Are you a current Michigan-based car shopper? A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/2 for details.
There's a prediction on the Aztek board at edmunds that Aztek will be axed in MY2004 or maybe as early as 2003. Anyone can substaniate/dismiss this claim?
Actually, the Aztek board is now overrun by Aztek lovers, and it's not much fun anymore. One guy's signing his messages "wearing Aztek smile" -- can you picture a human with the Aztek smile?
I know about the "reformed" Aztek site! If that guy signs "wearing that Aztek smile" one more time I'm going "ralph" all over my keyboard!! I don't know, it seems like the Aztek board is now a bunch of AA (Aztek Anonymous) members reinforcing each others purchase decisions. It's painful to read but I don't dare post anything to the contrary on that board anymore. :-)
Oh you guys, LMAO...no comment on Kissfan1 and his Aztek smile sig. I do have to see it each and everyday though ;-) ;-). Tonychrys would probably get a kick out of what you've written in your 2nd paragraphi, Kate!
Don't know if this was posted in the past or not. This is FHI's 5 year plan released May 2000. Thought is was relevant since we're discussing GM. http://www.fhi.co.jp/english/news/2000/5_29.htm Dennis
Interesting link, and totally relevant. Sounds good too, with more H6s, turbo models (plural), STX and SUW. To get a 62.6% increase in sales, I'd like to see our full wish-list met:
* 5 speed autos * 6 speed manuals * GT Blitzen models * SVX coupe model based on WRX * STi models * H6 manuals offered * STX with H6 * Big SUW with H6 * turbo Forester
SVX is going to stay dead. A turbo Legacy GT could happen, or an Impreza coupe could happen, but the SVX is not going to happen.
Juice, you don't have any GM-engineered shared products on your list. It wouldn't surprise me if there will be something Subaru badged engineered by GM, something small to help Subaru meet CAFE. If they can't meet CAFE, prices will go up to pay the penalties.
WRX coupe is fine - I don't care if they don't call it the SVX (though I think it would be cool).
My list was by no means complete. I don't think GM has a good small car platform to share, though.
But I read that the JDM Impreza comes with a 2.0l that makes 155hp. Though I'm not sure what they would put it in. Maybe they'll be counting on future credits from fuel cells?
-juice
Edit: let me correct myself. I'll take an Opel Speedster clone with AWD any day.
I was at my favorite dealer here in sac, and talked to my favorite salesman who was at the Pheonix "Drive around" thing that Subaru had... He heard some stuff from SOA reps about upcoming models: (I cant confirm any of this though)
Legacy GT- 2002 Models will have turbo... Either the 2.0 or 2.5.
Outback Legacys- 4-cyl will be droped in all models and replaced with the H6
Forester Remake- Will be based on the Legacy chasis, and will have the H6, and possibly a supercharger or Turbo model.
Once again, rumors! But I trust this man more than anyone else for rumors other than SOA reps themselves, cause hes an enthusiast just like us ... (Which could mean the SOA reps are mistaken, or these are somewhat accurate) Enjoy! :P
Drop the 4 cyl's when gas is rumored to be headed to $3 a gallon? How are they going to make CAFE (and if gas goes to $3 a gallon people will be going back to 4 cyls... it doesn't matter too much if the gas mileage is close, people will "think" that you must get better gas mileage with the 4 cyl)
I'm surprised they dropped the 2.2's from the line-up. My 97 OBS is rated for 30 mpg highway I believe. I'll be curious as to what the final 2001 CAFE average is. Dennis
like 4 cylinder engines - well engineered ones anyway. Less fuel, oil, coolant, weight, easier tune-ups and general maintenance. As long as they sing, or howl in Suby's case. Just wish I could get my wife to drive a stick though.
In fact, in more than 35 years of car ownership, I've never purchased anything else. Mind you, I never had an automatic until now so I guess I am open to change. An H6 Forester might not be all bad. :-)
I've probably missed on the "right" cars, but every time I've driven 6- or 8-cyl it was slow, heavy and floaty. Much less so with 4-bangers I've driven. I did not try H6 OB yet, but from what I've heard it's pretty good.
That's right - Mazda made 255hp from a 1.3 liter engine, you'll recall.
Bob - how 'bout 360hp from their HKS Impreza project? And that's the same engine from the Forester - can you even imagine a Forester with that kind of power?
Wow, those rumores sure got my attention! Honestly, I can't see a Legacy GT w/turbo by 2002. I'd be shocked. But Bob mentioned 2003 because it's the middle of the life cycle, so that seems likely.
H6 for all Outbacks? Hmm, that's a tough one. People like my dad would not have wanted to pay more for the H6; he thinks the 4 banger is plenty fine. Maybe have it optional across the board. The engine does fit the image, I'll admit.
A Forester on a Legacy chassis is intriguing, but I'm guessing no. It may be a stretched Impreza/shortened Legacy hybrid, but to put the Forester on a 3 year old platform? Plus it would probably be even heavier than the Outback is, which is no lightweight, so the H6 would then become a must-have, not an option.
I'm torn on that one. It has to be kept light and nimble. If they can do that and still keep it fun then OK, otherwise let the 2005 SUW tackle those duties.
In fact, maybe they'll call that a Grand Forester or something, and that was what he was referring to?
Yeah, I'd have to agree - I wouldn't have gotten our Outback if it had the H6. Not because of the displacement, but because of the price. Our Outback was $24k. An H6 LL Bean is $27k, which would be more than we'd want to spend.
I came from driving a 5.7 V8 Chevy truck. The H4 in our Outback is just fine for me. I was concerned about the H4 - but a test drive settled my worries right away.
subearu, theyre going to bring the H6 into the cheaper models as well, probably not raising the price more than a few hundred dolars... The reason the LL Bean and VDC models cost so much isnt because of the engine but because of all the other crap they put on the car along with it!
As for the Turbo in the GT... The GT/Legacy sedan doesnt sell very well, so im positive that Subaru is trying to do SOMETHING to get sell some more cars, and a Turbo even if its the WRX turbo would DEFINATLY sell more cars! And its not like its going to be hard to do at all for Subaru...
H6: I was just trying to say that if the H6 was only available in the VDC and the LL (as it currently is), I would not have even considered them since they were out of my price range at the time we got our Outback (July 2000).
Turbo: Steve - I agree with you 100%! Anyone who knows me here should know I'm all for a Blitzen type of Legacy here in the US! It's even in my dream car in my profile!
in the Legacy would be the easiest quick-fix for Subaru.
Most of the time, when Subaru does mid-season upgrades, they tend to rob from their international parts bin. So my guess, anything new we see here on a Legacy (or any other mid-life Subaru), we'll already have seen elsewhere, in other markets. Just one example: the same "blaze yellow" on our WRX has been offered in Japan for some time already.
I just became aware that Subaru is going to build this model (I thought it was just a model they did for fun not actually build one) and I must say I'm intrigued.
I personally do not feel the 2.0 turbo is a good idea for the Legacy platform. Any criticism about lag, power below 3,000 rpm, etc. would be intensely magnified. The 3.0 H6 is a much smarter choice for the US market.
A bigger turbo four could work, especially a light-pressure 2.5L. But the current WRX engine is simply not a good fit.
Crew cab prices really creep up there too, though. The Frontier SC (with 2 fewer HP than the H6) starts at $25,639, and the cruise/moonroof add $1,549. So you're already over $27k.
I agree. I said the WRX engine would be the "easiest" parts-bin-special, quick-fix—not the "best" solution. I also agree that I would rather see a 2.5 Turbo. If Subaru goes that route (2.5 turbo), do you think they'll stay with a SOHC format or revert to a DOHC format?
It's going to be interesting to see how Subarus markets/prices the new pickup. As juice indicated, there are many "real" trucks in the mid-$20K range. I just hope the SubaBRAT offers some real truck capability—towing, payload, dual-range, etc.
I hope they surprise us with something, anything really.
By that I mean more power, more gears on the tranny, a low range, or beefed up towing or ground clearance. Throw us a cookie, at least, to show some upgrades that other models will get in the future.
Check the SOJ link. They do indeed use a 2.5 DOHC on one version of the Japanese Foresters, the T/25. It appears to be only available in an automatic, and may(?) have variable-valve-timing (AVCS).
Yup I'm 100% sure. The Forester T/25 and Legacy 250 T-B, 250 T-V models get a 2.5 L DOHC engine with variable valve timing (AVCS). Didn't I mention that a loooong time ago?
BTW, it appears that all of the 2.5DOHC models come with 4EAT only. Ken
DOHC with auto only? That's the opposite of what I would expect.
Twin cams allow for more precise valve control and a higher revving engine. In fact, when the 2.5l boxer went to SOHC, the redline dropped from 6500rpm to 6250rpm.
So, you would expect them to include a 5 speed to exploit this high revving capability, no?
Regardless, given the borderline CAFE numbers Subaru has, they ought to bring over whatever technologies makes their engines more efficient. Plus variable valve timing adds marketing value.
Actually in this particular instance, DOHC does not mechanically enable a higher redline. There's nothing wrong with the SOHC valvetrain up to 8,000 rpm or beyond, assuming you had the right valvesprings and cams. Not of the rest of the engine is ready for that RPM, but just making a point.
The reason the rev limit dropped 250 RPM is definitely related to the fact that part-throttle torque increased a *great* deal as did torque below 3000 rpm.
Sort of... they desired more low-end punch and part-throttle responsiveness, and the trade-off was that the engine falls on its face above 5500 RPM. No need to rev beyond 6250.
They could have their cake and eat it too though with variable valve timing and variable induction lengths. It would be easy to make all the low-end torque of the SOHC EJ25 and rev higher than the DOHC EJ25, resulting in much more than 165HP.
That's one sure advantage for DOHC, if they actually implemented it. If variable valve timing isn't used though SOHC isn't a disadvantage.
Comments
Ed
-juice
Actually, the Aztek board is now overrun by Aztek lovers, and it's not much fun anymore. One guy's signing his messages "wearing Aztek smile" -- can you picture a human with the Aztek smile?
I imagine it looks something like this:
%*}
-juice
Bob
Stephen
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
This is FHI's 5 year plan released May 2000.
Thought is was relevant since we're discussing GM.
http://www.fhi.co.jp/english/news/2000/5_29.htm
Dennis
* 5 speed autos
* 6 speed manuals
* GT Blitzen models
* SVX coupe model based on WRX
* STi models
* H6 manuals offered
* STX with H6
* Big SUW with H6
* turbo Forester
I hope we get at least half of those...
-juice
Juice, you don't have any GM-engineered shared products on your list. It wouldn't surprise me if there will be something Subaru badged engineered by GM, something small to help Subaru meet CAFE. If they can't meet CAFE, prices will go up to pay the penalties.
-Colin
My list was by no means complete. I don't think GM has a good small car platform to share, though.
But I read that the JDM Impreza comes with a 2.0l that makes 155hp. Though I'm not sure what they would put it in. Maybe they'll be counting on future credits from fuel cells?
-juice
Edit: let me correct myself. I'll take an Opel Speedster clone with AWD any day.
Quick note: Just read in AutoWeek that the Acura TL S-Type will be available with a 6-speed manual later in the year.
Also in AutoWeek, some WRX modifications. How's a 350HP WRX grab you?
Bob
Legacy GT- 2002 Models will have turbo... Either the 2.0 or 2.5.
Outback Legacys- 4-cyl will be droped in all models and replaced with the H6
Forester Remake- Will be based on the Legacy chasis, and will have the H6, and possibly a supercharger or Turbo model.
Once again, rumors! But I trust this man more than anyone else for rumors other than SOA reps themselves, cause hes an enthusiast just like us
Enjoy! :P
As far as FHI's 5 year plan, please know how much "we" are hoping it is met. So....off with your wish list I go!
Patti
Frank
Dennis
-Greg
Ross
-Colin
Ross
Now people that stick exclusively to that sort of stuff and never experience smaller, more nimble cars are also missing out on something.
-Colin
Bob - how 'bout 360hp from their HKS Impreza project? And that's the same engine from the Forester - can you even imagine a Forester with that kind of power?
Wow, those rumores sure got my attention! Honestly, I can't see a Legacy GT w/turbo by 2002. I'd be shocked. But Bob mentioned 2003 because it's the middle of the life cycle, so that seems likely.
H6 for all Outbacks? Hmm, that's a tough one. People like my dad would not have wanted to pay more for the H6; he thinks the 4 banger is plenty fine. Maybe have it optional across the board. The engine does fit the image, I'll admit.
A Forester on a Legacy chassis is intriguing, but I'm guessing no. It may be a stretched Impreza/shortened Legacy hybrid, but to put the Forester on a 3 year old platform? Plus it would probably be even heavier than the Outback is, which is no lightweight, so the H6 would then become a must-have, not an option.
I'm torn on that one. It has to be kept light and nimble. If they can do that and still keep it fun then OK, otherwise let the 2005 SUW tackle those duties.
In fact, maybe they'll call that a Grand Forester or something, and that was what he was referring to?
-juice
I came from driving a 5.7 V8 Chevy truck. The H4 in our Outback is just fine for me. I was concerned about the H4 - but a test drive settled my worries right away.
-Brian
As for the Turbo in the GT...
The GT/Legacy sedan doesnt sell very well, so im positive that Subaru is trying to do SOMETHING to get sell some more cars, and a Turbo even if its the WRX turbo would DEFINATLY sell more cars! And its not like its going to be hard to do at all for Subaru...
Turbo: Steve - I agree with you 100%! Anyone who knows me here should know I'm all for a Blitzen type of Legacy here in the US! It's even in my dream car in my profile!
-Brian
Most of the time, when Subaru does mid-season upgrades, they tend to rob from their international parts bin. So my guess, anything new we see here on a Legacy (or any other mid-life Subaru), we'll already have seen elsewhere, in other markets. Just one example: the same "blaze yellow" on our WRX has been offered in Japan for some time already.
Bob
Too small for her, though. When can I show her a Blitzen? C'mon Subaru!
-juice
I hope they can get the H6 in there for a street price of $25k or so. Much more than that and it won't sell well.
-juice
I personally do not feel the 2.0 turbo is a good idea for the Legacy platform. Any criticism about lag, power below 3,000 rpm, etc. would be intensely magnified. The 3.0 H6 is a much smarter choice for the US market.
A bigger turbo four could work, especially a light-pressure 2.5L. But the current WRX engine is simply not a good fit.
-Colin
-juice
Bob
-juice
Bob
By that I mean more power, more gears on the tranny, a low range, or beefed up towing or ground clearance. Throw us a cookie, at least, to show some upgrades that other models will get in the future.
-juice
Maybe they could bring that over and turbo it!
Ken
Bob
The US plant (SIA) should start to manufacture those, then give us a LPT (light pressure turbo) on that bad boy, and watch people line up.
-juice
Bob
http://www.subaru.co.jp/forester/
The WRX and H6 use DOHC, along with the 2.0l and 2.0l turbos in overseas markets, but the 2.5l has gone to SOHC, AFAIK.
-juice
Bob
BTW, it appears that all of the 2.5DOHC models come with 4EAT only.
Ken
Twin cams allow for more precise valve control and a higher revving engine. In fact, when the 2.5l boxer went to SOHC, the redline dropped from 6500rpm to 6250rpm.
So, you would expect them to include a 5 speed to exploit this high revving capability, no?
Regardless, given the borderline CAFE numbers Subaru has, they ought to bring over whatever technologies makes their engines more efficient. Plus variable valve timing adds marketing value.
-juice
The reason the rev limit dropped 250 RPM is definitely related to the fact that part-throttle torque increased a *great* deal as did torque below 3000 rpm.
-Colin
-juice
They could have their cake and eat it too though with variable valve timing and variable induction lengths. It would be easy to make all the low-end torque of the SOHC EJ25 and rev higher than the DOHC EJ25, resulting in much more than 165HP.
That's one sure advantage for DOHC, if they actually implemented it. If variable valve timing isn't used though SOHC isn't a disadvantage.
-Colin