for the driver(s) of the car.
My point is this. Problems like this occur when people are not respectful of the right that everyone has to their own opinions. This does not mean that if someone's opinion differs from mine, I make it my life's work to change their view. Sharing your views is one thing, force-feeding them to others, is outright disrespectful. I think we're all beyond that.
Sorry for the dissertation.
as for all this auto vs manual stuff, in the hands of mere mortals like myself I doubt I could tell which AWD system is better!
its like jet fighters, the skill of the pilot far outweighs any technical advantage.
As I say always, the Manual-WRX and every other Subaru are priced very competitively in their respective segments and are worth every penny and more. No one needs to feel defensive about their Subaru purchase (regardless of whether it is a manual or Automatic), since they would not get anything close to it, for the money, from any other manufacturer. So let us all enjoy our cars and "live and let live". Let us refrain from making caustic and condescending remarks on someone else's purchase and/or decision to go with a specific transmission choice.
Later...AH
AH - Why do you continually have to bash the VC? If someone bashes the Auto, bash them. Again, how much experience do you have in driving a manual Subaru in slippery conditions? Exactly how long does it take for a VC to transfer torque? You need to start backing up your wild and uninformed statements with facts.
I agree Mike K. Maybe we should start and Argue with AH thread.
edit: AH, I like how you said you will not say anything else on this issue after you typed about 200 lines of text. Answer my two questions that I've asked you countless times, but have never received a direct answer.
-Dennis
You say the WRC car is "conceptually identical" to the VTD, but I disagree. WRC cars have a manual adjustment knob that they can use to vary the torque distribution during a race, and I'm sure it get used often.
One more though - the auto costs more. Take that $800 or so and buy a front limited-slip diffy for your manual tranny, and then let's compare similarly priced AWD systems through super slippery conditions. Who knows who would win, it would certainly be fun to find out!
-juice
-Dennis
-juice
edit: I did an i-club search and found this:
http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=40034&referrerid=767
Man, that guy ColinL comments on every i-club technical
thread. :-D Colin, your thoughts??
IIRC, the SCC article used a Quaife.
-Dennis
On the track, anything goes. But F1 cars use digital dashboards and folks don't seem to want them in their sports cars.
WRX content: How many of the 12K allotment of 2002 WRXs have been sold? Any known running changes made at the factory to care of the CEL bug?
-B
I get pleasure from it (most of the time - I'd settle for an auto anytime in a bad traffic jam) - that's all.
I'm sure some kind of voice recognition software could be developed to make the throttle obsolete -you could just say "speed up, slow down" or "go 40" - but I wouldn't want that either.
-mike
-mike
dennis' link is a good one (boy that ColinL guy knows some stuff, hehe) and here's another good one, more recent:
http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=125235
also in that thread, gearguy answers the question as to why the WRX has a 3.545:1 ring&pinion in the rear connected via a 1.1:1 multiplication box to the front's 3.90:1 r&p. hate to toot my own horn-- nah, I like it ;-) --but it's for increased strength.
-Colin
TWRX
-juice
You are correct about the manual adjustment knob in the WRC cars for varying the torque adjustment. The Auto-WRX also has a Torque sensing Planetary gear, whose pitch can be varied to vary the torque distribution. It is just that Subaru has not provided a knob to do the actual pitch variation of the planetary gear in the WRX-Auto. The underlying hardware that enables the variation of torque (of the World Rally Championship cars) is the Torque sensing Planetary gear, which is available in the Auto-WRX.
Later...AH
-juice
I would not want to make any comments about this issue again, but I would encourage you to think about the principle of the thing (which should hopefully answer your second question), which is....
System 1 (VTD-AWD):
A direct mechanical linkage with a combination of a Torque-sensing Planetary gear and an electronically controlled (with terrain sensing algorithms built in) 6-plate heavy duty clutch plate with accelerometers, speed sensors, throttle position sensors, gear selection sensors and a variety of other factors that enable it to act before slip occurs.
System 2 (VC-AWD):
On the other side, you find a system, that begins to act only after slip occurs (It needs slippage before it can act !!!) and then and only then, "reacts" (to the slip that has happened) by shearing the Viscous fluid (which is the medium that transfers torque unlike the planetary gear/multi-plate clutch on System 1, which has already acted by now and is readying for the next action), and thickens the viscous fluid, thus locking the differential and then begin to transfer torque. You will feel the slip very distinctly. Also, the quantum of torque that can be transferred to the wheels with grip is much more limited than the broad range of transferability of the "other system", primarily because of the presence of the planetary gear on System 1, and the tendency of the VC to come back to its original state of 50/50 quickly.
Now if you ask me the exact number of millseconds or whatever it takes to accomplish the transfer, I don't have raw data that would support it. But as a man of logic and reason, I can visualize what is happening and hence even in the absence of any data released by Subaru, we can safely assume that there is a lot of difference in the torque transfer characteristics between the 2 systems.
The 3rd AWD system of Subaru is employed by all the other Auto-Subarus and its efficacy would lie somewhere between the 2 systems above, probably closer to the VC (system 2). This does not have a Torque sensing planetary gear of System 1 and has a much lighter duty 4-plate clutch pack (when compared to the 6-plate clutch pack of System 1).
Later...AH