talked to a SOA Tech. today(he was teaching some local subaur tech. about some new stuff, in my Brake Class) well i had a chance to talk to him today...

some things he told me about the STi and WRX that are comming out in 2006.

WRX, will get the 2.5 liter, he said that is so that the car is more drivable, and to get the low end power that the 2.0 lacks, im not sure if the boost is going to stay the same or not, but if the boost stays the same....the HP ratings will be around 250.

STi, well as some of you know the new H6 engine has AVVT(i belive that is what its called), well the H6 has a better system in it then the STi. The STi's valve timing only effects the Degree of the cam(10 degrees). but on the H6 it also affects the Lift of the cam as well. He said that it looks like the 2006 STi might be getting the Cam lift put in as well...i also asked him about putting the valve timing on the Exaust cam, and he said that due to the Emitions Standards ill most likely never happend.

these is what the SOA Master Tech. told me...
hope that some of this stuff is new, i never heard of it, so i thought ide post it up.


kirill

Excellent. Then the modders can leave the Legacy GT alone and go back to buying WRXes. :lol:

Kevin

I've long hoped that a 2.5 WRX would occur!

Bob

so when will the 2006 go on sale? :)

"Coming out in 2006" means, I believe, it would be a 2007 model--typically Subaru would release a 2007 model late spring or early summer of 2006.

the reliablity of the 2.5 still has not been proven...I'll still take the JDM 2.0 over the USDM (gotta be bigger) 2.5

the reliablity of the 2.5 still has not been proven...I'll still take the JDM 2.0 over the USDM (gotta be bigger) 2.5

:huh:

Have fun with antiquated technology for no good reason.

the reliablity of the 2.5 still has not been proven...I'll still take the JDM 2.0 over the USDM (gotta be bigger) 2.5


No, it has only been proven to be more reliable than the US 2.0, and withstand horsepower and torque numbers well over 400.

hmm.. 2006 WRX might be in my future then.. to compliment the 2005 GT Ltd :)

i REALLY hope it has the 6 speed.. lol

the reliablity of the 2.5 still has not been proven...I'll still take the JDM 2.0 over the USDM (gotta be bigger) 2.5Well, I have to agree...sort of. What automatically poped into my head was rally. Not quite sure, but doesnt group N. require a 2.0?
For some odd reason, Id prefer a higher reving 2.0 than a 2.5. :confused:

While engine matters are big, I think the tranny is much more important. With 250hp it just increases the risk of blowing the tranny. While 6speed would be desirable, I think SOA will save the 6speed for the STi.

-Mark
MAPmotors.com

"Coming out in 2006" means, I believe, it would be a 2007 model--typically Subaru would release a 2007 model late spring or early summer of 2006.
no...im sure its for the next WRX, so MY2006, not 2007....

i would also have to take the JDM 2.0 over our 2.5....the JDM has valve timing on both the exasut side and intake side, unlike our STi that only has it on the Intake side...

Well, I have to agree...sort of. What automatically poped into my head was rally. Not quite sure, but doesnt group N. require a 2.0?
For some odd reason, Id prefer a higher reving 2.0 than a 2.5. :confused:

While engine matters are big, I think the tranny is much more important. With 250hp it just increases the risk of blowing the tranny. While 6speed would be desirable, I think SOA will save the 6speed for the STi.

AFAIK, both Group N and the FIA WRC limit displacement to 2.0. Rumor has it that the FIA will possibly ban turbo charging in the future. Hopefully if that happens, engine displacement will be allowed to go up. I would be sorry to see the 2.0 go the way of the dodo. It was what tied the WRX to its rally roots. It is just we Americans love torque too much, I guess.

As for the 6 speed, I can't see where we can't get a basic 6 speed and save the DCCD'd 6 speed for the STi (to keep it special).

As for the 6 speed, I can't see where we can't get a basic 6 speed and save the DCCD'd 6 speed for the STi (to keep it special).

If the 5-speed can take the torque (which it can), I'd rather have a 5-speed and save about 100lbs.

Plus, the 6th gear isn't made for fuel economy, nor do the engines have such narrow powerbands that tight gears are necessary...

if the 2.5 that the 07 wrx uses is the same block as our 04-05 sti block that means theres gonna be some h6 swaps in the future.

geez its 4 hrs late but

i call BS on all of those things

the only thing close is the avcs (for the new 3.0R) which is avcs on both intake and exaust cams

geez its 4 hrs late but

i call BS on all of those things

the only thing close is the avcs (for the new 3.0R) which is avcs on both intake and exaust cams

yeah ill believe this when i see it

Did the insider say anything about a STi wagon (Impreza or Legacy)?

Maybe Worm is back......

You mean the same worm that claimed that there was no way Subaru would ever put a 2.5 in the yet unreleased STi?

no...im sure its for the next WRX, so MY2006, not 2007....

i would also have to take the JDM 2.0 over our 2.5....the JDM has valve timing on both the exasut side and intake side, unlike our STi that only has it on the Intake side...

Nope...try again.

if the 2.5 that the 07 wrx uses is the same block as our 04-05 sti block that means theres gonna be some h6 swaps in the future.

What?

Did the insider say anything about a STi wagon (Impreza or Legacy)?
i didnt even think about it....i just got talking to him about technical stuff....
and i belive this guy, he saw increadably smart w/ the engines, and knew everything about every subaru engine. i saw him teach the tech. how to tear down the EJ20, EJ25 sohc, EZ30, all from memory.
seems to me like the guy was a SOA tech. to me, he even knew everything about the JDM engines and Australian...
if its not the 2006 WRX 2.5 ill be the 2007 almost for sure. he said that the EJ20 strugles way to mutch down bottom, and without having to put more boost or more high tech. stuff into the engine, the easyest way is to increase displacement...you know how the old saying goeas...

2nd that..... the H6 is GIANT compared to the ej series....its a good amount longer and wider, not to mention a bit heavyer to.

My take on this is they should just put the 2.5L block in the WRX. It's plenty reliable if you aren't pushing it to 350-400+ whp. 250hp at the crank is a long way away from that.

Just put the 5MT from the Legacy into it, done deal. It's a no-brainer if you ask me.

2nd that..... the H6 is GIANT compared to the ej series....its a good amount longer and wider, not to mention a bit heavyer to.

It's not that much bigger, you can fit it into a GC8 engine bay without much work. I don't know about the newer H6 but I don't see it's packaging being much larger than the older ones.

Still not an easy swap, the ECU is completely different.

If you can tear down 1 Subaru engine you can tear them all down, they are all identical and really not very complicated.

the h6 has an extra 2 pistons, and you know. so it has to be that mutch longer...the H6 and the EJ engines where right next to each other on engine stands, trust me its a good amount bigger...

but yeah the 2.5T w/ a 5sp would hall major @ss in a GD.

the h6 has an extra 2 pistons, and you know. so it has to be that mutch longer...the H6 and the EJ engines where right next to each other on engine stands, trust me its a good amount bigger...

but yeah the 2.5T w/ a 5sp would hall major @ss in a GD.Subaru says that its EZ30 engine (the one in the Outback) is only 0.8" longer than the EJ25 engine (see http://www.sae.org/automag/globalview_09-00/06.htm).

the 2.5 has to be reliable theyve been usin it since when?? what 96?? then since 2000 they've had it in all there models.. how can it NOT be reliable vs the 2.0?

the 2.5 has to be reliable theyve been usin it since when?? what 96?? then since 2000 they've had it in all there models.. how can it NOT be reliable vs the 2.0?

the 2.5 RS is totally different than the 2.5 STI motor

and i think many people would agree that 2.5RS motor is not all that bulletproof.

so what going to happen to the sti are they putting a h6 in it or what, guess I am not understanding, sorry can someone fill me in? thanks
I also whould like to see a 2.5 in the wrx with around 250 hp and 250 torque

I've pretty much expected that the next gen impreza will have the turbo'd 2.5L. In fact, I would be more suprised if it still had the 2.0L The 2.5L engine is going to be the workhorse of Subaru's lineup. Much like Nissan's 3.5L V6.

My main concern is (of course) the tranny. Not so much on the strength front but from the drivability front. I don't want to have to play chemist anymore to try to find an oil concoction that will allow proper synchro function but provide enough protection. I don't want to have to pause for almost a two seconds switching gears because the tranny "doesn't like to be rushed". I don't want to get a grind 30% of the time when I'm shifting into first full stopped at a light. I don't want to have to double clutch to get it back into first if I'm only going 5mph.

I don't need 6 speeds, but I want something that feels like it was designed in the last decade.

the h6 has an extra 2 pistons, and you know. so it has to be that mutch longer...the H6 and the EJ engines where right next to each other on engine stands, trust me its a good amount bigger...


SO are you saying that the Sti will be a 6 cylinder? Man I dont like that idea, it will hual major arse but I like the rally roots of the STi and it will probably get like 13-15 mpg :(

I think the WRX would be nice with a turbo 2.5L engine as well, for the extra torque and less turbo lag, but doesn't it need to have a 2.0L due to WRC homologation requirements? Please correct me if i'm wrong, I'm not sure if this is still the case.

If not, bring on that 2.5!

read my 1st post and youll see that the STi migh be getting....
the 2.5 in the WRX is almost a sure thing, the Diff. valve timing in the STi is not 100% but he said that subaru is leaning twords it.

and just by looking at the H6 and the EJ, you can tell that the H6 is bigger. the engine is just meaty compared to the EJ....
also the EJ25 that is in the 2.5rs is a SOHC, and isnt anything spetial. the closest thing that we ever saw to the NEW EJ257 was the 1998 EJ25 DOHC, and we all know how those where....

... doesn't it need to have a 2.0L due to WRC homologation requirements? Please correct me if i'm wrong, I'm not sure if this is still the case.Subaru has never relied on cars sold in North America to satisfy FIA homologation requirements.

http://www.fhi.co.jp/english/news/press/2004/04_09_01e.htm

Are any of the subaru cars sold in north america and canada homologated? The US version Evo MR and the RS "appear to satisfy" homologation specs.

the h6 has an extra 2 pistons, and you know. so it has to be that mutch longer...the H6 and the EJ engines where right next to each other on engine stands, trust me its a good amount bigger...The SVX's flat 6 is significantly larger than the EJ, but the new flat 6 is barely larger.. like 2" longer.

read my 1st post ... just by looking at the H6 and the EJ, you can tell that the H6 is bigger.Read MY first post. The H6 engine in the Outback is less than an inch longer than the US STi engine.

Does anyone else find it far-fetched to believe a Subaru service technician, even one certified as a Master Technician, would be privy to Fuji Heavy's future engine development plans?

']
Does anyone else find it far-fetched to believe a Subaru service technician, even one certified as a Master Technician, would be privy to Fuji Heavy's future engine development plans?
While it may be unlikely I don't think it is impossible. I know that the BMW service schools have access to new models long before the public sees them - mostly so they know how to work on them once they come out. So it seems possible that an instructor from subaru would have inside info.

i dont think the wrc will stop subaru from making 2.5 liter motors in our imprezas. it didnt stop them in the sti. where it will stop them is in the euro and japan models.

i dont think the wrc will stop subaru from making 2.5 liter motors in our imprezas. it didnt stop them in the sti. where it will stop them is in the euro and japan models.
As will taxes on higher displacement vehicles and higher gas prices.

The US EVO and STI aren't homologated for FIA GroupN. That being said, nobody in North America (except maybe Mexico) runs real FIA GroupN. You can run GrpN in the US with a USDM WRX or STI or whatever. You have to use the 2L engine though.

Anyways, I think the mechanic is just making guesstimates based on the direction Subaru is currently headed. Anyone can see that they are throwing the 2.5T in every single model line. You could stick the FXT setup in the WRX even and it would be better than the current 2L.

']Read MY first post. The H6 engine in the Outback is less than an inch longer than the US STi engine.

Does anyone else find it far-fetched to believe a Subaru service technician, even one certified as a Master Technician, would be privy to Fuji Heavy's future engine development plans?
seing as how the Opinions of the Tech. come back to subaru, im sure that what this guy has to say goes a long way...if he said that there is a problem w/ something, im sure that SOA would look deeply into something and then go over to Japan for further investigation....
how do you think that improvements are made on cars...what the SOA Tech, have to say im sure goes a long way....

but hey im just telling you guys what i heard from this guy...and to me it seems like he is the SOA Tech. teacher for the MT reagon, and considering that the Mountain region sell more subarus then any other part of the county combined....im sure he has a good idea of what he is saying....

hell the basic engine and tranny from the Legacy GT would be a no brainer.. lighten the WRX just a little iff possible.. bring back the agressive looks.. and they will have that killer combo that catipulted them into a "cult classic" in the 90s .. the original wRXs were always a hit because they were small.. agile.. fast and agressive.. the current WRX is along way from any of that..

hopefully this is a return to the WRXs of old :)

...and to me it seems like he is the SOA Tech. teacher for the MT reagon, and considering that the Mountain region sell more subarus then any other part of the county combined...Given that there is no Subaru "Mountain Region" and that no SOA region sells anything close to twice as many Subarus as the New England distributor, I now have a pretty good idea of how much weight I should assign to your "news."

yowch :lol:

']Given that there is no Subaru "Mountain Region" and that no SOA region sells anything close to twice as many Subarus as the New England distributor, I now have a pretty good idea of how much weight I should assign to your "news."
:lol: We've heard enough twin-turbo-H6-Legacy-coming-next-year rumors that I'll believe any "insider info" when I see it.

OK... The original post was a little but unclear to me, since this is really the first time I'm paying attention to the 2006 rumors.

Let me see if I get this straight:

WRX = 2.5 turbo 4
STi = ?.? ??? H6?

OK... The original post was a little but unclear to me, since this is really the first time I'm paying attention to the 2006 rumors.

Let me see if I get this straight:

WRX = 2.5 turbo 4
STi = ?.? ??? H6?
WRX yes, this guy told me sense the 2.0 is so laggy, they are going to put in a 2.5T, im not sure if its the same block as the XT/STi...
STi, will get the same AVC as the H6 has(new 2004-05). on the STi the AVC only advanses degrees and nothing else. But on the H6 is advanses degrees and also gives it more lift...now, Subaru is thinking to maby put that same system as the H6 has(advance the timing and also give it more lift). but he said that this is something that they might do, but he said that he was not sure...
however about the WRX having a 2.5 he said that he was pritty confident that it will happend...

Legacy Sti might get a H-6 but I highly doubt the Impreza would get it.

i think he is trying to say it'll get the AVC technology the H6 has.. NOT the H6 .. being that that tech has advantages over the AVCS the Sti gets in Japan.

Legacy Sti might get a H-6 but I highly doubt the Impreza would get it.

I second that, we hope anyways

thats exactly what im trying to say...sorry if i was confusing...

but yeah the STi might get the AVC technology the H6 has....

I think the WRX would be nice with a turbo 2.5L engine as well, for the extra torque and less turbo lag, but doesn't it need to have a 2.0L due to WRC homologation requirements?

No...

']Does anyone else find it far-fetched to believe a Subaru service technician, even one certified as a Master Technician, would be privy to Fuji Heavy's future engine development plans?

Yeah, but I didn't say anything.

He didn't say the guy was a service technician, he said he was a "Master Tech from SOA" meaning the guy was from Subaru corporate, probably one of the regional technical trainers.

talked to a SOA Tech. today ... i also asked him about putting the valve timing on the Exaust cam, and he said that due to the Emitions Standards ill most likely never happend.

these is what the SOA Master Tech. told me...This is nonsense. You can see from the table at http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.subaru.co.jp%2flegacy%2fb4% 2fechology%2findex.html that the Dual AVCS 2.0L engines emit exactly the same amount of CO, HC and NOx as the AVCS 2.0L engine. Expressed another way, adopting Dual AVCS doesn't increase exhaust emissions.

I've got to laugh at this thread. It's kind of amusing in a way.

Despite the current WRX being long in the tooth, I can't forsee them dropping the EJ255 in the WRX for MY06 as the major revision will be in MY07, holding to the major product revision timeframe. It would be nice, really nice to see something like the powertrain from the new GT's in the WRX, but I can't forsee that happening for MY06.

Theoretically, adding full, dual AVCS to both intake and exhaust just gives the engine the potential to be slightly more volumetrically efficient at more rpms than what the cam itself is designed for. As for adding AVLS (Active Valve Lift System), I'm sure it will make it to the turbo engines at some time.

I'd be more interested seeing it in an EJ25 N/A engine, a new RS on the line of the EJ20R used in the Legacy 2.0R in Japan. But that isn't likely to happen over here anytime soon.

As for adding AVLS (Active Valve Lift System), I'm sure it will make it to the turbo engines at some time.BTW, Subaru calls the system on the EZ30R simply "Variable Valve Lift" (always capitalized) and sometimes abbreviates it VVL.

Well, I know I had seen it called AVLS at one time or another, whether they decided to change the wording, that's very possible, but I had seen it called that or I wouldn't have called it that.

One such link:
http://www.subaru-global.com/topics/news/2004/0205_2.html

just to add another nail to the coffin

look at the gas mileage of a forester XT and compair it to a wrx
wrx = ULEV
fxt = not ULEV

sorry snow your master tech has an inflated self image soa/fuji hold future plans very close to their chest .. if you recall the 2.5 sti motor was a complete suprise to all but a handfull of people

Maybe your grammar is what's making people disbelieve you.

just to add another nail to the coffin

look at the gas mileage of a forester XT and compair it to a wrx
wrx = ULEV
fxt = not ULEV

So maybe they will put a 2.5 turbo in the WRX, but give it four cats and a real overdrive 5th gear? :p ;)

The 2.0 doesn't have enough power? So Subaru is all of the sudden going to give in to the "there's no replacement for displacement" idea while Mitsubishi is cranking out 2.0 Evos that run with the STi?

I don't think so. Unless Subaru really wants to jack up the WRXs price, it'll stick with a 2.0t.

What's the reasoning behind having a precat in the uppipe because what I have seen this hurts the low end power and decreases the gas milage

Cold-start emissions. It heats up before the post-turbo ones do.






We now return you to endless speculation and bickering.

I don't think so. Unless Subaru really wants to jack up the WRXs price, it'll stick with a 2.0t.


Care to explain why the 2.5t is any more expensive than the 2.0t?

Economies of scale come into play. They are going to be cranking out those engines for Legacies, Foresters, and Outbacks. It saves money in the long run to simplify your production methods.

Most of the bad gas milage associated with that engine is due to the 4.44 final drive ratio. If they kept the gearing the same as it is currently with the WRX, it would probably get similar gas milage to the current engine.

Cold-start emissions. It heats up before the post-turbo ones do.






We now return you to endless speculation and bickering.
One possible solution: drop the turbo in the engine bay to reduce exhaust piping length. Sure, intake piping may get a little longer, but the metal exhaust piping would potentially be reduced and heat would stay farther away from the firewall with the lower DP and have less bend room required as well as less up-pipe distance needed maybe negating the need for a cat in front. There is possibilities out there.

Bull, I agree, economies of scale. That and reduces parts needed to be stocked in the long run, etc, etc, etc... Change the final drive to the 3.9 or the 4.111 in the FXT and fuel economy would change at least some. It's amazing at the difference in fuel economy in my GT at 73 versus 80 and it's only a few hundred rpm difference along with wind resistance. I lose about 3-4mpg right off the bat. I've thought about throwing the 3.900 ring and pinion gears in for better cruising and top end as the GT is really a touring car. I definitely love the torque with the 2.5 over the 2L though. ;)

Right on coati, back to endless speculation and bickering. :p

I'm betting that the high final drive ratio is partially as a 'fix' for tranny strength. The 2.5L produces more torque lower and a high final drive ratio reduces shock loads on the transmission.

I would be wary about dropping down to 3.9 unless you tend to baby the transmission.

That's true Bull.

I would assume they would also use the beefed up Legacy GT tranny, and not the existing WRX gearbox.

Bob

I would assume they would also use the beefed up Legacy GT tranny, and not the existing WRX gearbox.

Bob

The Legacy GT still uses a higher final drive ratio (4.11) and it's hard to say if they beefed it up enough to withstand constant use with a 3.90 final drive ratio.

The Legacy GT still uses a higher final drive ratio (4.11) and it's hard to say if they beefed it up enough to withstand constant use with a 3.90 final drive ratio.

Why couldn't they use the same 4.11 final drive, as does the Legacy?

Bob

Why couldn't they use the same 4.11 final drive, as does the Legacy?

Bob

The idea was to get the better responding engine and not lose 4mpg.

Economies of scale come into play. They are going to be cranking out those engines for Legacies, Foresters, and Outbacks. It saves money in the long run to simplify your production methods.


Yes, but Subaru is and will be using the 2.0t on most of JDM and EDM Impreza and Legacy anyway. It's not like they can cut the production of 2.0 if they pull it out of WRX. I think economy of scale works at least in both ways.

Didn't Subaru actually pulled EJ207 out from WRX so that it couldn't touch STi? Now of course in these days of competition they have to be more concerned about other cars than the internal competition. But the fact is, once they put 2.5 into WRX they will have to either raise the price of WRX or lower that of STi. I really don't think people will pay that extra 10k if regular WRX can have that much modding potential.

I would personally prefer a better 2.0 (like EJ207) on a lighter chassis. It will be fun enough for me, and still true to the rally heritage.

But the fact is, once they put 2.5 into WRX they will have to either raise the price of WRX or lower that of STi. I really don't think people will pay that extra 10k if regular WRX can have that much modding potential.
.


Most of the market does not buy a car based on modding potential, especially when you are talking about the top end modding potential that exists between the EJ205 and EJ257. Modding potential does not enter into pricing.

There's much more to get for that 10k with the STi than the top end modding potential of the engine.

Even if they keep producing the 2.0t for the JDM market, it would still simplify production to go to the EJ255 for the US market as the US WRX already has an engine in a different state of tune so they would still be eliminating one specialized powerplant from their lineup.

Modding potential does not enter into pricing.

There's much more to get for that 10k with the STi than the top end modding potential of the engine.

the US WRX already has an engine in a different state of tune so they would still be eliminating one specialized powerplant from their lineup.

I agree that modding potential is not a major factor of pricing, although it does seem to be a factor for people choosing Evo over STi.

My point is that if regular WRX has 2.5, it and the STi will not have enough product separation to justify 10k difference. Yes enthusiasts may recognize the important differences in drivetrain and chassis, but then now we ARE talking about people that consider modding potential as a serious factor. They might as well take a regular WRX, add a bigger turbo, and mod it from there. For average buyers, the difference won't be enough for 10k on a 23k car IMO.
Now if that makes STi cheaper, then I'm all for it. I'm just worried that it would probably be the other way around.

You are right about EJ205 already being different from JDM engine. I didn't think of that. However if they were to put 2.5 on WRX shouldn't it be also in a different state of tune than legacy or STi engine?

The thing is though, we are talking about some SERIOUS modding for the difference between the EJ205 and the EJ255(7) to matter from a power making standpoint. I'm not sure the people that mod their car to such an extent are numerous enough to make enough impact on sales that it matters.

I mean, look at it this way.

Look at what it would take to get 300hp out of a WRX and 300hp out of a Legacy GT. Total cost is still going to be about the same as most of the same items need to be replaced. It's when you get past that into the 350hp and 400hp range when the block is going to make a bigger difference. I think the new sales that subaru would capture with more streetable power in the WRX would probably more than offset the STi sales lost to the WRX.

Nissan doesn't seem to be having any trouble achieving product differentiation between all their vehicles that use the VQ35DE in different states of tune.

Also, I don't know if you've checked new WRX prices lately, but they aren't going for a simple 23k anymore. MRSP is pushing 25k for the sedan. You are only talking about a 7k difference between the WRX and STi. The transmission, DCCD, suspension, wheels, brakes, and seats would cost you a bit more than 7k to put on a WRX.

Yes, I think it would probably be in a slightly different state of tune than the Legacy GT, but probably nothing more than ECU programming. That doesn't really cost any more to implement.

if they put the 2.5 in the wrx, they would most definately NOT put the forged rods, hyperneumatic pistons, or any of the strong internals in that engine. that would be my guess anyways. also consider that the head will be different as well.. along with the rest of the drivetrain (driveshafts, diffs, etc)

I think the new sales that subaru would capture with more streetable power in the WRX would probably more than offset the STi sales lost to the WRX.

MRSP is pushing 25k for the sedan. You are only talking about a 7k difference between the WRX and STi. The transmission, DCCD, suspension, wheels, brakes, and seats would cost you a bit more than 7k to put on a WRX.



Ok, I see your point. As much as I would like to have my rex in 2.0, the competition (such as SRT-4) in this contry is definetely pushing it for bigger displacement while WRC is still far from becoming popular. Maybe 2.5 is the only way to go here, and that may more than offset some loss in STi sales as you said.

Now that's assuming that they can keep the price at current level. But I too noticed that the price is going up every year. I just hope all that premium brand thing doesn't drive Subaru to price themselves out of the market.

i'm more worried about making the gap between wrx and sti a legitimate thing.

they could put the 2.5's in the gd's now if the wanted to, whne you are talking about thousands of cars to build, mid generation chnages are always made to get the rest of the chassi's out the door.

change some mounting hardware and subaru has new car to sell.

if they put the 2.5 in the wrx, they would most definately NOT put the forged rods, hyperneumatic pistons, or any of the strong internals in that engine. that would be my guess anyways. also consider that the head will be different as well.. along with the rest of the drivetrain (driveshafts, diffs, etc)
Why would you think that? The Legacy GT, Outback XT, Forester XT, Baja Turbo, and STi all share the same shortblock. Why not the WRX?

Oh, and by the way, it's "hypereutectic".

one would think that leans more towards cost-effectiveness

I am glad the WRX gets the 2.5, and it looks like the STi might get more power if that tech is right.

It would be nice, though, to be able to opt for the EJ20 in the STi. Bring us the JDM motor with emissions compliance, which the rallyists will throw out the window anyway, and Subaru will maintain its appeal in SCCA ProRally, group N, etc.

It only makes sence for them to all use the same short block from a buisness point of view. I.E. Lower tooling cost because there is only one part to make. Meaning That they will be able to keep car prices down to remain competitive in sales and that the replacment parts will be cheaper as well saving cost's in warranty work. And for anyone that thinks they would be loosing to many STi sales look at the JDM market WRX and the fact that it only has around 20hp addvertised diferance in power output compaired to the USDM 70hp gap. The STi seems to be selling pretty good over there. Another note to consider about the JDM EJ207 is the octain they get in Japan vs. here. This is the reson that Subaru chose to go with the 2.5. More displacement gives about the same power as the JDM STi at a lower boost psi. Anyone that has had bad gas in a stock USDM STi can tell you that even in it's state of tune it is prone to knock. We are mostly limited by fuel quality and EPA.

The main reason to do it would be a drivability improvement, more cc==less lag.

Same tech told me that Spec C STi gets a lightweight 5.0 v8 for 2006..

and more torque down low!!!

The main reason to do it would be a drivability improvement, more cc==less lag.

hmm WRX gets 2.5L

Legacy gets 3.0R and STi.

All I want is a WR-limited 2.5i Legacy Sedan 5 EAT SS without a sunroof.

i read on one thread that the fia might (very big rumor i need to stress) put a ban on turbos in the wrc. i guess that would probably be one of the biggest factors in a 6 cylinder being put into the wrx seeing how subaru has put so much into their rally heritage. along with their development of that ez30 motor that happens to be only 20mm longer than the current fours if there was a ban on turbocharging i think it would be logical for them to move up to 6 cylinders. dont get me wrong i love my flat four, but i think i could love the ez30 just as much

also another thread on nasioc talks about the subaru saab partnership and how that might ultimately lead to a 6 cylinder being put into a next gen 9-2x

I've pretty much expected that the next gen impreza will have the turbo'd 2.5L. In fact, I would be more suprised if it still had the 2.0L The 2.5L engine is going to be the workhorse of Subaru's lineup. Much like Nissan's 3.5L V6.

My main concern is (of course) the tranny. Not so much on the strength front but from the drivability front. I don't want to have to play chemist anymore to try to find an oil concoction that will allow proper synchro function but provide enough protection. I don't want to have to pause for almost a two seconds switching gears because the tranny "doesn't like to be rushed". I don't want to get a grind 30% of the time when I'm shifting into first full stopped at a light. I don't want to have to double clutch to get it back into first if I'm only going 5mph.

I don't need 6 speeds, but I want something that feels like it was designed in the last decade.

The Legacy GT 5MT is very smooth and is at least 200x better than the WRX/RS transmissions. Go test drive one. You will enjoy it.

~~Quentin

make my rs faster and i will be happier

kekeke

I think there is a lot of things that could/should be done in the powertrain areas of many of the models, there is that "if it isn't broken, don't fix it" way of approaching things and from what we can currently see, it looks like it's kind of ruling over things. That doesn't mean some really great things could be going on behind closed doors though. Just trying to keep an open mind.

I hope there are some nice surprises up Subaru's sleeve. I would personally like to see direct-injection added to the 2.5l turbo. This would potentially outperform the H6 in HP and torque at all RPMs. No real evidence this is in the works, but it would be nice.

with turbo...

Legacy Sti might get a H-6

http://www.autocarmagazine.com/news_article.asp?na_id=212253
this article says that in the next gen impreza the engine is moved back 50mm for improved weight distribution and handling... could that extra 50mm also be used to shoe-horn in that 20mm longer ez30??

i read on one thread that the fia might (very big rumor i need to stress) put a ban on turbos in the wrc. i guess that would probably be one of the biggest factors in a 6 cylinder being put into the wrx seeing how subaru has put so much into their rally heritage. along with their development of that ez30 motor that happens to be only 20mm longer than the current fours if there was a ban on turbocharging i think it would be logical for them to move up to 6 cylinders. dont get me wrong i love my flat four, but i think i could love the ez30 just as much

Your rumor is not a rumor. They are considering banning turbos, active diffs, and complicated transmissions to lower costs. They also want to switch to transverse engines. :huh:

Anyway, the teams are trying to curb that idea, they're looking at other cost cutting mesures.

I dont think this will ever happen because that whould take subaru out of the game, and if it does happen it will be a very big mistake on subarus part I think :huh:

I don't think they'd require transverse engines as it would pull out one the the big anchors of the series. I think I heard something like making the engines last 2-3 races and taking active diffs out could slash costs by 30-50% I think, don't remember exact figures, but it was significant. They could essentially run upgraded Group N cars, be fairly competitive still, and really slash costs.

sneekyjesus, the only problem with that article is a few inconsistencies like the new generation Impreza pic, which is a B11S, it's MUCH larger than any Impreza to date. Though the engine thing may be doable if they significantly alter the transmission and front diff location.

coolblue, I'd like to see direct injection become standard on all models within the next 2-3 years, but I'm not quite sure that would happen. It would allow for slightly higher compression while running the same fuel grades and allowing for slightly more agressive tuning ability additional to being more precise. There really isn't drawbacks to it.

also another thread on nasioc talks about the subaru saab partnership and how that might ultimately lead to a 6 cylinder being put into a next gen 9-2x


The next gen 9-2x will share its platform with the Opel Astra, so it will have a transverse I4, and potential for a transverse v6.

i read on one thread that the fia might (very big rumor i need to stress) put a ban on turbos in the wrc. i guess that would probably be one of the biggest factors in a 6 cylinder being put into the wrx seeing how subaru has put so much into their rally heritage. along with their development of that ez30 motor that happens to be only 20mm longer than the current fours if there was a ban on turbocharging i think it would be logical for them to move up to 6 cylinders. dont get me wrong i love my flat four, but i think i could love the ez30 just as much


British "CAR" magazine is indicating the same thing may happen, but it won't happen anytime soon, at least not for a few years.

I don't think they'd require transverse engines as it would pull out one the the big anchors of the series. I think I heard something like making the engines last 2-3 races and taking active diffs out could slash costs by 30-50% I think, don't remember exact figures, but it was significant. They could essentially run upgraded Group N cars, be fairly competitive still, and really slash costs.

sneekyjesus, the only problem with that article is a few inconsistencies like the new generation Impreza pic, which is a B11S, it's MUCH larger than any Impreza to date. Though the engine thing may be doable if they significantly alter the transmission and front diff location.

coolblue, I'd like to see direct injection become standard on all models within the next 2-3 years, but I'm not quite sure that would happen. It would allow for slightly higher compression while running the same fuel grades and allowing for slightly more agressive tuning ability additional to being more precise. There really isn't drawbacks to it.

Direct injection NEEDS to happen. The next Evo will have MIVEC, so AVCS is not longer unique to subaru, and if Mitsu gets over 300hp out of their 4G63, then that means that Subaru loses some of the advantage of greater displacement, and surely will no longer be able to have the HP bragging rights.

It's just not about power, it's mainly about efficiency, and through that power can also be had. Fuel injection can be controlled with much greater precision when direct injection in the cylinder is used versus port injection currently used. You aren't combusting the fuel in the compression cycle thus allowing higher compression to be used on the same grades of fuel. Variable compression takes that a step farther, particularly for forced induction engines allowing higher compression on low-load situations and the compression is reduced in higher-load situations. I feel both are very much needed technologies for Subaru. Making them reliable and still keeping the boxer configuration may be slightly more of a challenge though not impossible by any means (speaking mostly of VC.) A variable compression system may require a head-centric cylinder, though head gasket failures would be a thing of the past. :)

Saab had produced a variable compression 1.6L 5-cylinder, supercharged protoype with head-centric cylinders and variable compression between 8.0:1 and 14.0:1 (I don't know if it was even using direct injection), but it was making 225hp and 225lb-ft of torque. That equates to 140lb-ft per liter and 150hp per liter with fuel efficiency savings of 30% over a naturally aspirated engine of the same output. Think EZ30 H6 for example, normally 19/25, now 24-25/32-33. Not a bad thing.

Saab Variable Compression Engine (http://www.saabnet.com/tsn/press/000318.html)

it seems slightly flawed. a great idea that would healp but it has to be a waise away from being properly efficiant.

otherwise saab wouldnt be using our motors now.

tell me seth. does the wrc mandate compresion ratios? if not you have another selling point.

I don't know parker, but variable compression would probably be out of the question for WRC right now. It could be a big selling point for Subaru IMO.

Saab is using Subaru stuff for one reason, cost and their lack of needing to do R&D. It's a good chassis for Saab, why not use it? The powertrain just goes along. Saab has been really choked for R&D I believe and I'm not sure if it has made it past R&D stages as I believe that prototype news was released in 2000. If it was going to production it sould have made it to production by now. BTW Parker, it has to be at least slightly more efficient than other systems out there to make the power and fuel economy numbers it's capable of. I think it was also using a new Honeywell (I think) electric supercharger as well, probably to reduce lag. Less flaw, it's just a simple, yet complex engineering problem.

Is there any sharing of technology between Subaru and Saab, or will it always be little more than Subaru exchanging their cars for GM's money?

i remmeber reading about it's introduction (the variable compression motor) a couple years ago. but with so little current focus i cant think they are using it. otherwise we should hear more. this being one of the biggest changes in the big threes motor developments. i'm willing to be gm put the axe to that idea and fed them subaru.

you know how swedes love to push engineering, then the americans com in and say, "hay you! use that part from this on that too! it's cheaper,"

sube555 do you have a thread about your multi displacement theory? we could use a big blown up picture too.

getting ot, puting on flame suit lol

I'm sure I've had a thread about displacement somewhere around here, looked for it recently but couldn't find it. As for the big 3 pushing around their might, yeah, that's my theory, it's cheaper so lets do this... The power per liter is quite awesome for that little engine with that kind of efficiency compared to whats actually in the market today and it's probably a bit more responsive than the larger EJ20 in the WRX.

I wish Subaru said we need to make a breakthrough in ICE, we're starting with a clean slate. They could verywell do it. There is enough money and capacity for R&D, but realizing the benefits in short term versus long is the hard thing for investors and management.

"hay you! use that part from this on that too! it's cheaper,"

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

it's the truth that you speak of GM, ford,etc

Did anybody see that Subaru has a little teaser for the B9 or whatever it is, on their website?

Does anybody know where this thing will stand in relation to Subaru's current lineup?

Did anybody see that Subaru has a little teaser for the B9 or whatever it is, on their website?

Does anybody know where this thing will stand in relation to Subaru's current lineup?

there are a few other threads in this forum that discuss that vehicle.

there are a few other threads in this forum that discuss that vehicle.

Are you implying that there are other threads on NASIOC? :lol:

Nonsense!

Are you implying that there are other threads on NASIOC? :lol:

Nonsense!

no, in the News and Rumors forum. This forum. ;)

:huh:

Have fun with antiquated technology for no good reason.
The 2.5 is the worse motor. It has only displacement going for it. USDM V8 has worse cams, heads, strength of block, and internals compared to it's JDM V7 counterpart.

So by your argument you're wrong :)

um, prove it?

i dont thin we have seen the limitations yet. keep in mind subaru hasnt been turboing 2.5's for ten years like the have with the 2.0

um, prove it?

i dont thin we have seen the limitations yet. keep in mind subaru hasnt been turboing 2.5's for ten years like the have with the 2.0
sure.

are you comparing future 2.5 powerplants or the current one? It is poinless to compare future motors, and the current jdm sti motor has better components that the usdm motor. The only thing the usdm motor has going for it is displacement.

Hmm, no wonder capt crunch is a little biased, look what's in his WRX, a JDM V7 motor. HMMMMMMMMM

I'd have to say for most thoughts and purposes, the EJ257 in the USDM STi machine is well enough off to handle most scenarios. If it's not beat all to heck, the USDM motor should last nearly as well as the JDM EJ207, that mostly dependant on the operator.

Hmm, no wonder capt crunch is a little biased, look what's in his WRX, a JDM V7 motor. HMMMMMMMMM

I'd have to say for most thoughts and purposes, the EJ257 in the USDM STi machine is well enough off to handle most scenarios. If it's not beat all to heck, the USDM motor should last nearly as well as the JDM EJ207, that mostly dependant on the operator.
I am obviously biased, but I chose the version 7 motor because it was better.

Will the sti block handle high power? Sure, just like the WRX can handle high power. Problem is that those with the 2.5 have to worry about it, unlike those of us with JDM swaps. Also the top end potential is limited by the heads, cams etc.

You want low end? Get the 2.5, hands down, there is no replacement for displacement. I'm just saying that technologically speaking, every single component and the potential of the JDM is better than the USDM one.

If the WRX get's the 2.5, that's nice, it would let us keep up with SRT-4s :) but I'd rather they change that damn tranny, that was the first thing I wanted to change.

If the WRX get's the 2.5, that's nice, it would let us keep up with SRT-4s :) but I'd rather they change that damn tranny, that was the first thing I wanted to change.

What makes you think it won't get the beefed up tranny the Legacy GT get? Or even a 6-speed?

I bet we see the Legacy GT's HD manual seeing duty in most if not all future Subies with 5-speed manuals.

Bob

What makes you think it won't get the beefed up tranny the Legacy GT get? Or even a 6-speed?

I bet we see the Legacy GT's HD manual seeing duty in most if not all future Subies with 5-speed manuals.

Bob
I doubt the WRX will get the 6-speed because that is reserved for the sti. The legacy GT revised 5-speed is more likely IMO, which would still be great! I'm not sure about the gear ratios on the Legacy tranny, but if they are at all revised so that 1st isn't so stupid short and 2-4 aren't so tall than it will be a major improvement. Being able to get into first from a roll would be a definate plus.

If they fix the tranny, then the only thing the WRX would need is a catless uppipe and a decent suspension.

JUST speaking in terms of displacement. not ej20 or ej25... just two generic 2.0 and 2.5 L engines...

what is the advantage of having a smaller displacement ?

I know there must be a few otherwise all cars would have big ol 6.0 L engines in them...

I think all turbo 2.5's would use the same tranny, that being the one used in the GT and FXT. I agree, 1st is rather short and 2nd is rather tall, not the best combo, but it works. It's great gears for fast backroads touring though. :)

There was rumors that one way for Subaru to be trying to at least marginally increase mileage ratings was to use 6-speed units more widespread. That was just a rumor, though the unit in the Spec B Legacy is supposed to be derived from the STi, therefore strong, and ratios can be set accordingly, as well as 6-speeds look better to that upscale crowd, more is better, even if it wasn't necessarily.

Crunch, the reason the 2.5L is used is for torque and for tuning levels we can't reach over here because of fuel quality. Oh well, I'll live with the 2.5L engine. It works just fine in my GT Wagon. :)

what does the short block have to do with the heads?

no makey sense. just put the heads of your liking on a 257 short block

JUST speaking in terms of displacement. not ej20 or ej25... just two generic 2.0 and 2.5 L engines...

what is the advantage of having a smaller displacement ?

I know there must be a few otherwise all cars would have big ol 6.0 L engines in them...


The downside is fuel efficency and weight/structial integrity.

more air requires more fuel, there are lots of ways you can make things efficient IE a 6.0L vette gets about the same highway mileage the WRX does, but that seems to be the exception to the rule.

And the bigger the cylinders, the more cylinders, the bigger the block you need, bigger block... more weight, bad balance for the car.

But those are really the only downsides for larger engines, weight and fuel.

And friction. 4 EJ20 pistons have a dia of 92mm, that's a cir of 289mm per cylinder, x4 = 1156mm of surface distance around the pistons alone. EJ25 pistons have 99.5mm dia, 312.6mm cir, x4 = 1250.3mm surface distance. That's just one small effect. It all adds up.

Friction is one of the biggest areas of loss, that and the lack of attention to finite details, how incredibly raw the common internal combustion engine is, at least like our cars. Yes, they have electronic fuel injection, active valve control and all this and that, but still they are incredibly limited by the laws of physics and how really imprecise they are by design and the sheer mechanics of them. That's why I think something completely new is needed. I'd be willing to pay an extra grand or two alone if they could get equal the power and performance and double the efficiency out of it. Easier said than done, but it's very possible with a number of advances used all at the same time and taking advantage of certain materials and techniques that could significantly reduce tolerances yet also using ultra-low friction materials at the same time. I'm just waiting for some manufacturer to really stick their heads out with something radical and new that will rock the industry. The funny thing is, often simplicity is the key.

:huh:

Have fun with antiquated technology for no good reason.


Alot of people still do this with V8s and are getting good results when compared to the updated varients.

The 2.5 is a good engine but the JDM 2.0 is easier to tune and is proven as a reliable platform. While it will take some time for the 2.5 to be considered IMHO as a good engine, I will continue to stick with the 2.0 as it can do everything the 2.5 can!!!!!!!!!!

Define easier to tune a 1994 model 2.0L than the newer more electronically-focused models? You guys do get better fuel, that does make it easier to get more power reliably. In Japan you may be able to do most everything a 2.5L can do here. It's mostly about what you can get for pump gas.

And friction. 4 EJ20 pistons have a dia of 92mm, that's a cir of 289mm per cylinder, x4 = 1156mm of surface distance around the pistons alone. EJ25 pistons have 99.5mm dia, 312.6mm cir, x4 = 1250.3mm surface distance. That's just one small effect. It all adds up.

The ring thickness and material also matter, as does the shape of the piston.

That's very true, I'm just using it for one area of comparison.

The downside is fuel efficency and weight/structial integrity.

more air requires more fuel, there are lots of ways you can make things efficient IE a 6.0L vette gets about the same highway mileage the WRX does, but that seems to be the exception to the rule.

And the bigger the cylinders, the more cylinders, the bigger the block you need, bigger block... more weight, bad balance for the car.

But those are really the only downsides for larger engines, weight and fuel.

I'd like to note that a Corvette LS1 motor weighs approximately 430 pounds fully dressed. A EJ20 longblock, fully dressed with turbocharger, weighs anywhere between 400 to 430 lbs.

Food for thought.

the new audi 2.0 FSI-T is looking very promising as of late...going to be using a lot of the new technologies you all are discussing here, baseline is 200hp but there are chips already bumping power by 50hp at the crank with just tuning(insane)...i think it's going to be something special to come, and i'm seriously considering it now that the old 1.8t is dead...

http://www.germancarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2040906.006/page/7/lang/eng/audi/1.html

Volkswagen turbo engines typically respond well to chipping. The question to ask is whether this engine will gum-up and self-destruct at 50k miles, which is also typical of Volkswagen engines.

Click Here for Details (http://www.detnews.com/2004/autosinsider/0409/01/autos-259707.htm)

Too bad they will both be Chevy products.
I wont buy a new subaru/gm.

Whoops. Wrong button.

My main concern is (of course) the tranny. Not so much on the strength front but from the drivability front. I don't want to have to play chemist anymore to try to find an oil concoction that will allow proper synchro function but provide enough protection. I don't want to have to pause for almost a two seconds switching gears because the tranny "doesn't like to be rushed". I don't want to get a grind 30% of the time when I'm shifting into first full stopped at a light. I don't want to have to double clutch to get it back into first if I'm only going 5mph.

I don't need 6 speeds, but I want something that feels like it was designed in the last decade.

Preach on my brother!

Too bad they will both be Chevy products.
I wont buy a new subaru/gm.

it is my under standing GM only owns about 20% of Subaru. It was mainly to have rights to the AWD tech.

Too bad they will both be Chevy products.
I wont buy a new subaru/gm.

Because GM has so much influence on subaru engineering :rolleyes:

Here's one for you. If it weren't for the global buying power that subaru got through their alliance with GM, we wouldn't have the WRX on our roads right now. Who do you think is gettting three cats for every car nice and cheap for subaru?

Subaru has made out like a bandit on this deal and stands to make out even better as we move forward. This is a very GOOD thing for subaru.

I dont mind partnerships in the auto industry I just dont want a subaru that looks like a saab and looks like a chevy whick looks like a dodge. We need to have the different brands keep their individuality and not do too much rebadging. Other than that I wouldnt care less if mitsubushi, subaru, ford and dodge come together to make a WRX sti hemi GT Evolution with a 600 bhp turbo charged boxer engine and a big carbon fiber wing and a huge 40 on the side of the car. If it drove nicely I would still buy it and still drive the hell out of it.


-Sam

all i know is that subaru needs to stop giving USDM the boot...we dont get the AVC on both cams, we dont get the twin scrol, we dont get spec-C, we dont get Forester STi or Legacy STi....
and yeat mits. is brining out its big boy toys for there coust...MR...
i think that if subaru doesnt start putting on some of the stuff that is coming out over seas soon, i can see them loosing bussiness...
in japan the HP battle is on(the gentlemans agreement is no more, thanks to honda). so now in japan the companies will be telling the truth about the real HP and TQ #'s....and im sure that US people will want in on it...in the new car and driver they said that Mazda is in the prosses of coming out w/ a 400hp rotary car, and that toyota is building a follow up car for where the supra left of....
to me it seems like the HP game is on...

High HP supercars are not where the money is at.

Toyota and honda can afford to play around in that area becuase they have the fundimentals down well.

Mits can do it because, quite franky, they have nothing to lose at this point.

Subaru needs to focus on some areas first before they worry about expending a lot of resources to really compete in the sports car wars. Quality and fuel economy are the two biggest right now.

Quality and fuel economy are the two biggest right now.

if you are 65years old or dont like having fun....j/k

i was just talking about the younger buyers/car entutiest(sp?)...
but yes, most people care about ,fuel consum., safety, quality... :rolleyes:

enthusiast dont make up a large portion
for example lets talk about the STi
sure great deal, super nice car, fast
however, after the initial hype and attention, i would still see several STi's in the lots just sitting there. If they were in such high demand, why would they be just sitting there? STi is really a very niche market car like the spec C which could be even harder to sell (but the north american STi is close to the spec C in some respects). would u buy a car without A/C for that price? no projectors either

near racing cars arent volume cars, they simply lure ppl into the show rooms and the base model sells.
However i think the Legacy STi and less so the Forester STi would sell well. The performance midsized sedan segment is pretty big and can do with a couple more cars. but it is going to be tough, Subaru arent going to be making numbers like the TL but would give the A4 a run for its money

Too bad they will both be Chevy products.
I wont buy a new subaru/gm.

You do know that Saab Engineers are woking with Subaru on the NEW 2006 Impreza...

http://www.autocarmagazine.com/news_article.asp?na_id=210769


Although the current 9-2X has a brief shelf life, Saab engineers and stylists are said to be working closely with Subaru on the next-generation Impreza, which will form the basis of the next 9-2X.

for example lets talk about the STi
sure great deal, super nice car, fast
however, after the initial hype and attention, i would still see several STi's in the lots just sitting there. If they were in such high demand, why would they be just sitting there?

Because the spoiler is just too dang BIG.

I am embarrassed to admit it, but I am just vain enough to not want to been seen in a car with an "easy carrying handle" on the back no matter how well it drives.

hell yeah i would buy a car w/o AC or projectors...but i am also a car enthu.
and im not sure where you live, but in UT the STi;s are HOT cars...i see 60year old men driving them, i also saw a grandma driving an EVO, blew my mind....
and about the wing, it adds to high speed stability at speeds over 100mph.
i also think that if subaru came out w/ STi wagon(witch would sell, i know of a couple of ppl that bouth a WRX wagon for room, but would have gottn a STi if it came in wagon form)....and the STi legacy would sell as well, my dad would actualy consider buying one.
STi forester would be a hard sale thow...but thats just me...

in SLC, UT the new Legacy GT, forester XT, and the STi are fairly popular, i will see at least 2-3 legacy GT's, 4-6 Foresters XT's and 2-3 STi's on a daily basis....and im not making this up....turbo subarus are all over...in my neighborhood(sp?) there are 6 WRX's....

I don't usually do this, but honestly I think I hurt my head trying to read that last post.

Maybe if you want Subaru to take your requests more seriously you might think about spelling out words properly, capitalizing sentences, and not putting in random ellipses for no reason.

I don't want you to take it personally, but DAMN!

wow thats a lot of scoobies!
i guess it is a regional thing

he's right. we have a big suby group here.

and we know what we want.

The US EVO and STI aren't homologated for FIA GroupN. That being said, nobody in North America (except maybe Mexico) runs real FIA GroupN. You can run GrpN in the US with a USDM WRX or STI or whatever. You have to use the 2L engine though.

GrpN in the states is the same as it is world wide. You cannot run a USDM WRX or USDM STi motor/drivetrain, we are governed by the same rules as everyone else, it is an FIA class.