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
After seeing these clips, I'm sure that all of you will probably want the system too :-) BTW, notice how much less countersteering has to be done when VDC is active. Also, the system is active regardless of whether your foot is on the gas pedal, the brake pedal, or neither one.
Video 1 - 9.0 mb
Video 2 - 4.0 mb
Video 3 - 5.2 mb
Video 4 - 5.4 mb
Comments?
Enjoy!
Drew
Guess what? I found out that in Japan, the Forester is available with the VTD-4WD system! This means that it could really blow away the Tribute/Escape, CR-V, etc. Hopefully, this system will trickle down to North America bound models soon.
Nice find with the videos! They take a bit to download (even on my cable modem) but they're worth it.
The videos are pretty self-explanatory, but just in case, in every clip the blue Legacy is the one without VDC and the white on has VDC.
Here's a quick summary of each one:
Video 1: Demonstrates the effectiveness of VDC on a slalom over a slippery track. The video also illustrates how the steering input differs between the VDC and non-VDC vehicle.
Video 2: Avoidance maneuvering with VDC. At the end of the video, the narrator points out the difference in exit angles.
Video 3: Entering a T-intersection with slippery road conditions.
Video 4: Another avoidance maneuver but this time on a low traction surface. The narrator points out that the difference is quite "obvious".
Also, I think Subaru uses the VTD system on just the turbo Forester, if I'm not mistaken. Apparently, that system was developed originally for the SVX and is used for their "performance" vehicles because it allows for a slightly rear-drive bias.
The VR6 even more so. I'm not even sure I'd want to change that engine much, Ken.
Forester with VTD? Add the H6 and I'm in heaven. Hmm, can I possibly transfer all these accessories onto the new one if I trade up?
Photos are sweet. $32k seems like a lot for a Subaru, but you have to ask yourself if this looks like a plain Subaru (or even if it drives like one).
The Japanese market gets all the goodies. The interior looks a seriously gadget-loaded.
I recall this article in AutoCar. The Impreza Turbo actually runs through the slalom quicker in wet conditions, where it can drift. I wonder if the VDC would actually slow down the times (and if there is a defeat button, there is, right?).
-juice
The nice thing is that the system is not intrusive, but when it kicks in, you'll be able to feel the brakes on one (or two) wheels being applied. There is no sensation through the brake pedal, but you will be hear a grating noise, much like the ABS sound. This sound will vary in intensity, depending on how hard the system has to cut in.
Yes, I believe there is a "VDC off" button. However, since I didn't need to turn it off, I didn't look around for it nor ask where it was.
The vehicle is indeed gadget laden, as most Japanese vehicles are. But I found them to be helpful and pretty nifty! That big LCD screen is where the driver sees the video inputs (split screen, if you like) coming in from the tiny CCD cameras in the bumpers. Honda offers a similar system. FWIW, at first I thought that the GPS screen location was too low, but surprisingly I had no real problems with it after a few minutes of usage.
Personally, I think the $32K figure won't hold out for long. It should come down at least a little after the initial excitement. BTW, the Subaru that I drove (and the one in the pictures above) is the top of the line Lancaster S H6 model.
Drew
Even the Japanese CR-V looks good. Much nicer than our North American spec ones.
That's funny to see all those cars being thrashed by a wagon.
Let's also not forget driver familiarity though-- the more often a driver sees a corner, the faster he'll take it. Whatever car goes last in each of these tests has an advantage in my book. There were a few quirks like the WRX's faster wet slalom. That's BS I'm afraid and it either means they got an erroneously high number in the wet or didn't reach the car's potential in the dry. AWD or no, the coefficient of friction is always higher when it's dry. Another point of curiosity is the slow 15m acceleration times. The WRX was the fastest in 2.25s in the dry... Sounds fast right? No. 15m is a bit shy of 50 feet, and I've brought my 165HP RS to the dragstrip and easily gotten 2.0-2.2 seconds at the 60 foot mark. You would think the ueber Impreza with over 100HP more could beat me to 10 feet less distance. (And I'm not John Force-- other RS drivers average low 2s 60' also.)
-Colin
Yeah, around me at least, the prices will drop under $30k within a month. You guys in high-demand markets (read: New England) ought to consider coming by train to DC, attending an SCOA or i Club event, and then driving back. You'd come out ahead.
In the slalom, I wonder if the slippery surface allows the engine to rev higher, wheels spinning, keeping it in the power band.
Also, perhaps the turbo spins the wheels more off the line, so it loses some time, later recovered since the engine is allowed to make peak power.
We drove automatics at Edmunds Live, so they shifted annoyingly, just when you didn't want them to. Even the few tiptronic style shifters didn't lend the control I wanted. We only got one lap per car, so we couldn't get used to it in that short time, though.
Here are photos of the event.
-juice
Nice job (again) with scanning the article. I read through it, but unfortunately it's more fluff than a technical review.
The article is written by a writer/reporter who normally drives a Legacy Touring Wagon. He apparently has been a Subaru fan since he met up with some Subaru engineers while doing a story on the safari.
In between his ramblings, ge comments on how much smoother the engine is and how more stable the ride feels. He also gives it a thumbs up on it's good emissions performance.
As for the rear-view camera, you must know from your first hand experience in Japan that this is a necessity for big vehicles. Parking spots are TIGHT. Retractable side-mirrors are also a product of tight road conditions. People often fold the their side mirrors as they squeeze by each other on narrow roads. Believe me, I've had to do that when I lived there.
Ken
-juice
The cars:
**2k Impreza RS (super loaded but no perforamnce mods) $20,985 with some dealer options (boy racer stripes and other stuff) but not including tax or tags.
**2k Honda S2000 ("dealer options" like paint sealer and under body rust proofing) no performance mods. $38,016 witout tax or tags.
1) The transmission in the S2000 is as close to "perfect" as this amature has ever driven. I wish I could have taken it with me. Its everything all the press claims its is and probably more. Anybody can drive this car. The RS needs a 6spd. The S2000 wins here hands down.
2) The S2000 driving dynamics are track tuned which makes them kinda harsh in my book. I guess I have to face it, my boy racer days are over. BUT it sticks like velcro on dry (road not track). Did not drive it on wet. I prefer the ride in the RS over the S2000. I'm not good enough to really test the limits of either car on the track so.....My opnion is that the RS wins here. Plus you can drive the RS in the winter and play in the snow too.
3) Its pretty obvious that the S2000 not a 0-60 car nor was it intended to be. It seems to perform best when I kept it wound up between 5000-8000rpm. Probably the point it kicks over to the other cam face. Another thing, I bet the torque does not peak until about 7000rpm (I could be wrong here). It's just kinda wimpy unless you REALLY rev it and then its fun. I have seen times in the mid 5s for the S2000 for 0-60. The best I could do was the low 7s without transmission "abuse". Yea, I know thats pretty sad but its definately me and not the car. I was limiting wheel spin and probably slipping the clutch too much. I think just dropping the thing at 5-6k and mashing the throttle would yeild better results but as I will freely admit....I'm not a great driver. I wonder how may times one could do that and keep the clutch???? I just have lots of doctor/lawyer friends with disposable income that owe me favors:). Still, they are not gonna let me destroy their cars!!!! I found the Subaru more friendly off the line but not as quick as the reved up Honda. In the hand of an amature they are a little more than 1sec apart.
4) I not a big fan of the F1-like engine. Yea, I know it spits our 240hp with just 2L but....I actually prefer the 2.5L F4 from the Subaru. I guess some people like the sound but the 5000+rpm needed to keep it fun resulted in a constant "whine" that got annoying to my ears. Also not that most people who own one would care but does that seem like a ton of stress on the engine to you? Does to me if you want to have fun with it. Yup, my Speed Racer days are gone for sure. I like the Subaru better here. Please dont tell me....I might as well get a Buick with the 3800 V6 right? I have secretly have been eyeing up the Regal GS but thats another post to another group.
5) The S2000 looks better to my eyes. I'm just not a fan of non-functional scoops and stuff.
Well boys and girls, if I had the money, I'd take the RS and $17,000. Not to say the S2000 is not as good....in the hand of a pro/semi-pro its probably worth the cash but not for me. NO WAY. I would rather get the RS and with the left over money (about $17k) put the RS in the sub 5s range 0-60. Overall, the S2000 was what I expected....an out of the box track/autocrossing car. Its not a very good daily driver in my opnion.
To address #1, I suggest a Kartboy shifter, which runs about $200 or so. I've tried one in BugBomb's RS, and loved the short, snick-snick feel. It actually reminded me of the S2000 shifter I was able to try (but not drive) at Car & Driver's 10Best open house.
As for engines, the boxer actually makes more torque. The Honda is light and uses gearing to its advantage.
I loved the seats on the Honda, and that shifter. The interior seemed lame compared to the Audi TT it competes with, though, and the front headlight look too much like a Camry's.
Keep 'em coming, guys.
-juice
I agree with that too. Specifically, I bet you are talking about that magic lateral support (and thigh support to some extent). I felt stuck in the seat (in a good way). The thing is it looks like a regular seat until you go up an on-ramp too fast and you realize that you are leaning in for no reason. Another thing was that people with long legs will be pretty comfortable in the Honda seat too. I have very long legs (for someone 5'7'') and it supported my thighs really well. I think the only problem would be someone larger than about 180-200lbs. They may feel squeezed.
"The interior seemed lame compared to the Audi TT"
This one is an odd one for me. Normally I like Audi design. I have not driven the TT but I did fiddle with it while my friend was test driving an A4. I dont like all that brushed aluminum stuff BUT lots of people do. I prefer a basic black interior with a little bit of wood (or plood) here and there. The TT is kind-of Buck Rodgers meets Iron Man feeling and I think its supposed to be. I dont know about on the road but I felt like I could not see well to the sides because of the low roof line. Have you driven it? It seemed like it was a slave to fashion to me. While I really like the look it seemed like "the look" came first and some driveability things were ingored. By this I mean REALLY low roof line and I want to see someone over 6' get into it and be comfortable. I felt like the Honda was stripped for what it cost. BUT that not the reason I would buy or not buy the S2000. Double BUT I do agree, in comparison it did seem lame.
"Honda is light"
Totally agree. I have not had the same feeling since I drove a 1995 RX7 Twin Turbo (250hp for around 2800lbs). Its almost a scary feeling like a go-cart with 200hp. Actually, thats probably a good way to describe the S2000 or the RX7. Although, with the RX7 it felt like you were never really in control when you pushed it and if I remember it liked to oversteer quite a bit if you tried to throttle out of a turn. Not the S2000. It drives like a Civic with super stiff springs until you push it and then its still easy to control. Another reason the Honda may fell extra light is that the steering is super quick. Too quick for every day driving? I'm not sure but I would really like to borrow it for a whole week and tear around in it to find out. Unless I was stopped I would probably keep it around 5000rpm!!!! I did get passed by an 18-wheeler on I40 at about 77mph and its wind wash did got me a little wiggley but nothing major and not as bad as my old Corolla. For how light it is, it stick really well.
I have not driven the TT, and I am actually too big for it (tall and wide). I think it looks stunning, though, as cars in this price range should.
I actually don't like when they tune out the RWD quirkiness, though. The BMW 323i was way too "safe" with understeer for me. Why get RWD if it feels like FWD?
Solution: AWD.
-juice
Wimp!
RWD: most fun but scary EVEN if you know what you are doing
You need more seat time, autocross would be a good start. To me FWD is the most scary at the limit because once you get into terminal understeer that's that. If you set it up for trailing throttle oversteer (say a big fat rear swaybar) it's even more scary than RWD because you can't steer with the throttle.
Wait I take that back. 911's and midengined cars are scary. That freaks me out being hyper sensitive to lift oversteer. Nevertheless I want a 911 badly.
We're getting OT... Subaru content: I sure hope the north american Impreza turbo comes with 35/65 front/rear power torque distribution, 50/50 is a bit much for tarmac racing. I have to be fairly gentle with the gas exiting corners or I'll spin a front tire.
-Colin
Yup, driving on the narrow and crowded streets was definitely a challenge, more so than in Europe. Thank god I didn't have to parallel park, because I'm really rusty since I haven't had to do that for a while.
nematode, sounds like you want the WRX :-). It has an adjustable centre differential which allows you to vary the torque split ratio going to the front and rear wheels via this lever:
AWD (especially if it's a 50/50 split) can be almost too boring to drive, except in the snow, because it is so neutral compared to RWD, or FWD. :-)
Drew
My favourite Porsches have are the 996 Carerra 4 coupe and cabrio (35/65 torque split AWD with 4 wheel traction control and Posche stability management). One of my neighours has a Silver cabrio and it is a beauty!
FWIW, my E320 4-matic has a 38/62 torque split ratio. If I push the car a little too hard (in the snow especially) the rear end can get a little tailhappy, more so than the 48/52 split that my ML has. Luckily, there is ESP to bring the rear end back into line before anything too severe occurs.
The WRX center differential switch sounds cool, though I wonder how often a relatively tame driver like me would really spend adjust it in day-to-day driving.
Check it out: http://www.detnews.com/autosweekly/0008/09/lead/lead.htm
The mini-Expedition look is actually quite nice, but the rear quarters are a tad Windstar-ish.
I would think that most drivers would leave the adjustable centre diffy control around the 50/50 (or maybe with a rearward bias) split for neutral handling in most situations. However, most WRX buyers are probably not tame drivers too :-)
Drew
-mike
Keep in mind I was testing cars that I don't own, and only got one lap, so spinning out was simply not a concern (and how often can you say that?).
Hence we sought out the RWDers, and were disappointed with the safe (read boring) handling they've tuned in.
A good clutch doesn't have to be stiff, though. Centerforce's dual friction was actually a bit lighter than the OE clutch on my buddy's Shadow Turbo, and grabbed harder too.
HOT NEWS: Firestone will issue a recall today for the Wilderness tires. Let's see if the Outback's tires are included.
-juice
4.2" taller, though? Does it need that kind of height? That plus the ground clearance could be scary. Don't they already roll over a lot?
Oh, air bags that stay deployed for 6 seconds to keep passengers in place in a rollover. Why not design a vehicle that simply doesn't roll over in the first place?
At least it's wider, which is good. The Escape is actually wider than the current Explorer.
3rd row seat a big plus.
4334 lbs a big minus for handling.
Who cares, they'll still sell like hot cakes.
-juice
-mike
-Frank P.
People here don't know how to take care of em and SOA was burnt before on turbo units. The last time they had turbos here they apparently had a lot of trouble with them as far as reliability. Mostly cause US consumers don't know the proper care and maintainance of a turbo (allowing it to spool down before turning off the engine, higher grade and more frequent oil changes, high octane fuel) and whether the consumer or the manufacturer is at fault for the reliability problems, the manf looks bad if the cars don't work.
I kinda agree. People in the US don't really care for their cars very well and are quick to blame the manf.
-mike
I think the new Explorer will be light-years ahead of the old model, both off-road and on-road in terms of handling.
Even with the increase in ground clearance, the step-in height has actually been lowered! That's pretty amazing.
Bob
-mike
paisan: on turbos, well said.
Ford seems to concentrate a lot of effort on the Explorer, though, so I imagine they'll iron out glitches more willingly than they would on a less profitable, lower volume model.
-juice
Perpetual Ford Explorer Woes II
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/engaged/edmund.cgi?c=SUV&f=0&t=2571
I think they should concentrate harder
-mike
told me that the reason Subaru doesn't bring their turbo models state-side is cause they have problems getting them to meet U.S. emission standards
Partly true. The problem wasn't specifically meeting emissions restrictions, it was the fact that you MUST have an OBDII compliant computer to sell a vehicle in the US. There's a significant cost involved with developing one just for the US market, so I would assume that Subaru's new Impreza turbo will actually use an OBDII compliant ECU for all markets.
Paisan's comment about people not taking care of turbos is right in some instances but there are many, many turbocharged vehicles on our roads and most owners have no problems with them. If they don't take care of it properly, after the first costly repair they usually learn.
-Colin
When I need to haul kids and family members around, I personally would prefer the 3rd row seats instead of wider back seat. From my own experience I know that unless you have a really really wide vehicle, person in the middle will be still an unhappy person. Also I feel much safer and happier when my kids (don't know about yours ;-) seat on different rows...
Wouldn't it be nice if Subaru made something similar to Acura MD-X, but maybe a bit smaller, more agile, versatile and of course better priced?
Maybe, we should start a petition to SoA? Chris Kennedy is pretty successful in getting his Stop the Aztek petition signed...
I would find it hard to believe that it wouldn't have a third row of seats.
Bob
Subaru will actually build a Grand Outback, if you will. They're promising a bigger SUW (as in wagon) for 2005. Yep, 3 rows!
Why not BOTH, though? The Forester arrived and brought new customers to Subaru. Outback sales, ironically, went UP.
The next Explorer will actually be bigger to avoid being cannibalized by the Escape (which is wider than the current Explorer, BTW).
I'm not there yet, with multiple kids, that is, but I too long for the versatility of a 3rd row seat.
-juice
-mike
Stephen
Drew
Maybe I'm just messed up but it seems they don't compete too often and a lot of dealers are both Isuzu and Subaru.
Corolla = Geo Prizm...
Bob
Carrying 6 warm bodies is a lot!
I know what you're wondering. By saying "Dave", I've narrowed it down to about 70% of the Crew. I believe it was 2ndwnd that had the Sears carrier.
I think SIA (Subaru-Isuzu Automotive) is like a collaboration, or a partnership, in that plant. Of course it is VERY convenient that Isuzu builds only trucks, and Subaru builds only cars (even the Forester is classified as a car).
Bob: by "bigger" I meant interior space.
It's funny, but the current Cherokee is a mid-size, and its replacement will be a compact. But get this - the new one has more interior room! Go figure.
-juice
-mike
Do you know if SOA is planning on keeping a n/a Impreza RS even after the turbo comes out? Would there be any reason why that someone would want to get a n/a model vs. a turbo from a performance standpoint? Displacement or boost?
The small trailer idea is my favorite but I cant really do that now. We are in a town home with little parking. Perhaps in a couple of years....
It would be easiest if Subaru would just make a minivan by 2005. I dont want an SUV but I hear they have one (larger Forrester???) on the way to be released by then. I want a minivan with a decent AWD system.
Instead, how 'bout a stealthy 2.5l L sedan, and a 2.5l Outback Sport. Then the turbo wagon and sedan.
Thing about a minivan is Subaru would probably use the Montana platform, which had poor crash test scores and isn't really up to Subaru quality levels.
-juice
Do you know if SOA is planning on keeping a n/a
Impreza RS even after the turbo comes out? Would
there be any reason why that someone would want to
get a n/a model vs. a turbo from a performance
standpoint? Displacement or boost?
Sure, throttle response and performance potential. (more on the second one later.) Very solid word is that the turbo is still 2.0L and probably will still run low compression (8.0:1) and high boost. No matter how good the exhaust and turbocharger, there will be lag in that environment. Some will want the superior throttle response of a naturally aspirated 2.5L. Additionally, some enthusiasts will want the 2.5L for racing-- hard to say what classes it will end up in, but one thing is for sure-- no SCCA roadrace classes short of the BIG boys (GT1, 2, 3) allow forced induction. If someone wants to roadrace an impreza it will be done with a 2.5RS type car.
About potential... when you REALLY start modifying a car, displacement starts to matter more than what the car originally made HP-wise. 2.5L is 25% more displacement than 2.0L and that won't change. Additionally, bolt-on turbo and SC kits for the 2.5L start work with a nice 10:1 compression ratio-- which obviously limits boost potential, but lag will be significantly minimized.
-Colin
sorry about the slow response, I've been out of town since Tuesday.