Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday July 10, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-09-2012, 01:08 PM   #376
WRX4US
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
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.
One doesn't need to be exclusive to the other.
Change to improve both performance and efficiency is not stupid.
Engine noise can be controlled in a number of ways including DSP.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
WRX4US is offline  
Old 09-09-2012, 07:49 PM   #377
HipToBeSquare
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:
1992 SVX LS-L

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRX4US View Post
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.
Tell the reliability story to 2005-2006 Legacy GT owners who's turbos have blown between 80 and 120K miles.

And anti-lag is much more complex... and not developed to OEM mass production standards.

Funny, you haven't mentioned turbine compounding. When you want to discuss unleashing the thermal recovery of an exhaust turbine, get rid of the waste gate, then we'll talk. Mechanically mix the turbine's energy into the crankshaft directly. Then run a compressor separately, if you want to, as a supercharger. Exhaust and intake are two different things, and a turbine has different efficiency ranges than a compressor as well. Cutting off a turbine to keep a compressor in check is wasting energy potential.

Increasing known-reliable parts from 4 sets of pistons, rods, and valves from four sets, to six sets doesn't increase likelyhood to fail, the way adding external complexity does.

If you don't like additional valves... maybe one would prefer a turbine compounded, variable-supercharged, direct injected, stratified-combustion wankel rotary. No valves, no cams, no rods... just spinning rotors that don't lose inertia because they don't reciprocate in two directions.

Quote:
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.
The scrolling thing you describe... is the right-side pedal on the floor, in a CVT car. Managing a throttle AND a rheostat-like gear ratio selector is doubly complicated, and badly handled... those two controls can become contrary to each other.

Believe me, I am not meaning to be rude, nor to raise my virtual voice... but I have to re-iterate that the point of a CVT that you make here, infinite ratio adjustment... is antithetical to driver control. A driver cannot manage that much variance on the fly, along with everything else, especially navigating traffic. It must be automated if it isn't a known-set of ratios, like a manual gearbox.

And to make it truly efficient, as I have, and Scrappydo just mentioned, the engine becomes more steady-state in behavior, and the CVT controller takes over to vary the road speed of the car.

The engine becomes the slave, the CVT becomes the master, instead of the other way around, and the driver becomes a director, instead of an actual driver. The computers managing the engines's torque output level, and the CVT's ratio are driving the car, by the 'director's' suggestion.

Quote:
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!

The ratios you suggest are also at the behest of the CVT controller's math, you might as well let it do ALL the math constantly, and sticking to a ratio just to appease the person in the seat behind the steering wheel, is negating the point of a CVT.

Drive it yourself, or let the computer drive it and sit back.

CVTs do what CVTs do. They don't do what they don't do. Trying to blur that line, loses the point of a CVT.

A torquey, narrow-band diesel, backed by a CVT, to negate the need for more than a dozen gear ratios... sounds good to me in a utilitarian vehicle. I wish I could buy a small truck or SUV with a torquey boxer diesel and a robust CVT.

A wide band sporty gas engine, in a performance car, where the driver wants feedback more than efficiency, a CVT is the wrong choice of technology for the philosophy of the vehicle and the driver's expectation.

I don't want a performance car that drives like a tractor, or doesn't offer feedback, because the CVT controller is doing all the driving, and keeping the engine at steady torque output.

Last edited by HipToBeSquare; 09-09-2012 at 07:57 PM.
HipToBeSquare is offline  
Old 09-09-2012, 08:59 PM   #378
WRX4US
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare View Post
Tell the reliability story to 2005-2006 Legacy GT owners who's turbos have blown between 80 and 120K miles.

And anti-lag is much more complex... and not developed to OEM mass production standards.

Funny, you haven't mentioned turbine compounding. When you want to discuss unleashing the thermal recovery of an exhaust turbine, get rid of the waste gate, then we'll talk. Mechanically mix the turbine's energy into the crankshaft directly. Then run a compressor separately, if you want to, as a supercharger. Exhaust and intake are two different things, and a turbine has different efficiency ranges than a compressor as well. Cutting off a turbine to keep a compressor in check is wasting energy potential.

Increasing known-reliable parts from 4 sets of pistons, rods, and valves from four sets, to six sets doesn't increase likelyhood to fail, the way adding external complexity does.

If you don't like additional valves... maybe one would prefer a turbine compounded, variable-supercharged, direct injected, stratified-combustion wankel rotary. No valves, no cams, no rods... just spinning rotors that don't lose inertia because they don't reciprocate in two directions.



The scrolling thing you describe... is the right-side pedal on the floor, in a CVT car. Managing a throttle AND a rheostat-like gear ratio selector is doubly complicated, and badly handled... those two controls can become contrary to each other.

Believe me, I am not meaning to be rude, nor to raise my virtual voice... but I have to re-iterate that the point of a CVT that you make here, infinite ratio adjustment... is antithetical to driver control. A driver cannot manage that much variance on the fly, along with everything else, especially navigating traffic. It must be automated if it isn't a known-set of ratios, like a manual gearbox.

And to make it truly efficient, as I have, and Scrappydo just mentioned, the engine becomes more steady-state in behavior, and the CVT controller takes over to vary the road speed of the car.

The engine becomes the slave, the CVT becomes the master, instead of the other way around, and the driver becomes a director, instead of an actual driver. The computers managing the engines's torque output level, and the CVT's ratio are driving the car, by the 'director's' suggestion.




The ratios you suggest are also at the behest of the CVT controller's math, you might as well let it do ALL the math constantly, and sticking to a ratio just to appease the person in the seat behind the steering wheel, is negating the point of a CVT.

Drive it yourself, or let the computer drive it and sit back.

CVTs do what CVTs do. They don't do what they don't do. Trying to blur that line, loses the point of a CVT.

A torquey, narrow-band diesel, backed by a CVT, to negate the need for more than a dozen gear ratios... sounds good to me in a utilitarian vehicle. I wish I could buy a small truck or SUV with a torquey boxer diesel and a robust CVT.

A wide band sporty gas engine, in a performance car, where the driver wants feedback more than efficiency, a CVT is the wrong choice of technology for the philosophy of the vehicle and the driver's expectation.

I don't want a performance car that drives like a tractor, or doesn't offer feedback, because the CVT controller is doing all the driving, and keeping the engine at steady torque output.
On some level a CVT can act like a no lag mechanism for a turbo.

I actually like the idea of a Wankel, especially one that might mitigate the inherent combustion compromises in typically available rotaries.

A variable shift control (perhaps on a paddle(s)) on a CVT wouldn't need a clutch, or shift aim, so I do believe that a driver could adapt to the extra control quite easily. There seems to be concern about which end is in control, quite honestly I don't care, I just want the better system, and my ego is not so invested in my driving that if a computer could do it better that I would mind. But, I don't think there has to be such an all or nothing approach, as a CVT could work better in any prioritized configuration, and on the fly!

Think of it the other way around. What if there were only 4,5,6 or 7 accelerator settings? Coming from the linear variable flexibility that we're accustomed to, we would find that objectionable. Now that's the current state of manual transmission ratios. Why not have the same linear flexibility from our transmission that we have from our accelerator? Manual or auto chosen a the flick of a switch, or a turn of a dial, or what have you, with nary any added weight or mechanical complexity. As such the driver decides how much of a "master" he wants to be anytime he wants. Having such freedom certainly would disqualify him from "slave" status.

Please spare me the comparisons to farm vehicles, economy cars, etc., as though a CVT might only work particularly well there. That it might work well there is a testament to it's versatility and doesn't disqualify CVTs from even greater or perhaps just different potential in a performance car. Hasn't the traditional manual transmission done just that? Perhaps it's time to move on.

Better efficiency, better performance, more absolute control or an easier driver experience all at the whim of the driver. Try and think beyond what is currently being offered in CVTs, and instead think of the potential. A potential that might never be achieved with the current alternatives.

Hip, after reading so many of your pasts posts, I doubt you'll change your mind unless you open it. With that said, I think I've said as much as I can to you.

Best Regards!
WRX4US is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 09:28 AM   #379
NOTinASubaru
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 295494
Join Date: Sep 2011
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Ma
Vehicle:
1996 Miata, 07 Si

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Drift View Post
No such car is being developed. Mitsu is going hybrid for all future cars. Evo is dead after the X.
Such a drastic change may be the only thing that can save Mitsubishi.
NOTinASubaru is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 09:46 AM   #380
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

Everything you keep saying is that you can make a CVT as good as regular manual. PDK's say they are better than a regular manual. Automatics say they are easier than a manual to drive.

The true hatred of CVT's from most people who love to drive is the 'feel'. I like to drive and I like having three pedals. I can use a carrot to pound a nail into wood if I do enough modifications to the carrot. You can make anything into a performance anything if you put enough modifications and computers to allow it.

You are trying to fit a very square peg into a round hole. Your trying to so hard to convince yourself it can be made better, you are not stopping to ask yourself, if something is already better, why bother.

A CVT is an economy transmission best suited for ecoboxes and snowmobiles. I do not want one in my driveway. It reminds me too much of driving a boat. Set throttle to full and control engine pitch and trim tabs. Boring.

What you are advocating is change for the sake of change. Why try to make a CVT emulate what a manual can already do fabulously.

The engine is the heart and soul of a car. Not the transmission. Nobody ever wrote a song about a transmission. Taking the control away from the engine has fail written all over it. It is bad enough people and the press have found half assed ways to legitimize automatics, but pushing the worst automatic in volumes on anything but an economy car is just borderline blasphemy.
SCRAPPYDO is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 09:48 AM   #381
Calamity Jesus
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 44501
Join Date: Oct 2003
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: in a minefield of caddishness.
Vehicle:
1984 "Skeletor from
"He-Man"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRX4US View Post
On some level a CVT can act like a no lag mechanism for a turbo.

I actually like the idea of a Wankel, especially one that might mitigate the inherent combustion compromises in typically available rotaries.

A variable shift control (perhaps on a paddle(s)) on a CVT wouldn't need a clutch, or shift aim, so I do believe that a driver could adapt to the extra control quite easily. There seems to be concern about which end is in control, quite honestly I don't care, I just want the better system, and my ego is not so invested in my driving that if a computer could do it better that I would mind. But, I don't think there has to be such an all or nothing approach, as a CVT could work better in any prioritized configuration, and on the fly!

Think of it the other way around. What if there were only 4,5,6 or 7 accelerator settings? Coming from the linear variable flexibility that we're accustomed to, we would find that objectionable. Now that's the current state of manual transmission ratios. Why not have the same linear flexibility from our transmission that we have from our accelerator? Manual or auto chosen a the flick of a switch, or a turn of a dial, or what have you, with nary any added weight or mechanical complexity. As such the driver decides how much of a "master" he wants to be anytime he wants. Having such freedom certainly would disqualify him from "slave" status.

Please spare me the comparisons to farm vehicles, economy cars, etc., as though a CVT might only work particularly well there. That it might work well there is a testament to it's versatility and doesn't disqualify CVTs from even greater or perhaps just different potential in a performance car. Hasn't the traditional manual transmission done just that? Perhaps it's time to move on.

Better efficiency, better performance, more absolute control or an easier driver experience all at the whim of the driver. Try and think beyond what is currently being offered in CVTs, and instead think of the potential. A potential that might never be achieved with the current alternatives.

Hip, after reading so many of your pasts posts, I doubt you'll change your mind unless you open it. With that said, I think I've said as much as I can to you.

Best Regards!



Edit: Scrappy, "I doubt you'll change your mind unless you open it."


Seriously, dude.. this is a thread about the new WRX.. not hypothetical potential of CVTs. Give it a rest.
Calamity Jesus is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 10:03 AM   #382
samagon
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 26859
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: undisputed COMBAT! champion
Vehicle:
of TXIC
I also like (oYo)!!!!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
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
So you like CVTs then?

Resisting change because the way it's being done now is 'good enough' is a horrible reason not to change. In fact, it's one of the worst reasons to resist change.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
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.
You don't think the engineers would develop an exhaust that is tuned to be quietest when the engine is at a specific RPM?
samagon is online now  
Old 09-10-2012, 10:56 AM   #383
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

No I said meaningful improvement. I chose that word carefully. I do not consider slightly improved mpg a meaningful improvement when it comes at a cost of fun, feel, and control.

You can put all the exhaust modifications you want, it is nothing more than lipstick on a pig.
SCRAPPYDO is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 11:12 AM   #384
WRX4US
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
No I said meaningful improvement. I chose that word carefully. I do not consider slightly improved mpg a meaningful improvement when it comes at a cost of fun, feel, and control.

You can put all the exhaust modifications you want, it is nothing more than lipstick on a pig.
There would also be performance improvements, more potential "control" and ergo more range of "feel" and I believe that could all add up to more "fun".
Negating an argument with constructive counterpoint is not "putting lipstick on a pig".
WRX4US is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 11:20 AM   #385
Snow Drift
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 75071
Join Date: Nov 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NYC
Vehicle:
4 Train - Subway
Past: 05, 08, 11 Red WRXs

Default

Did you guys see a WRX w/ CVT testing in the US? If not, this CVT convo is rather OT.
Snow Drift is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 11:34 AM   #386
WRX4US
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Drift View Post
Did you guys see a WRX w/ CVT testing in the US? If not, this CVT convo is rather OT.
Has anyone seen a certifiable WRX being tested in the US? Is this whole thread off topic?
WRX4US is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 11:34 AM   #387
uspopo
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 317014
Join Date: Apr 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NY/CA
Vehicle:
2015 WRX Limited CVT
ISM

Default

The 2013 JDM Legacy has the 296HP DIT FA20 motor with CVT. I think it is safe to say that we will see this powerplant in the new WRX/STI. Manual transmission is a definite but if Subaru decided to put an automatic (Sportshift or CVT) option at least we know it is possibility if the CVT will fit in the Impreza chassis. I for one would consider it as I am lazy...lol.
uspopo is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 11:45 AM   #388
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRX4US

There would also be performance improvements, more potential "control" and ergo more range of "feel" and I believe that could all add up to more "fun".
Negating an argument with constructive counterpoint is not "putting lipstick on a pig".
Everything you just said is nothing more than speculation. You have no argument except that YOU THINK it could be tuned for performance and YOU THINK it could have more control and YOU THINK that equates directly to feel.

I do not care what you think it might be like. You have no argument because you have no facts. You only have what you think! Which counts for nothing.
SCRAPPYDO is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 12:06 PM   #389
rexster
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 22863
Join Date: Aug 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Marriottsville, Maryland
Vehicle:
2015 WRX Premium CWP

Default

I wouldn't be surprised if we see a WRX variant with the CVT. They have already paired the FA20 DIT with the CVT in Japan and now it looks like Germany will see it in the Forester. And here in the US they experimented with the Impreza GT which had the slopbox auto. Lets face it, there is a growing market share for sporty and fuel efficient cars. But don't worry, sales numbers don't lie. SOA knows better than to try and push a CVT on all WRX buyers. The CVT as the only option would be the end of the WRX era.
rexster is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 12:16 PM   #390
Snow Drift
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 75071
Join Date: Nov 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NYC
Vehicle:
4 Train - Subway
Past: 05, 08, 11 Red WRXs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRX4US View Post
Has anyone seen a certifiable WRX being tested in the US? Is this whole thread off topic?
CVT is not related to the OP's linked article. WRX is related.
Snow Drift is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 12:35 PM   #391
samagon
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 26859
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: undisputed COMBAT! champion
Vehicle:
of TXIC
I also like (oYo)!!!!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
Everything you just said is nothing more than speculation. You have no argument except that YOU THINK it could be tuned for performance and YOU THINK it could have more control and YOU THINK that equates directly to feel.

I do not care what you think it might be like. You have no argument because you have no facts. You only have what you think! Which counts for nothing.
Unfortunately, neither do you. You might have information from driving a scooter with a CVT, or a less than inspiring econobox with a CVT, but you don't have experience with a CVT that has been programmed for use in a performance vehicle.

So if all we're going to do is negate any potential discussion of CVT based on the fact we are all just speculating, we might as well just get back to speculating whether the new WRX/STI will have 4 independent 1 cylinder turbo engines going through 4 independent sequential transmissions to each wheel.
samagon is online now  
Old 09-10-2012, 01:05 PM   #392
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

Well, we can agree on that. I have no experience with a CVT in a performance car. Because there is not one in existence. I wonder why that is...
SCRAPPYDO is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 01:15 PM   #393
Calamity Jesus
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 44501
Join Date: Oct 2003
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: in a minefield of caddishness.
Vehicle:
1984 "Skeletor from
"He-Man"

Default

CVTs are used in snowmobiles.. not because of their high performance, but because they're lightweight. Weight is more important than feel and response in a vehicle designed to float on top of powder. The fact that high performance snowmobile CVTs (the ones with feel and response) came into existence was a result of compromise... not optimum design.
Calamity Jesus is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 01:16 PM   #394
WRX4US
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
Everything you just said is nothing more than speculation. You have no argument except that YOU THINK it could be tuned for performance and YOU THINK it could have more control and YOU THINK that equates directly to feel.

I do not care what you think it might be like. You have no argument because you have no facts. You only have what you think! Which counts for nothing.
Your point re: my speculation is on point. However, there is good reason to think of the possibilities and little reason to dismiss them. Your free to not care what I think. Other might disagree. In any event, I'm free to share my thoughts. That is the essence of a forum.
WRX4US is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 01:23 PM   #395
WRX4US
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 162846
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

WRX4US is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 01:55 PM   #396
samagon
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 26859
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: undisputed COMBAT! champion
Vehicle:
of TXIC
I also like (oYo)!!!!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
Well, we can agree on that. I have no experience with a CVT in a performance car. Because there is not one in existence. I wonder why that is...
if I had purchased a 914 back in the 70s with the D-jetronic FI, I'd have ripped it out and tossed some dual carbs on. Today though, if someone told me that a carburetor could offer better performance on a car, I'd laugh at them.

I can agree with you that right now CVT isn't what a person should be looking for in a performance vehicle, but when they can handle the levels of torque people will throw at them, they will be.

Remember, that the way they are set to gear from the factory will be moot because it will be controlled by the ECU, and you will have ultimate capability to set the gear ratio to whatever RPM band you want, not only to offer the best throttle response and acceleration, but feel as well.
samagon is online now  
Old 09-10-2012, 02:04 PM   #397
pgh88
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 316756
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Drift View Post
Did you guys see a WRX w/ CVT testing in the US? If not, this CVT convo is rather OT.

The 13 Forester in Germany gets a FA20DIT/CVT combo good for 240hp
pgh88 is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 02:09 PM   #398
uspopo
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 317014
Join Date: Apr 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NY/CA
Vehicle:
2015 WRX Limited CVT
ISM

Default

Now is that considered the XT variant in Germany or is that the base engine offering? Sorry to be off topic...
uspopo is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 06:06 PM   #399
a2cpc
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 10139
Join Date: Sep 2001
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Indy/Broad Ripple
Vehicle:
9&11 WRX 5Dr
DGM/Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRX4US View Post
It can add to the essence of driving.
I thought that is what the BRZ is for...
a2cpc is offline  
Old 09-10-2012, 07:21 PM   #400
chanomatik
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 159474
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: AKIC
Location: Anchorage (...for now...)
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Ltd 6MT CBS
SNOSLO

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a2cpc View Post
I thought that is what the BRZ is for...
And people are still enjoying the non-CVT gearbox of the automatic variant. Imagine a BRZ with a CVT!!!! *frothing*
chanomatik is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.