Subaru B9 Tribeca (B9X)

rsholland · March 2005

but don't the 2.0 and 2.5 H4s have different blocks? And don't forget that Subaru also sells a 1.5 and 1.6 H4s overseas. I'm sure they are built off different blocks from that of the 2.5 engine.

So I definitely see the possibility have having two H6 engine familiesespecially as Subaru moves upmarket.

Varmint, are the 3.0 Accord V6 and the 3.5 Acura V6 built off the same engine block? I'm assuming the Acura 3.2 V6 is based on the Accord engine, but what about the 3.5?

Bob

ateixeira · March 2005

I think the 2.0l belongs to the EZ family.

I'm not sure about the smaller displacement engines in Japan.

The EJ series has been around for ages, ever since the 1.8l, 2.2l, and 2.5l have been around in the US.

-juice

varmint · March 2005

Yeah, the 3.0, 3.2, and 3.5 are all part of the J series. Same casting, different pots.

The old 3.5RL had a different 3.5L, which was not based on the J series. It was actually a very old racing block they retuned for street use. But the thank-gawd-they-finally-did-it 2005 RL uses the same J series.

Getting back on topic, I think a new, larger H6 could be cast in several sizes. As well as a 3.5 or higher, they could leave it un-bored for 3.0 or 3.1 and replace the current H6. A single block spread out over several models would be cheaper than maintaining two H6s even if they have to convert engine bays.

njswamplands · March 2005

like i am ever on topic...

jeffmc · March 2005

I believe the 1.8L isn't even a boxer. Anyone confirm?

Can't believe we haven't had any good Tribeca rumors for so long! C'mon, Subaru! Leak us a tidbit.

Somebody somewhere must've captured a photo of these on the street by now.

Wonder when Subaru will call to let me know I won my Tribeca in their contest. *sigh*

subearu · March 2005

but I'll be going tomorrow afternoon to the Milwaukee show and will try to get more detailed pics of the seats and the LATCH points. Not sure if I'll be at the chat tomorrow night, but I'll post pics as soon as I can.

-Brian

jon_in_ct · March 2005

I disagree about the "boring" aspect of this recent discussion. varmint's post at varmint, "Subaru B9 Tribeca (B9X)" #2009, 1 Mar 2005 10:26 pm indicates he understands the issues:

Technically, Subaru could increase the bore. I'm not saying they should, but they could.

Using a technique similar to Honda's quad sequential-sleeve design, they might get the the distance between bores below 9mm. Honda got it down to 6mm.

If anyone else actually read the article cited there, they'd find that Honda engineers had to overcome numerous obstacales/difficulties to get that extra 3-mm (0.11-in) bore. If FHI were to able achieve the same success and reduce the "web distance" on the B9's engine to only 6-mm from 9.2-mm, the EZ30 could become the EZ32 - still not close to a 3.6L engine. But why did Honda's engineers spend so much effort and yen? The article explains clearly why Honda's engineers were jumping through all of those hoops:

With this liner construction, the web distance, or distance between the inner walls of the adjoining cylinders, could be reduced to 6 mm from the separate lines' 9 mm, while retaining the same bore pitch. This was the essential requirement so that the new block could be cast and machined on the existing Suzuka lines.

It's VERY expensive to start up a new engine production line, which apparently is necessary to make engines with a new bore pitch.

An article at http://www.sae.org/automag/globalview_09-00/06.htm describing the development of FHI's EZ30 engine makes the issue of changing bore pitch even clearer. According to Noriaki Sekine, Manager of power unit development at FHI:

"Getting a new bore pitch-the distance between two adjoining cylinder centers-is really a once-in-your-engineering-life occurrence," said Sekine, "so significant is its influence."

With this in mind, I'd say that the recent engine displacement discussion here has veered not to boring, but to, how shall I say this politely, uninformed. Consider this contribution from ateixeira, "Subaru B9 Tribeca (B9X)" #2014, 2 Mar 2005 1:46 pm piece by piece

They could stroke it - remember the Tribeca's platform is wider, so it could accomodate a 3.3-3.6l or so engine based on the EZ30.

Stroking an engine doesn't change its external dimmensions.

Or we could see some form of the EJ257 turbo, maybe with 280-300hp if Subaru wanted to keep it affordable.

A four-cylinder spark ignition engine is a non-starter with the B9 Tribeca.

An STi could get the H6 and a turbo, but that would put prices in the $40s, and then everyone would be screaming about the price.

A B9 Tribeca wouldn't need to called an "STi" to be equipped with a turbo EZ30 and the only ones who'd whine about the price would be those who paid $50K for some other wimpier brand.

I bet there are several design studies going on simulateously. The ST-X had a supercharged engine that never made it to production. So just because a certain engine is rumored, even factual, does not mean it will make production.

The ST-X design and fabrication was stricly an SOA effort. SOA hired a Michigan company, SVI (see http://www.subaru.net/owners/prototype/stx/stx.htm and http://www.automotive-technology.com/projects/subaru_STX/subaru_STX4.html) to build the ST-X and its powertrain. To say there are "several design studies going on" is hardly profound. FHI's CEO has declared they're working on both hybrid and diesel engine development. But this in no way supports the idea that FHI is working on a 3.6L engine for the Tribeca.

jeffmc · March 2005

Joe over at www.cars101.com posted some new info on the following page, including options and interior/exterior color combinations for each configuration that will be available. It's VERY nice to see Subaru offering a choice of interiors for most of the exterior colors. (Thank You, Subaru!)

http://www.cars101.com/subaru/tribeca/tribeca2006.html#orders

Disappointing to see so many little "premium" touches (like puddle lights & the auto-dimming mirror) are options, but I'm sure Subaru's trying to keep that MSRP down. Also somewhat disappointed the audio upgrade is only available with a bump up to leather. The upgraded audio should be STANDARD across the line, since this dash won't allow for aftermarket upgrades.

jon_in_ct · March 2005

Thanks for the heads-up, jeffmc. I can see another contingeny that'll be disappointed (as in: This Sucks) - those who wanted a larger Outback (i.e. 5-seater) with all the ammenities. Their only factory options are cloth/leather and color. They're denied the NAV, Rear Seat Entertainment (RSE) aka DVD, and upgraded sound system:
STD: 100-Watt AM/FM stereo with MP3-compatible single-disc in-dash CD player, 6 audio speakers
UPGD: 160-Watt AM/FM stereo with MP3-compatible 6-disc in dash CD player, 9 audio speakers

The only options the 5-seater folks can order are the port (or dealer) installed options.

rsholland · March 2005

Hmmm... Anyone else having trouble accessing the cars101 site today? Usually I don't have a problem with that site...

Bob

jon_in_ct · March 2005

I can't access cars101.com, either.

ateixeira · March 2005

The 1.8l was a boxer (EJ18 is related to today's 2.5l).

It was the Justy's tiny engine that was an in-line.

But the Leone, GL, BRAT, SVX, Loyale, XT, Impreza, Legacy, Forester, and Outback have had boxers.

jon: if they can get to 3.2l by boring it out like Honda did, they could also stroke the engine to obtain even more displacement, no?

I just feel like you conclude that certain things are not possible, but they only seem impossible, as Honda's example with clever cylinder liners proves.

Stroking an engine doesn't change its external dimmensions

You sure about that? I would expect that the boxer would end up wider.

-juice

varmint · March 2005

Thanks Jon. I've learned something new today. Those links are great material. It's not easy to find details like that.

"...if they can get to 3.2l by boring it out like Honda did, they could also stroke the engine to obtain even more displacement, no?" - Juice

Not sure, Juice. When modifying an engine by stroking it, the crank offset (not sure of the technical term) must also be enlarged. Otherwise, the piston cannot take advantage of the longer stroke.

Subaru designed the engine with very tight bore spacing making for a very compact fore/aft design. 9.2mm doesn't leave much room for expansion. But with boxer engines, and the Outback's relatively narrow stance, I would assume width is of equal importance. I'm making a big assumption here, but if Subaru were going to build the engine with such a tight web, I'd expect they didn't leave extra space in the bottom... excuse me.... "middle".

No, I see two realistic possibilities. The first is that Subaru didn't expect the hp war launched by Nissan. So they built their H6 with the assumption that it was big enough to carry them for quite a long time. The second is that they decided from the start that this engine would get upgraded via forced induction.

Personally, I think the second is the more likely of the two.

ateixeira · March 2005

I'd actually prefer to see a light pressure H6 turbo, but some people are very averse to them, perhaps scared from the typical problems encountered with them in the 80s.

-juice

kens · March 2005

True, but look at Volvo's XC90. Until the new V8 showed up you had to choose between a 5 or 6 cylinder turbo. I think both have sold fairly well despite having the turbo.

Ken

once_for_all · March 2005

turbo-diesel. (farmer in me creeping out).

John

sduford · March 2005

Yeah, same here. I would be all over a TDI.

Judging by the Volvo diesel engine in Europe, it should be possible to generate 250 lbs/ft of torque and 40 MPG.

once_for_all · March 2005

turbo-diesel + CVT = best power and efficiency combined.

My $0.02.

John

ateixeira · March 2005

I'm afraid any diesel Subaru, in the US at least, would be a niche-within-a-niche.

What's 1% of 1% of the US market? Nothing, basically.

I like diesels, but they should build one primarily for Europe. It has to make its business case over there. If so, then we might see it in limited quantities.

-juice

sduford · March 2005

That is in large part because:
a. the diesel fuel here has been of very poor quality
b. in the past diesel cars were slow, noisy and smelly.

Once the fuel has been fixed (2006 in Canada, 2007 in the USA?) and they start bringing in modern turbo-diesels, I think people will be all-over them.

They provide better performance, fuel economy, practicality, and cost of ownership then most hybrids.

Sly

ateixeira · March 2005

Problem is Subaru can't risk investing a lot to get a small return.

Spend the money on developing AVCS further and on Direct Injection as well. What needs attention now is their bread-and-butter 2.5l engine IMO.

-juice

alpha01 · March 2005

Check out the new Subaru Of America Homepage- much improved, IMO! Looks great, user friendly.

http://www.subaru.com

~alpha

once_for_all · March 2005

here in California, they couldn't make air quality standards for cars. Still see them in trucks (hey, isn't the Outback a Truck now)?

Might be on to something here...

John

sduford · March 2005

From what I undersand, the latest diesel technology is very clean...

once_for_all · March 2005

you are right, they have done it with electronic injection and turbochargers. We are now seeing Tier 3 diesel engines coming in. But, even so, they don't rank with the LEV standards of gasoline engines. I think it is the SOx that kills them.

John

bigelm · March 2005

before Diesels become popular in the US. By that time, I'm sure engines have been tweaked, adjusted, etc. This will be the option to the Hybrids, and so the war between diesels and hybrids begins soon.

If Subaru is smart, they will monitor the marketing movement and potential sales of these engines before deciding what they'll bring. I'm for the diesel engines, as supposed to be a major improvement from the 80's and 90's.

With Hybrids costing so much (sales wise), it'll be interesting to see the introduction of diesels. Even more interesting to see where our gasoline engine compadres end up.

I think it'll be the battle of the HP's w/ MPG's as opposed to just the HP's of our current days.

sduford · March 2005

Ah, but isn't the cleaner diesel fuel supposed to be much lower in sulphur?

once_for_all · March 2005

they did de-sulphur much of the diesel (in fact the truckers filed lawsuits because the "lubricity" reduction caused injection pump failures) (sidebar# 2 the price of diesel skyrocketed in California) but there is still a certain amount of it. The few remaining cars with turbo-diesels are not even bothering with California, they just pull their products back to states with less stringent requirements.

John

njswamplands · March 2005

stgreen · March 2005

I love the look and the size and most everything else.

but no sat radio? they want to take on the big boys and like someone mentioned, that dash makes aftermarket a challenge.

So I ask again, so xm/sirius FACTORY option?

ateixeira · March 2005

Don't forget the aux input, so it could be added.

It would be nice to see a diesel-electric hybrid. Talk about range...

-juice

sweet_subie · March 2005

still showing dumb pictures. Can't they get better pictures ? Shame on them. subdriven.com has best pictures.

ateixeira · March 2005

Same ones from the press kit I got.

-juice

subearu · March 2005

Confirmed: No LATCH on the 3rd row

The 2nd row has rear tether anchors on the backs of the seats:

The rear tail IS red:

There are LATCH emblems on the bottoms of the outer seats:

Hopefully the images appear for everyone. The rest of the album is here: http://www.imagestation.com/album/index.html?id=2129972785

-Brian

subearu · March 2005

I wasn't allowed to sit or enter the vehicle, but my DW convinced the rep to let her quickly sit in the drivers seat. DW immediately concluded that she was able to see the end of the hood unlike in the MDX & RX.

Subaru rep commented that visitors weren't allowed in the Tribeca's due to them being "handbuilt" and not up to par on quality. I did notice the powerseat switch paneling on the driver seat was loose, and a small dent in the front fender, nothing other than autoshow wear and tear really.

-Brian

ateixeira · March 2005

Great pics Papa Bear, thanks.

Question - the LATCH anchors in the 2nd row, do they move fore/aft with the seat?

If so, that means you don't have to reinstall the child seat every time you slide the seat forward to let someone in the 3rd row.

It's pre-production, I doubt the hand-built part though.

-juice

rsholland · March 2005

subearu · March 2005

Yes, the LATCH anchors are part of the B9 seat base, just like the ones on our MPV. The MPV 2nd row seats can move (slide-by-side for one of 'em, but both will move fore/aft). So, you can slide-by-side the passenger seat AND move it fore or aft when a child seat is connected using LATCH.

The hand-built line made me chuckle actually. I refrained from commenting on it to the spokesperson.

-Brian

ateixeira · March 2005

Bingo, that's perfect for my needs!

Now, I hope they price it at $8,995 so I can afford one.

)

-juice

jeffmc · March 2005

Question for those who've seen B9 Tribeca in person: where's the auxiliary input for the stereo? (err... I mean "audio system". This is a PREMIUM vehicle, after all.)
Anyone else still bummed about the loss of Subaru's relationship with McIntosh? Anyone know what happened there? Design differences? Too expensive? No one cared? Now THAT was a premium feature.
-Jeff

samiam_68 · March 2005

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2026&ncid=2026&e=6&u=/latimests/20050305/t- s_latimes/subaruattopinqualitysurvey

bigelm · March 2005

I don't express much concern that Subaru is no longer offering McIntosh. To me it's a brand that's simple but overrated. I don't think people have been happy with the product. Maybe it's a different thing overseas but there's too much competition and consumers like flexibility and features, something that McIntosh shyed away from.
I won't lose sleep over it. Rumor has it that the NAV and sound system is Kenwood - now that I'm happy to hear.

jeffmc · March 2005

Kenwood's certainly a step up from Panasonics used by Subaru (like in my '04 Outback). Good, upscale reputation, but not a "premium" reputation in my mind, if Subaru's competitors offer Bose, Nakamichi, Yahama, etc. McIntosh maybe didn't have the same name recognition with the general public, but they certainly made some amazing systems. One local high-end store is advertising a demonstration of a $50,000 McIntosh home system. Yikes. I think I remember reading somewhere that McIntosh inked a deal with Ford.
Ah well. Kenwood's quality will make me happy.

jon_in_ct · March 2005

From jeffmc, "Subaru B9 Tribeca (B9X)" #2058, 4 Mar 2005 11:25 pm

Anyone else still bummed about the loss of Subaru's relationship with McIntosh? Anyone know what happened there? Design differences? Too expensive? No one cared? Now THAT was a premium feature.

Yes, I'm bummed about the loss of the McIntosh option, too. It was far superior to anything SOA is offering today. In Japan you can still order your Legacy B4 (i.e. sedan) or your Outback equipped with a McIntosh sound system. In Australia, you can order your Liberty (aka Legacy) with a McIntosh sound system. It's probably available everywhere in the world except North America.

snowbelter · March 2005

I'm in that small minority of folks who purchased a VDC in 02 not for the stability control, but for the McIntosh system. I liked the sound and found it far superior to the "upgraded" system available on the Bean and Limited. If I have one complaint, its that in 02 it came with a single CD player.

sweet_subie · March 2005

i think it has to do with upcoming NAV. they cut all in one deal with kenwood

ateixeira · March 2005

The McStereo was too expensive for what you got. At one point someone at SoA claimed the full setup cost $8000 (list price of all items if purchased individually).

Any how, the aux input is in the 3rd row, where you might hook up an iPod or portable gaming system. There is storage there near the port, I'm sure pretty soon people here will have all kinds of nifty solutions for mounting them.

Sam: saw that, great timing for Subaru. Eat your heart out, Lexus!

I know CR doesn't allow you to quote them, but I'll bet Subaru advertises the Tribeca and mentions "from the brand rated most reliable by a leading consumer magazine". Watch.

-juice

sweet_subie · March 2005

i have seen sub dealers showing CR's best as Forestor. i have also heard you can't advertise CR's results.

CR results get such press coverage, sub doesn't need to.

ateixeira · March 2005

They'll just refer to it vaguely, but I think they'll use it.

-juice

sduford · March 2005

"Eat your heart out, Lexus! "

Don't get your shorts in a knot yet. That ranking is just for the 2004 model year. This shows that Subaru is making great strides in initial quality, and I applaud that. But so are the Koreans.

However, those stats say absolutely nothing about long-term reliability! Inf act the Korean cars are known to fall apart after about 5 years.

I think Subaru still has some work to do before they can displace Lexus. But still, nice job!

Sly

Subaru B9 Tribeca (B9X)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles