|
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
09-08-2012, 01:09 PM | #351 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 274172
Join Date: Feb 2011
|
Give me a better stereo and less plastic feel to the interior with the same drive train and I'll be happy as a pig in you know what.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
|
09-08-2012, 01:13 PM | #352 | |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 306844
Join Date: Jan 2012
|
Quote:
|
|
09-08-2012, 01:19 PM | #353 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 317014
Join Date: Apr 2012
Chapter/Region:
Tri-State
Location: NY/CA
Vehicle:2017 Crosstrek ISM |
Should I be waiting for the EVO XI instead?...(running for cover)..Lol
|
09-08-2012, 04:36 PM | #354 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
|
|
09-08-2012, 05:02 PM | #355 | |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 306844
Join Date: Jan 2012
|
Quote:
|
|
09-08-2012, 06:06 PM | #356 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 75071
Join Date: Nov 2004
Chapter/Region:
Tri-State
Location: Long Island
Vehicle:23 Solterra,ModelY Old: 05 08 11 WRX, 18 STI |
Quote:
|
|
09-08-2012, 08:14 PM | #357 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 10139
Join Date: Sep 2001
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Indy/Broad Ripple
Vehicle:WRX 09 Outback 15 Miata 93 |
|
09-08-2012, 08:16 PM | #358 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 10139
Join Date: Sep 2001
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Indy/Broad Ripple
Vehicle:WRX 09 Outback 15 Miata 93 |
|
09-08-2012, 08:22 PM | #359 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:1992 SVX LS-L |
Quote:
A single car can't be everything to everyone, but a model lineup of cars can have a wider scope. If WRX and WRX STI become more focused... I think the suggestion I posted last night, and have posted before, has more merit. 3-door Forester Sport, based on XV Crosstrek's shorter length, roof height and ride height, but same width. WRX/STI equivalent drivetrain hardware. Subaru's answer to more expensive models like Evoque 3-door, and Range Rover Sport, and the Range Stormer concept... and a better performer than the new Mini Paceman. If one car can't be appealing to a wide variety of buyers, maybe two cars can cover it. |
|
09-08-2012, 08:37 PM | #360 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
|
With better technology like torque vectoring, no lag turbos, performance CVTs, etc., versatility can be sustained while still improving performance.
|
09-08-2012, 08:52 PM | #361 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 317014
Join Date: Apr 2012
Chapter/Region:
Tri-State
Location: NY/CA
Vehicle:2017 Crosstrek ISM |
^Agreed!
|
09-08-2012, 09:00 PM | #362 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:1992 SVX LS-L |
Torque vectoring - yes please.
no lag turbos - sounds like a lot of vulnerable complexity. I'd rather have an H6 with more displacement-generated latent torque, and a lower cruising RPM. Performance CVT - no thank you. A CVT can be numerically fast, but absolutely driver-uninvolved. the more you make it seem like a traditional transmission, the more the point is moot anyway. A CVT acting as a CVT is designed to, turns the driver into more of a biological autopilot occupying a seat, suggesting what the car should do. And that mostly addresses power, not chassis weight. Safety testing is mandating that vehicle chassis weights keep rising... antithetical to a compromise between high performance power levels and CAFE-mandated fuel economy. increasing power, or maintaining the same power level while getting better fuel economy, while cars get heavier... is a problem... and the heavier car mitigates the sharpness of handling... ...although sometimes sharp handling is better left to the weekend backroad strafing, and the track, than shaking one's dental work out of their head on a daily basis in a daily driver, or a modest-size road trip car. |
09-08-2012, 09:10 PM | #363 | ||
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 194216
Join Date: Nov 2008
Chapter/Region:
W. Canada
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Vehicle:2022 Fast POS |
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
09-08-2012, 09:35 PM | #364 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:2005 Baja Turbo 95&96 Sambar 06 Forester |
OK. Tell me how Subaru's AWD is not torque vectoring. I have read about it in a few places and they all describe what Subaru's system does. All of those training videos with cars on rollers seem to show this. What is missing that all of ya'll seem to want? |
09-08-2012, 09:48 PM | #365 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 16819
Join Date: Mar 2002
Chapter/Region:
SCIC
Location: Lake Elsinore, CA
|
Torque vectoring as purely a description of what is happening, yes.
Torque vectoring as the commonly used term for "wheel torque manupulation for better handling", no. |
09-08-2012, 09:55 PM | #366 | |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
|
Quote:
A CVT could go a long was towards negating turbo lag. Furthermore a CVT could potentially offer more driver control than a typical manual. Not only could a driver select more set ratios to shift with, but the same driver could customize those set ratios not only before beginning to drive, but also on the fly. Better yet, with a scrolling shifter a CVT could offer a driver completely adjustable torque/RPM adjust-ability at any point in the CVTs range. All this and with driver adjustable variable performance/gas mileage parameters. Torque vectoring could go a long way with dealing the effects of weight and handling dynamics. I'm not suggesting that all this is a panacea for bad engineering design. Obviously all this technology would still be better used on a fundamentally well designed platform. What I am saying is that we don't have to sacrifice too much to not only maintain versatility while maintaining performance, with technology we can actually increase versatility and increase performance. After all, hasn't the automobile always basically been and exercise in technological engineering? |
|
09-08-2012, 10:00 PM | #367 | ||
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 75071
Join Date: Nov 2004
Chapter/Region:
Tri-State
Location: Long Island
Vehicle:23 Solterra,ModelY Old: 05 08 11 WRX, 18 STI |
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
09-08-2012, 10:07 PM | #368 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 327495
Join Date: Jul 2012
Chapter/Region:
Tri-State
Location: Ozone Park, Queens, New York
Vehicle:2012 Impreza WRX 5DR Plasma Blue |
Stay with a damn manual transmission. Dont cran the car with technology. it takes away the essence of driving...
|
09-08-2012, 10:23 PM | #369 | |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
|
Quote:
|
|
09-08-2012, 10:23 PM | #370 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 10139
Join Date: Sep 2001
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Indy/Broad Ripple
Vehicle:WRX 09 Outback 15 Miata 93 |
If the car gets a little smaller/lighter and keep the price increase keeps down to $1k or so, I'll be okay with pretty much whatever else they do with it.
|
09-08-2012, 10:24 PM | #371 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
|
|
09-08-2012, 11:45 PM | #372 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:1992 SVX LS-L |
Quote:
Most talk of torque vectoring refers to that active torque application behavior across the rear axle, though, to apply more torque to the outside rear tire, to get the car to turn in quicker. Acura RL's SH-AWD, Audi Sport Differential, and Mitsubishi EVO X's Active Yaw Control (IIRC) are the most well known torque vectoring systems on production cars now. It tends to minimize the feel of understeer in a turn, without making the car truly loose and on the edge of control the rest of the time. |
|
09-08-2012, 11:57 PM | #373 | ||||
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:1992 SVX LS-L |
Quote:
An EZ H6 is not much heavier, and less than 3" longer than an H4, due to smaller cylinder pitch, and more open space in the block. It can have more torque near idle, off boost at lower RPMs, which allows lower cruising RPMs, and less throttle input required in stop and go driving. While generally being less complex, more reliable, and less under-hood heat and cooling system demands. The torque vectoring mentioned can mitigate the front-engined aspect of Subaru's drivetrain anyway, whether H4T or H6. Quote:
And if you are not manually controlling the engagement, and the gear ratio, it is definitively not "more driver control than a typical manual", as the computer is controlling the transaxle, and the engine's throttle. The interior controls are merely making suggestions. Quote:
If you are going to have an automatic, it may as well be truly hands-off. Even if it can be numerically fast if sufficient power is input, it is not driver-involved. If you want to split the difference, a dual-clutch like a PDK/DCT is more direct than a CVT mechanism behind a torque converter. Quote:
Autopilot is technology, too, after all, and it isn't just for planes anymore. Last edited by HipToBeSquare; 09-09-2012 at 12:03 AM. |
||||
09-09-2012, 09:32 AM | #374 | |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
|
Quote:
Turbocharging is not necessarily unreliable (I have over 212000 miles on my turbo engine, without any issues). The extra cylinders, valves, etc., of a 6 compared to a 4 cylinder comes with added complexity and potential failure rate as well. One could argue that not using turbocharging is a waste of the internal combustion engines inherent efficiency/performance. Subaru system as it stands already has a rather unfortunate weight bias, adding to the dilemma seems like an anathema to increasing sporting performance. Your point about torque vectoring negating the extra weight is well taken, but the same torque vectoring system working with less to compensate for might offer even greater performance. Understand that with a CVT the drivers could be free from preordained gear settings and modify them as the driver saw fit, and on the fly too! Better yet with a scrolling gear gear level the driver could adjust the torque/RPM's anywhere within the range of the CVT. Forget the 4,5,6,7 set ratios decided by someone other than the driver, when virtually hundreds of ratios could be actuated by the driver on the fly! Basically bypassing the computer, the computer might only be needed if by driver error a chosen ratio would be damaging. What is a "real manual"? One that allows the driver to select from a set number of decided by someone other than the driver predetermined ratios? One that allows the driver to select from a set number of predetermined driver chosen ratios? One that allows the driver to select from a yet undetermined number of set number of ratios. One that allows the driver to eliminate any set number of ratios and choose any number of ratios at anytime? Or one that can do all that, and offer "auto pilot" at the discretion of the driver? Past technological limitations don't necessarily warrant authenticity. A CVT can offer more or less driver involvement at any time at discretion of the driver, while offering greater efficiency and greater performance (especially with turbocharging and toque vectoring ), and has the potential do it better than any other currently competing alternatives. Embrace the potential! Last edited by WRX4US; 09-09-2012 at 09:42 AM. |
|
09-09-2012, 12:59 PM | #375 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region:
TXIC
Location: www.testdrivemylife.com
Vehicle:2020 JEEP / RAM Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000 |
So your going to modulate gear ratios to balance the chassis mid corner instead of the throttle? No thanks. Change for the sake of change is stupid. Change for a meaningful improvement is far better
Just setting the engine to max power and varying gear ratios constantly sounds very unappealing as the engine drone at one single rpm band would be unnerving. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|