pack enough supplies to mobilize the 101st Airborne
LOL, sounds like my wife!
Well, paid a visit to Fitzgerald yesterday, hoping to find a Baja. Nope, water pump recall was being done right then, and it was pre-sold. The salesman said it was a great attention getter for them, no surprise.
So we had a nice chat. It was the same guy that sold us the Legacy, very nice, absolutely zero pressure. I expressed interest in the Shiftronic, and he had them pull one up for us to drive.
I dunno, I liked it. The shifts come much quicker than, say, Volvo's. About the same as Mercedes'. At normal speeds, it only lags about 200 rpm. At full throttle, it can take a little longer, but still less than 1000 rpm. Plus you'd get used to it.
I liked that it was up and down, not side-to-side. Down to first, up for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. Seemed intuitive. Ideally I'd have it on the left side of the shift pattern, but it's on the right (JDM influence).
This was a wagon, and the engine pulled it well. The Phase II mates well to an automatic, IMO. It's not fast, though more than adequate.
The suspension is stiffer than our L, no surprise. Mostly I think it's the tires, though. Ride was less tolerant, but I'm sure that pays off in handling (we weren't driving hard enough to try it out).
Love Subaru steering, haven't disliked any Subie I've ever driven. Leather covered wheel and shift knob are nice.
Heated seats felt nice on my back. The front moonroof seems small now that I'm used to ours. Lit key ring works and looks nifty. It has a different in-dash 6CD, but no tape. So I liked ours better, from a WRX.
So overall I like it, but the price still makes me run to an L/SE. I looked at those, they even get fog lights, body colored mirrors, even the side skirts are painted. A WRX doesn't have that!
But - I like shiftronic. I think it would be the perfect thing for my wife, who wants control but needs less distraction while the kids are this young.
So c'mon, Subaru, drop the standard automatic and put shiftronic on every Subaru, even if you have to charge $300 more for it.
With Mercedes', if you drive aggressively enough and once the computer recognises this, the shifts (manually) are quite fast. If you don't have a lead foot and drive conservatively, the manual shifts will be slower. In their case, wide open throttle or not doesn't make a difference.
The slower ones are Volvo's and VW's, at least from the ones I've sampled. To the point that they are annoying, even perhaps slower than in full auto mode.
Mercedes and Subaru have quicker response.
All of them shift smoothly.
But Mercedes' best tranny is the buttery 6 speed in the SLK320! Man, that thing is schweet!
Test drive in Brooklyn? Can't do much there except circle a few blocks with an array of double parkers, stop signs, and lights or getting stuck in traffic. ;-)
In my case, I'm looking for a new vehicle in 2003-2004 for more selfish reasons. The Forester has served me very well, but I want something a little more zippier. I figured I'd get my "fun" car in before we make the inevitable switch to a larger family vehicle in the future.
I get a letter from Valley for a "Subaru Buyback Program" which is dealer speak for "please come in and trade up to a new model so we can keep getting the financing from you."
Don't make me go up there* and smack you. You know as well as I that a WRX wagon won't fit your bodhrán and bass, and Q's chamber orchestra ensemble. Abstain from the Impreza form factor. Have patience, my dear moppet. The economy will survive, though it does appreciate your enthusiasm.
..Mike (ducks for cover)
* Loosh lives in Bawl'mer (Baltimore), I near Washington, DC, a mere 18 minutes away via the as yet funded maglev train.
they didn't have the center caps back in March when I ordered the wheels. I've emailed a couple of times on the status but no response. May have to do an i-club post. :-) To tell you the truth, I don't notice it much anymore.
A few days ago you posted a link to a site that handles Subaru's PR (i.e., it looks like a Subaru site but the URL isn't subaru.com). I can't find it, even with Edmunds' fantabulous search. Still have it? I think you were posting sales numbers. Thanks.
The rumors for a 2.5 turbo have picked up, for sure. A few months ago I figured it would be a 50/50 chance of it occurring. Now I say 95/5.
Besides all the earlier rumors, Mike (Smith) just found an Aussie link mentioning a 2.5 turbo Forester is coming next year, for sure. In addition he heard it (2.5t, not 2.0t) from a sales person's mouth. I did too, and from another dealer. So the evidence is mounting...
This raises some interesting questions:
• Is this new 2.5 turbo part of the (again, rumored) upcoming Phase III engine program?
• Will it be SOHC or DOHC?
• Will it include AVAC?
• Will it have a timing belt or a timing chain (like the H-6)? I'm hoping for a timing chain. I know some here will disagree with me on this.
• Will it be available in both automatic and 5/6-speed? There is a rumor stating only automatics will be offered. I really hope that is wrong.
• Will the rumored 5-spead automatic debut with this engine, or will it debut with the redesigned '05 Legacy?
• I'm assuming it will be a low-boost turbo(?), so as to attract a wider audience than the high-boost WRX engine. In addition, a low-boost turbo will be better suited for the Forester, and hopefully the Baja too.
• If it is a low-boost turbo, how will it integrate with the H-6, in terms of the (Subaru) marketplace? Will it have better power characteristics than the H-6? If so, why offer an H-6, unless that engine also gets some tweaks?
• Will the Baja also get this engine as an option, or the H-6?
• Will the Legacy GT get a (still) higher performance version?
• Will this 2.5 turbo be more attractive to customers than the 2.0 turbo being used in the WRX—and hurt WRX sales? Or, with the US-spec WRX and STi also get the 2.5 turbo, but in a higher state of tune?
Questions, questions, in search of answers, answers...
Subaru will never put a 2.5 in the WRX, WRC cars can only have a 2 liter engine and half the mystique of the WRX is its WRC pedigree. On the other hand, a 2.5 T or even supercharged 2.5 as an alternative to a H6 for more power may be due to CAFE mileage requirements, a 2.5 T will probably have better mileage than an H6. Either that or they have to bring back the 2.2 on base Imprezzas and Foresters etc etc or start paying fines to the govt! or sell some fuel cell vehicle or a new econobox or something!
Various Touring Car classes in Europe and Asia also have an annoying 2.0L displacement limit-- naturally aspirated. The Honda Accord's top-level engine is a 3.0L V6, yet it runs a destroked 2.2L I4 and presumably Honda still feels there is a marketing / racing connection. Same for the Impreza-- there are a 2.0L naturally aspirated touring cars, even though there's never been anything remotely close to naturally aspirated performance development in production Subarus.
So anyway, I see no logical reason why a 2.5L turbo can't exist in production cars with a 2.0L turbo in WRC and both because of necessity.
There's nothing carved in stone about the 2.0L WRC limit remaining forever. Who's to say they will "never" raise that engine size limit. Same with the SCCA Rally; if Subaru offers a 2.5 turbo WRX here, I'm sure there will be some major venue in which it will be raced.
Besides, ultimately it's all about selling vehicles. If Subaru thinks they can sell more 2.5 WRX turbos, than 2.0 WRX turbos, you can bet they'll offer a 2.5 turbo.
The current 2.5L has: 165 hp @ 5600 rpm 166 pounds of torque at 4000 rpm
The current 2.0L US-spec WRX has: 227 hp @ 6000 rpm 217 pounds of torque at 4000 rpm (comes on boost around 3000 rpm)
The current 3.0L H-6 has: 212 hp @ 6000 rpm 210 pounds of torque at 4400 rpm.
I would like to see the rumored 2.5L turbo have:
For Forester* and Baja* applications: 215 hp @ ~ 4000 rpm 240 pounds of torque @ ~ 2700 rpm (comes on boost around ~ 1800 rpm)
For Legacy GT applications: 250 hp @ ~ 4000 rpm 230 pounds of torque @ ~ 4000 rpm (comes on boost around ~ 2500 rpm)
* I think the power characteristics of a low-boost turbo are more desirable for an "SUV/truck," than those of the current H-6, in that it will make more power down low, where it's needed.
While they could certainly change the rules I would venture to say that is far less likely than a scenario where Subaru wants a 2.5 in an Imprezza of some sort, but it won't be the WRX. An upgraded RS or whatever you want to call it but the whole marketing point of the WRX is "son of WRC" and now you go and change one of the main parameters! The Honda analogy does not hold as Honda only touts that its racing engine tech has made it to production cars. Not that they are selling you a street legal, low cost available to the general public pseudoWRC. Whatever they do with the Impreza, I can't wait to see a 2.5T in a GT! I don't even think it will need as high a max output as 250, even a 200hp but with much better torque characteristics will be good enough. Plus fuel economy will be better. Changing some models to truck status doesn't help SOA that much as they still have no high mileage econobox.
for offering offshoots of various models. In Japan, they have several versions of the WRX-STi. Same is true in Europe. They used to have a 2.2L (I forget the name) that was basically a last-generation WRX with a hot turbo 2.2L engine. So, I don't see any problem with them offering a 2.5 WRX (or whatever) here in the USA, and still keep the 2.0 version for other markets.
My main point for mentioning a 2.5 WRX is, when the 2.5 turbo debuts here, I could easily see interest in the (2.0) WRX dropping off. So, in order to counter that, offer a 2.5 WRX...
Also, Subaru has had zero success in the WRC this year. In fact, it's probably Subaru's worst WRC showing to date. For that reason alone, Subaru may now be less willing to promote the WRC aspect too heavily. Maybe it's now time to move beyond the WRC, in terms of marketing??
Bob the turbo 2.2l 22b model of the WRX was VERY VERY limited and VERY VERY Expensive (somewhere around $50K ish) I agree that they can throw in the 2.5T in the WRX and still sell like hotcakes, at least here in america. I'd venture to say that most WRX buyers here didn't buy it for the rally authenticity.
While Subaru isn't doing well on the WRC, they're having an excellent SCCA Pro Rally year (U.S.).
I say that we're way off for a 5EAT. First - it has to come out in Japan. Second - That means an additional 5-6 years to come to the U.S. :-)Hopefully, I'm wrong.
Bob: 50/50, 95/5, sounds more like the torque distribution figures for an AWD system!
I'll take guesses at your questions. I'm thinking it will be based on the Phase III since most likely it'll come from Japan, at least at first. Probably DOHC for the turbo, and yes with AVCS. Belt or chain? Either way, but if they want to swith to chains, doing so with the Phase III intro would make sense.
Why keep the H6? Prestige. Some customers ask "does it have a six?" and just have to hear "yes". The H6 is butter smooth, and I doubt the 2.5T would be nearly as smooth or quiet. Bring it to 230-240hp and keep it on the luxurious models.
I like your formula for output figures, let's hope Subaru is listening. The Legacy GT, IMO, just has to beat the Altima and Accord's 240hp, because those are mainstream sedans, without sporting pretensions.
The Forester could match the current class leader (XTerra S/C) with 215hp, and being much lighter it would eat up the class.
Yep I have to say that having seen the SVX idling next to a WRX recently both stock, the SVX's 230hp H6 is far smoother than the H4 in the WRX will ever be. heck you barely know the car is running, whereas on the WRX you can hear it tapping away under the hood.
If they want a "refined" car they'll have to keep the H6
<< The Forester could match the current class leader (XTerra S/C) with 215hp, and being much lighter it would eat up the class. >>
My thinking is that the Forester/Baja-tuned 2.5t would be very competitive with most 4.L 6-cylinder SUVs, in terms of horsepower and torque. The new '03 4.0L 4Runner would have more horsepower, but other than that, and the the 4.2L I-6 GM engine, it would give most of the others a run for their money.
Even though those vehicles are not in the Subie class, I'd still like to benchmark the 2.5t against those engines, than those used in the mini-SUV class, if for no other reason than braggin' rights.
Also be sure to compare the reve bands as well, a 2.5T is going to be way down on torque compared to a 4.0l engine and not nearly as wide a band either.
I just read that Volvo will have a new 2.5 turbo, rated at 300 horsepower this year in the S60. This is the first 5-cylinder 2.5 turbo for them. Previous 5-cylinder turbos were all 2.3L.
So a 215 horsepower 2.5t in the Forester should have excellent low-rpm power.
I'm of the school that you can only bump up the HP and Torque figures so much on a small displacement engine w/o hurting other areas such as reliability, ease of repair, bandwidth, etc. Something has to give somewhere, not sure where though.
I just don't see a WRX having > 2.0L turbo being a problem in any way shape or form. No one is going to complain that they have more engine than the WRC cars use.
I can legitimately see buyers being concerned about major features *missing* from the production car that are in the WRC car, for example if AWD were to disappear (yeah right!) or turbocharging altogether, that would loose many customers.
Bob: what's the new 4Runner getting? The current engine is pretty wimpy nowadays.
I want the Forester to be the quickest and best handling small SUV, no excuses. Actually, make that substantially quicker. I don't think any sport-cute had broken the 8s barrier to 60mph, I'd like to see the Forester break the 7s barrier!
And give it the brakes and suspension to keep up.
Volvo uses a 2.4l N/A or LPT and a 2.3l regular turbo, I think.
A few posts back I suggested that a 2.5t might become more desirable than the 2.0t, found in the WRX. I think it will come down to the following:
• For many, myself included, if the 2.5t (in the Forester & Baja) offers power that is in the ballpark with the WRX (wagon), and it's priced within earshot of the WRX, it could be a tough choice.
• 2.0 WRX vs. 2.5t Legacy GT. I don't see a problem here, so much, as I think the Legacy turbo will be much more expensive than the WRX, thus attracting a different crowd.
• 2.5t Legacy GT vs. 2.0 WRX-STi. Could be a problem, if the STi were offered in decent quantities, which I don't see happening. I think they'll be priced fairly close.
• What Subaru needs to concentrate on is bring *new* customers into the Subaru family. They don't want to compete against other Subie models, with existing customers.
an all-new 4.0L V6, and the optional 4.7L V8. The V6 will have 5 more horsepower than the V8(!), but less torque. The old 3.4L V6 is a good engine. It's truck-tuned, but has been put in relatively heavy vehicles.
To date, all current Volvo turbos (V60/V70) have been 2.3L. The non-turbos have been 2.4L, and all these are 5-cylinders.
I think a turbo GT would appeal to a different, more mature crowd. Lots of folks love the performance of the WRX but don't want a small car, or the boy-racer image.
Come to think of it, for the Legacy GT it might be wise to put the intercooler up front and avoid the hood scoop, so that it can appeal to the mature, stealthy owners.
Lots of folks hate the hood scoops. I'm OK with them if they are functional.
Bob: nope, the XC gets a 2.4l light-pressure turbo. Only the full blown turbos are 2.3l. Maybe they made the cylinder walls a little thicker to take the stress?
Comments
Head to Flemington and ask for Alex. Tell him bluesubie sent you.
-Dennis
-mike
LOL, sounds like my wife!
Well, paid a visit to Fitzgerald yesterday, hoping to find a Baja. Nope, water pump recall was being done right then, and it was pre-sold. The salesman said it was a great attention getter for them, no surprise.
So we had a nice chat. It was the same guy that sold us the Legacy, very nice, absolutely zero pressure. I expressed interest in the Shiftronic, and he had them pull one up for us to drive.
I dunno, I liked it. The shifts come much quicker than, say, Volvo's. About the same as Mercedes'. At normal speeds, it only lags about 200 rpm. At full throttle, it can take a little longer, but still less than 1000 rpm. Plus you'd get used to it.
I liked that it was up and down, not side-to-side. Down to first, up for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. Seemed intuitive. Ideally I'd have it on the left side of the shift pattern, but it's on the right (JDM influence).
This was a wagon, and the engine pulled it well. The Phase II mates well to an automatic, IMO. It's not fast, though more than adequate.
The suspension is stiffer than our L, no surprise. Mostly I think it's the tires, though. Ride was less tolerant, but I'm sure that pays off in handling (we weren't driving hard enough to try it out).
Love Subaru steering, haven't disliked any Subie I've ever driven. Leather covered wheel and shift knob are nice.
Heated seats felt nice on my back. The front moonroof seems small now that I'm used to ours. Lit key ring works and looks nifty. It has a different in-dash 6CD, but no tape. So I liked ours better, from a WRX.
So overall I like it, but the price still makes me run to an L/SE. I looked at those, they even get fog lights, body colored mirrors, even the side skirts are painted. A WRX doesn't have that!
But - I like shiftronic. I think it would be the perfect thing for my wife, who wants control but needs less distraction while the kids are this young.
So c'mon, Subaru, drop the standard automatic and put shiftronic on every Subaru, even if you have to charge $300 more for it.
-juice
Mercedes and Subaru have quicker response.
All of them shift smoothly.
But Mercedes' best tranny is the buttery 6 speed in the SLK320! Man, that thing is schweet!
I'd sure like to sample Subaru's 6 speed.
-juice
Test drive in Brooklyn? Can't do much there except circle a few blocks with an array of double parkers, stop signs, and lights or getting stuck in traffic. ;-)
I'll prolly check with Mark @ SI
-Dave
-mike
Ah, now I see what you meant.
In my case, I'm looking for a new vehicle in 2003-2004 for more selfish reasons. The Forester has served me very well, but I want something a little more zippier. I figured I'd get my "fun" car in before we make the inevitable switch to a larger family vehicle in the future.
Ken
http://ultimategto.com/scripts/showcar.cgi?type=show&pic=/1968/68h_00204_3
Ironic in that mom's Mustang had a manual. Wish that car could've stayed in the family.
Ed
I wanna WRX wagon with Vishnu stage 0 and 17" rims and I want it NOW! If only I could even remotely justify trading off the GT.
;-))
-Loosh
Soooo tempting....
..Mike (ducks for cover)
* Loosh lives in Bawl'mer (Baltimore), I near Washington, DC, a mere 18 minutes away via the as yet funded maglev train.
..Mike
Come out Seattle way and you can drive mine anytime you like!
Stephen :-)
You can swing out Seattle way and drive mine anytime you choose!
Stephen :-)
-mike
Stephen
-mike
BTW we're at J Patrick's both Fri and Sat......
..Mike
* She Who Must Be Obeyed
..Mike
..Mike
..Mike
..Mike
The ones for my Forester's steelies were also chromed since they are visible, but cars with wheel covers usually get gold ones (like my wife's car).
I've dealt with lugs a lot, as you can see!
-juice
Besides all the earlier rumors, Mike (Smith) just found an Aussie link mentioning a 2.5 turbo Forester is coming next year, for sure. In addition he heard it (2.5t, not 2.0t) from a sales person's mouth. I did too, and from another dealer. So the evidence is mounting...
This raises some interesting questions:
• Is this new 2.5 turbo part of the (again, rumored) upcoming Phase III engine program?
• Will it be SOHC or DOHC?
• Will it include AVAC?
• Will it have a timing belt or a timing chain (like the H-6)? I'm hoping for a timing chain. I know some here will disagree with me on this.
• Will it be available in both automatic and 5/6-speed? There is a rumor stating only automatics will be offered. I really hope that is wrong.
• Will the rumored 5-spead automatic debut with this engine, or will it debut with the redesigned '05 Legacy?
• I'm assuming it will be a low-boost turbo(?), so as to attract a wider audience than the high-boost WRX engine. In addition, a low-boost turbo will be better suited for the Forester, and hopefully the Baja too.
• If it is a low-boost turbo, how will it integrate with the H-6, in terms of the (Subaru) marketplace? Will it have better power characteristics than the H-6? If so, why offer an H-6, unless that engine also gets some tweaks?
• Will the Baja also get this engine as an option, or the H-6?
• Will the Legacy GT get a (still) higher performance version?
• Will this 2.5 turbo be more attractive to customers than the 2.0 turbo being used in the WRX—and hurt WRX sales? Or, with the US-spec WRX and STi also get the 2.5 turbo, but in a higher state of tune?
Questions, questions, in search of answers, answers...
Bob
On the other hand, a 2.5 T or even supercharged 2.5 as an alternative to a H6 for more power may be due to CAFE mileage requirements, a 2.5 T will probably have better mileage than an H6. Either that or they have to bring back the 2.2 on base Imprezzas and Foresters etc etc or start paying fines to the govt! or sell some fuel cell vehicle or a new econobox or something!
Jim
I disagree with your "never 2.5L turbo" logic.
Various Touring Car classes in Europe and Asia also have an annoying 2.0L displacement limit-- naturally aspirated. The Honda Accord's top-level engine is a 3.0L V6, yet it runs a destroked 2.2L I4 and presumably Honda still feels there is a marketing / racing connection. Same for the Impreza-- there are a 2.0L naturally aspirated touring cars, even though there's never been anything remotely close to naturally aspirated performance development in production Subarus.
So anyway, I see no logical reason why a 2.5L turbo can't exist in production cars with a 2.0L turbo in WRC and both because of necessity.
-Colin
Besides, ultimately it's all about selling vehicles. If Subaru thinks they can sell more 2.5 WRX turbos, than 2.0 WRX turbos, you can bet they'll offer a 2.5 turbo.
Bob
165 hp @ 5600 rpm
166 pounds of torque at 4000 rpm
The current 2.0L US-spec WRX has:
227 hp @ 6000 rpm
217 pounds of torque at 4000 rpm
(comes on boost around 3000 rpm)
The current 3.0L H-6 has:
212 hp @ 6000 rpm
210 pounds of torque at 4400 rpm.
I would like to see the rumored 2.5L turbo have:
For Forester* and Baja* applications:
215 hp @ ~ 4000 rpm
240 pounds of torque @ ~ 2700 rpm
(comes on boost around ~ 1800 rpm)
For Legacy GT applications:
250 hp @ ~ 4000 rpm
230 pounds of torque @ ~ 4000 rpm
(comes on boost around ~ 2500 rpm)
* I think the power characteristics of a low-boost turbo are more desirable for an "SUV/truck," than those of the current H-6, in that it will make more power down low, where it's needed.
Bob
While they could certainly change the rules I would venture to say that is far less likely than a scenario where Subaru wants a 2.5 in an Imprezza of some sort, but it won't be the WRX. An upgraded RS or whatever you want to call it but the whole marketing point of the WRX is "son of WRC" and now you go and change one of the main parameters!
The Honda analogy does not hold as Honda only touts that its racing engine tech has made it to production cars. Not that they are selling you a street legal, low cost available to the general public pseudoWRC.
Whatever they do with the Impreza, I can't wait to see a 2.5T in a GT! I don't even think it will need as high a max output as 250, even a 200hp but with much better torque characteristics will be good enough. Plus fuel economy will be better. Changing some models to truck status doesn't help SOA that much as they still have no high mileage econobox.
My main point for mentioning a 2.5 WRX is, when the 2.5 turbo debuts here, I could easily see interest in the (2.0) WRX dropping off. So, in order to counter that, offer a 2.5 WRX...
Also, Subaru has had zero success in the WRC this year. In fact, it's probably Subaru's worst WRC showing to date. For that reason alone, Subaru may now be less willing to promote the WRC aspect too heavily. Maybe it's now time to move beyond the WRC, in terms of marketing??
Bob
-mike
I say that we're way off for a 5EAT. First - it has to come out in Japan. Second - That means an additional 5-6 years to come to the U.S. :-)Hopefully, I'm wrong.
-Dennis
-Dave
Bob
I'll take guesses at your questions. I'm thinking it will be based on the Phase III since most likely it'll come from Japan, at least at first. Probably DOHC for the turbo, and yes with AVCS. Belt or chain? Either way, but if they want to swith to chains, doing so with the Phase III intro would make sense.
Why keep the H6? Prestige. Some customers ask "does it have a six?" and just have to hear "yes". The H6 is butter smooth, and I doubt the 2.5T would be nearly as smooth or quiet. Bring it to 230-240hp and keep it on the luxurious models.
I like your formula for output figures, let's hope Subaru is listening. The Legacy GT, IMO, just has to beat the Altima and Accord's 240hp, because those are mainstream sedans, without sporting pretensions.
The Forester could match the current class leader (XTerra S/C) with 215hp, and being much lighter it would eat up the class.
-juice
If they want a "refined" car they'll have to keep the H6
-mike
My thinking is that the Forester/Baja-tuned 2.5t would be very competitive with most 4.L 6-cylinder SUVs, in terms of horsepower and torque. The new '03 4.0L 4Runner would have more horsepower, but other than that, and the the 4.2L I-6 GM engine, it would give most of the others a run for their money.
Bob
-mike
Even though those vehicles are not in the Subie class, I'd still like to benchmark the 2.5t against those engines, than those used in the mini-SUV class, if for no other reason than braggin' rights.
Bob
-mike
Bob
So a 215 horsepower 2.5t in the Forester should have excellent low-rpm power.
Bob
-mike
I just don't see a WRX having > 2.0L turbo being a problem in any way shape or form. No one is going to complain that they have more engine than the WRC cars use.
I can legitimately see buyers being concerned about major features *missing* from the production car that are in the WRC car, for example if AWD were to disappear (yeah right!) or turbocharging altogether, that would loose many customers.
-Colin
I want the Forester to be the quickest and best handling small SUV, no excuses. Actually, make that substantially quicker. I don't think any sport-cute had broken the 8s barrier to 60mph, I'd like to see the Forester break the 7s barrier!
And give it the brakes and suspension to keep up.
Volvo uses a 2.4l N/A or LPT and a 2.3l regular turbo, I think.
-juice
• For many, myself included, if the 2.5t (in the Forester & Baja) offers power that is in the ballpark with the WRX (wagon), and it's priced within earshot of the WRX, it could be a tough choice.
• 2.0 WRX vs. 2.5t Legacy GT. I don't see a problem here, so much, as I think the Legacy turbo will be much more expensive than the WRX, thus attracting a different crowd.
• 2.5t Legacy GT vs. 2.0 WRX-STi. Could be a problem, if the STi were offered in decent quantities, which I don't see happening. I think they'll be priced fairly close.
• What Subaru needs to concentrate on is bring *new* customers into the Subaru family. They don't want to compete against other Subie models, with existing customers.
Bob
To date, all current Volvo turbos (V60/V70) have been 2.3L. The non-turbos have been 2.4L, and all these are 5-cylinders.
Bob
Come to think of it, for the Legacy GT it might be wise to put the intercooler up front and avoid the hood scoop, so that it can appeal to the mature, stealthy owners.
Lots of folks hate the hood scoops. I'm OK with them if they are functional.
-juice
-juice