Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Saturday December 20, 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.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-12-2012, 03:47 PM   #26
Concillian
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 4414
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Dublin, CA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX Sedan
Midnight Black

Default

This CVT is going in a Forester... a kiddie / stuff hauler, not a sports car. How many people are buying manual Foresters?

Even my wife has a 5-speed commuter, but was insistent on an auto/CVT for the kiddie hauler when we were looking at Outbacks and such before settling on our Volvo XC60.

Ranting about CVT only option for WRX / STi... warranted. Foresters though? What percentage of forester buyers really want a manual? There's a reason there aren't a lot of cars that cater to enthusiasts... most people aren't enthusiasts.

I personally didn't have an issue with the CVT when I was doing test drives. It felt better than an auto, and seemed to have less drivetrain loss. Sure, there are cases where manuals are better, but in this kind of vehicle, you never know when you might need your shifting hand free to wrestle with a 3 year old.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Concillian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2012, 05:22 PM   #27
HipToBeSquare
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:
1992 SVX LS-L

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesubie View Post
It doesn't make sense to offer a manual in the Forester if only a handful of people buy them. When I took my car in for a free oil change at the dealer in the spring of 2004, the service department hadn't yet seen a manual and the car had been out for a year already.

-Dennis
Good luck finding a Forester XT before 2009 with a manual... if they come onto the market, they are bought up... and probably with less depreciation than my 5-speed Legacy GT.

2009+ Forester XT has no manual option. Can't buy something that isn't sold.

2009+ Forester X has a manual on ONLY the very stripped down base model, as an otion, and even rarer, the X Premium, with tint, sunroof, and cold weather package, but not limited or touring options.

I am looking for 2011-current FB25 Forester 2.5X Premium models, with the 5-speed manual, and I am not particularly happy about taking a 50% power cut from my Legacy GT Limited, just because Forester XT Limited doesn't offer the same equipment, and no manual available.

The 4EAT is the bane of my SVX, and the only thing about the car that I don't like. I am sure not buying a newer car with one.

If I have to buy an automatic Subaru, I will default to the 08+ 5-passenger Tribeca, and at least have 250hp, and VTD-AWD to go with it,

Legacy GT is gone, and I am not a fan of the 2010-12 body anyway. Outback XT is gone.

If Forester XT goes CVT-only, as it is now Auto-only, then the only option left with a manual is WRX/STI, which is rumored to go smaller, and less versatile.

As hard a time as I am having, finding a Forester X Premium 5-speed, I am having reminders of trying to find my Legacy GT in 2007. There aren't any around.

It wouldn't surprise me if 2014+ Forester, from tip to tail, is CVT only for the USDM X or XT, without the diesel option either.

I am getting a little tired of the mentality that says nobody buys manuals, when nobody OFFERS manuals, and if they do, they aren't on the popular up-optioned trim lines, only the stripped down economy trim line. I left Ford for Subaru partly because of that, now Subaru is doing it, too.

Manual transmission take-rate was up ~6% over the last year... yet car companies ever more seem to be taking them off the option sheets.
http://content.usatoday.com/.../stick-shift-manual-transmission-surprise-more-interest

I don't know what the next WRX is going to be... but rumors seem to be going toward LESS versatile, rather than more versatile... and probably not a sleek AWD coupe, either. If I can't get a gorgeous sleek coupe, it should at least be versatile enough for a trip to the home improvement store, and to pull a trailer, and earn it's keep.

I want a manual AWD vehicle. Subaru makes good ones, but they seem to get more and more scarce every model year.

I don't want a CVT. I know how they are intended to work, I don't drive that way. I am not convinced of their 100K+ mile reliability, either.

One of the reasons I want an NA engine with a cam chain, is long term reliability. Fewer issues with turbochargers failing as some Legacys have had, or cam belts failing and ruining engines. A healthy EZ H6 still offers good power levels, with less complexity and plumbing, but NONE of those offer a manual in the US market, either.

If the transmission doesn't last either, that is another problem, and likely an expensive one outside of warranty. CVTs in the general automotive industry don't have the best reputation for reliability, and the new stronger one behind the DIT engines are an unknown quantity in that respect. Subaru Autos aren't even all that great at being reliable behind powerful engines due to hydraulic system heat... the 4EAT, or a few problems with the 5EAT, and rather strict stock horsepower limitations, ~230 for the 4EAT, and ~260 for the 5EAT.

Some of us still want a good manual gear shift, and a clutch pedal, and not just on one model, or on the econo-tastic stripped down base trim.
HipToBeSquare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2012, 05:25 PM   #28
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 Sub!eDr!ver View Post
... you get all the benefits of a manual transmission for sporty driving...
No you do not. You do not get tactile feel of rowing your own gears, picking the ratio you want and easing out the clutch. You get NONE of the interaction with the car.

Numbers do not equal good feel. In the end, we buy what feels right, not what is faster by a millisecond.

There is no way on this planet a CVT could ever offer as good of a feel and driver interaction as a traditional 3 pedal setup.

Could a CVT be better than a traditional auto slushbox. Maybe it could.

But please refrain from making statements like that. A CVT is not a manual and never will be. It is a cheap attempt at such. It is an econo transmission being used to meet mileage requirements Nothing more.

A dual clutch is not as interactive as a manual
A slush box is not as interactive as a manual
And you can darn well bet a CVT will not be as interactive as a manual.

the more interaction the more feel a car can have. Because you are having to move and touch things. Anything but 3 pedals takes away from that. Just to what extent do you want the car to work for you is what you have to ask yourself.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2012, 05:58 PM   #29
Sub!eDr!ver
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 88924
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Vehicle:
2007 Tribeca Limited
05 LGT (98 LGT, 88 Justy)

Default

Fair points Scrappy. I was more referring to the mechanical benefits, not the emotional connections through clutch & shifter.

A CVT, built well, is absolutely better than a traditional slushbox, and can be significantly more efficient than an auto or manual.
Sub!eDr!ver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2012, 06:09 PM   #30
chanomatik
Scooby Guru
 
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 Concillian View Post
I personally didn't have an issue with the CVT when I was doing test drives. It felt better than an auto, and seemed to have less drivetrain loss. Sure, there are cases where manuals are better, but in this kind of vehicle, you never know when you might need your shifting hand free to wrestle with a 3 year old.
Agree with this wholeheartedly. The CVT is REALLY not that atrocious and much easier to deal with than a standard auto. I cannot wait until the standard auto disappears.
chanomatik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2012, 06:34 PM   #31
bluesubie
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 767
Join Date: Jan 2000
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: N.J.
Vehicle:
04 FXT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare

Good luck finding a Forester XT before 2009 with a manual... if they come onto the market, they are bought up... and probably with less depreciation than my 5-speed Legacy GT. ..

One of the reasons I want an NA engine with a cam chain, is long term reliability. Fewer issues with turbochargers failing as some Legacys have had, or cam belts failing and ruining engines. A healthy EZ H6 still offers good power levels, with less complexity and plumbing, but NONE of those offer a manual in the US market, either.
I do have a manual Forester. Me and 10 other people in N. America. Currently on OEM turbo #3.

-Dennis
bluesubie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2012, 07:11 PM   #32
chanomatik
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159474
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: AKIC
Location: Anchorage (...for now...)
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Ltd 6MT CBS
SNOSLO

Default

In certain moments I REALLY wish I had kept my 2008 Forester Sports XT 5MT DGM. I got it at a steal of a deal and it was just a rare car. The only version I would've preferred would've been the XT Limited converted to look like a Sports.
chanomatik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2012, 07:55 PM   #33
white comet
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 221623
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Great White North
Default

I'm liking my CDM FXT Sports Limited 5mt. We also have 5mt on the new Forester Touring but not Limited model. Don't know why the States aren't offering them.
white comet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2012, 10:58 PM   #34
Wyldcat89
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 245725
Join Date: May 2010
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Sherwood, OR
Vehicle:
2014 Forester
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare View Post

2009+ Forester X has a manual on ONLY the very stripped down base model, as an otion, and even rarer, the X Premium, with tint, sunroof, and cold weather package, but not limited or touring options.
When I purchased my 2010 Forester Premium (all weather) 5MT the dealer had to get it from 3 states over, and was perplexed why I'd want a manual transmission...that was April of 2010, far from the end of the model year. I wouldn't buy the current 4EAT offering but am cautiously optimistic about the new model upcoming. I haven't driven a vehicle with CVT yet...
Wyldcat89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 12:45 AM   #35
JustyWRC
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
09 WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare View Post
I wonder why the 2.0DIT is so de-tuned from the JDM Legacy version, with 296hp.
What is the ground clearance of a Legacy Wagon? The Forester XT is 8.9 inches. Doubt 296hp would be safe in a vehicle sitting that high.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare View Post

But it is 90% front bias normally, right?

Drivetrain isn't only the gearing mechanism... and 90% front bias is more like transverse Faux-wheel-drive like Haldex, and not nearly as top-shelf as 65% rear-biased VTD in the 5EAT and Spec.B 6MT, or STI's DCCD AWD.
What I was told by an engineer at a training event was that it isn't proper to put a set number to the power split. He said that the system is constantly adjusting as the car moves. Acceleration. Deceleration. Turn right. Turn left. Turn right AND accelerate. Turn left AND decelerate. He said it is never in a set ratio; BUT, if you just HAD to put numbers to it, it would be more like an 80/20 split. In our training materials/tests on Subarunet, it doesn't even have a number set to it. The VTD does(45/55) and the Continuous AWD(manuals) does(50/50). The Active AWD just says it sends more power to the front.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare View Post
I am getting a little tired of the mentality that says nobody buys manuals, when nobody OFFERS manuals, and if they do, they aren't on the popular up-optioned trim lines, only the stripped down economy trim line. I left Ford for Subaru partly because of that, now Subaru is doing it, too.


I don't want a CVT. I know how they are intended to work, I don't drive that way. I am not convinced of their 100K+ mile reliability, either.
Well, with autos getting that much better MPG, and the push for higher CAFE standards, the manual is......what do ya'll refer to the 4EAT as?.......archaic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chanomatik View Post
In certain moments I REALLY wish I had kept my 2008 Forester Sports XT 5MT DGM. I got it at a steal of a deal and it was just a rare car. The only version I would've preferred would've been the XT Limited converted to look like a Sports.

We had one and it took a long time to sell. Had it on the lot for 5 months. It sucked, because it looked SOOO good. Nobody wanted a manual...
JustyWRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 01:16 AM   #36
laufu
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 29826
Join Date: Nov 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Vehicle:
13 Legacy 3.6R
Deep Indigo Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustyWRC

What is the ground clearance of a Legacy Wagon? The Forester XT is 8.9 inches. Doubt 296hp would be safe in a vehicle sitting that high.

What I was told by an engineer at a training event was that it isn't proper to put a set number to the power split. He said that the system is constantly adjusting as the car moves. Acceleration. Deceleration. Turn right. Turn left. Turn right AND accelerate. Turn left AND decelerate. He said it is never in a set ratio; BUT, if you just HAD to put numbers to it, it would be more like an 80/20 split. In our training materials/tests on Subarunet, it doesn't even have a number set to it. The VTD does(45/55) and the Continuous AWD(manuals) does(50/50). The Active AWD just says it sends more power to the front.

Well, with autos getting that much better MPG, and the push for higher CAFE standards, the manual is......what do ya'll refer to the 4EAT as?.......archaic?

We had one and it took a long time to sell. Had it on the lot for 5 months. It sucked, because it looked SOOO good. Nobody wanted a manual...

Really? I always thought Active AWD was set to 60:40. Or maybe that is how SOA sets USDM cars while the rest of the world gets 60:40. I got my information from Subaru global.

http://www.subaru-global.com/tec_awd.html
laufu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 04:32 AM   #37
keepclam
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 120244
Join Date: Jul 2006
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Everett, WA
Vehicle:
2006 Legacy SE Sedan
2006 Pilot EX-L 4WD

Default

^Good find, laufu.
keepclam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 04:46 AM   #38
keepclam
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 120244
Join Date: Jul 2006
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Everett, WA
Vehicle:
2006 Legacy SE Sedan
2006 Pilot EX-L 4WD

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare View Post
Good luck finding a Forester XT before 2009 with a manual.
Six on AutoTrader right now. There's a red 2006 in NY with only 20k(!), silver 2005 in Seattle with 55k, two black 2005s with 88k in San Diego and North Carolina...
keepclam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 09:10 AM   #39
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 Sub!eDr!ver View Post
Fair points Scrappy. I was more referring to the mechanical benefits, not the emotional connections through clutch & shifter.

A CVT, built well, is absolutely better than a traditional slushbox, and can be significantly more efficient than an auto or manual.
I 100% support your feelings with the slushbox vs CVT. I would take a CVT over it, as the benefits FAR outweigh the negatives when compared to a traditional slush box.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 12:45 PM   #40
HipToBeSquare
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:
1992 SVX LS-L

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keepclam View Post
Six on AutoTrader right now. There's a red 2006 in NY with only 20k(!), silver 2005 in Seattle with 55k, two black 2005s with 88k in San Diego and North Carolina...
I live in Iowa.

The wife an I flew to Vermont to buy my Legacy GT, and drive it home. It cost me a significant part of the price difference between that used car, and the price of a new one... I couldn't find a new one, though.

Like Wyldcat89... nobody had a Legacy GT Limited with black leather and a 5-speed stick, and the one Spec.B that I did see was brand new, and being held for ransom above my budget, well above a GT Limited's price. Nobody wanted to help, and most were incredulous that I wouldn't just buy one of a few Legacy GTs that were around with Taupe interiors, and automatic gearboxes, and mostly white, black, or silver... and I wanted a color. Everything is grey and white here in the winter... it gets depressing without any color.

I bought a Garnet Red Pearl 2005 Legacy GT Limited 5MT, with an AccessPort and a second set of wheels from a member on the Legacy GT forum, instead, and used the money to fly out and get it.

Later, I bought an SVX from California, and paid to have it driven to me, but the price of the car was quite a deal. I was driving it through the near-local Subaru dealer here one day, and the salesman that approached me, asked about the car, and what it was.... "SVX", it looks futuristic, what year? "'92"... who made it? "SUBARU did." Oh.

I am not sure why some Subaru retailers are so out of touch with what Subaru enthusiasts want.

However, I am not sure I can justify a third trans-continental Subaru purchase to the 'powers that be', in order to get anything close to what I want. Not quite ready yet to pull the trigger anyway... but somewhat mid-term soon.

I always research and shop for years before pulling the trigger on a newer car. I shopped for 2 years while I prepared to purchase the Legacy, and I was figuring on it being my first factory-new car. I was much more excited about Legacy then than I am about any Subaru now. I knew Legacy GT was THE CAR I wanted. Now I find myself trying to find the least amount of down-side, because what I really want doesn't exist at any sort of affordable price point.

Like Forester vs. 5-seat Tribeca. Neither of them are the GT Coupe I want... so might as well go utilitarian. The original plan was a nice AWD GT Coupe as a daily driver and trip car, and a bargain basement cheap AWD SUV/CUV as a backup hauler. Without the first option, the second option gets promoted to the front line.

But do I want to keep the manual, and lose half the horsepower... or keep most of the horsepower, amenities, have VTD AWD, but lose the manual gearbox for the 5EAT which isn't necessarily 100% robust. (HB Dad, IIRC, had some pretty serious problems with his tribeca's transaxle and a lot of down-time.)

Without a nice GT Coupe to hope for... I find myself hoping for a Forester with at least WRX hardware, preferably WRX STI hardware. Subaru has built it as a concept, and other customers with deep pockets have constructed one out of a Forester plus a donor STI.

An FA20DIT with 296 hp and a WRX STI drivetrain with a taller 6th gear sounds great. With 240hp, a CVT, and lower-end AWD hardware... not really.

And BTW, JustyWRC... there are lots of CUVS and SUVs with MUCH more than 300hp. BMW, Porsche, Land Rover/Range Rover, Explorer with an EcoBoost engine... and more. A higher center of gravity is indeed something to properly tune the suspension for, but does not preclude a healthy amount of horsepower.

How high is the CG of a Ford Raptor with a Supercharged 6.2 V8? Probably higher than a Forester XT with a boxer engine.

Last edited by HipToBeSquare; 09-13-2012 at 01:10 PM.
HipToBeSquare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 01:02 PM   #41
chanomatik
Scooby Guru
 
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 JustyWRC View Post
We had one and it took a long time to sell. Had it on the lot for 5 months. It sucked, because it looked SOOO good. Nobody wanted a manual...
Those fools did not know what they were missing out on. SMH

Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare View Post
I live in Iowa.

The wife an I flew to Vermont to buy my Legacy GT, and drive it home. It cost me a significant part of the price difference between that used car, and the price of a new one... I couldn't find a new one, though.

I bought an SVX from California, and paid to have it driven to me, but the price of the car was quite a deal.

I am not sure I can justify a third trans-continental Subaru purchase to the 'powers that be'...
Hip, in 2009 I flew down to Park City, UT, from Alaska to pick up my Forester and I drove it back up. Please tell me you'll at least TRY to find one? They really are worth it. I only gave it up because my life got less active as my friends kept getting married off and they became more active, among other reasons. The Forester no longer filled a need, but if your family has a need for its utility then I vote you go for it. I don't think we'll ever get a manual transmission Forester turbo again.
chanomatik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 01:53 PM   #42
HipToBeSquare
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:
1992 SVX LS-L

Default

I don't mind a road trip... but finances aren't the same as they were in 2007, before the economy took a dump, and salaries got frozen.

And my wife doesn't like to be cooped up in a vehicle, car or plane, to travel long distances.

If it comes to that... I can do another trip... but I would much rather find something within a day's round-trip radius, when the time comes.

And the point of buying new... is that you should be able to go to your near-by dealer, and get what you want, without having to spend the additional money on travel arrangements. It hardly seems like Subaru enthusiasts can buy new at a local dealer, without having to negotiate about getting cars from distant locations, or waiting months, rather weeks, for a factory delivery of a BTO car.

And with S-Edition, or diesel-powered Foresters, and probably this new DIT Forester... it may not even be offered in the US, period. (I have a feeling DIT-powered Forester won't make it to the US until it arrives in the next-gen body, if SOA justifies selling it at all.)
HipToBeSquare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 01:59 PM   #43
SoDealer
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 67960
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default

And somehow this conversation goes way off topic and all about one person.
SoDealer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 02:26 PM   #44
HipToBeSquare
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:
1992 SVX LS-L

Default

So contribute to the conversation.

What is YOUR comment on the DIT Forester, or the Forester in general?
HipToBeSquare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 03:41 PM   #45
JustyWRC
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
09 WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare View Post
An FA20DIT with 296 hp and a WRX STI drivetrain with a taller 6th gear sounds great. With 240hp, a CVT, and lower-end AWD hardware... not really.

And BTW, JustyWRC... there are lots of CUVS and SUVs with MUCH more than 300hp. BMW, Porsche, Land Rover/Range Rover, Explorer with an EcoBoost engine... and more. A higher center of gravity is indeed something to properly tune the suspension for, but does not preclude a healthy amount of horsepower.

How high is the CG of a Ford Raptor with a Supercharged 6.2 V8? Probably higher than a Forester XT with a boxer engine.

I should have said SUBARU probably wouldn't think it was safe ENOUGH for them. Not sure about the Porsche, but aren't the other ones criticized for their "top heaviness"? The Explorer I believe is a wider vehicle as well. NONE of this even means that they are safe. What are their roll over ratings?

My statement wasn't meant to argue. I was trying to get in the minds of Subaru and why they wouldn't offer the Forester with the 296 vs 240. Having worked at a dealer for as long as I have, I somewhat understand them a bit more, I think it has to do with what people will buy. A 296hp Forester would probably cost significantly more than the 240hp one. Sure, they would sell the 296, but enough of them at the price they would have to charge?
JustyWRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 03:56 PM   #46
chanomatik
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159474
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: AKIC
Location: Anchorage (...for now...)
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Ltd 6MT CBS
SNOSLO

Default

How much more did the 2009 WRX cost over the outgoing 2008 WRX?
chanomatik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 03:57 PM   #47
HipToBeSquare
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:
1992 SVX LS-L

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustyWRC View Post
I should have said SUBARU probably wouldn't think it was safe ENOUGH for them. Not sure about the Porsche, but aren't the other ones criticized for their "top heaviness"? The Explorer I believe is a wider vehicle as well. NONE of this even means that they are safe. What are their roll over ratings?

My statement wasn't meant to argue. I was trying to get in the minds of Subaru and why they wouldn't offer the Forester with the 296 vs 240. Having worked at a dealer for as long as I have, I somewhat understand them a bit more, I think it has to do with what people will buy. A 296hp Forester would probably cost significantly more than the 240hp one. Sure, they would sell the 296, but enough of them at the price they would have to charge?
I wasn't trying to be argumentative, either, just making a point.

And they wouldn't meet current crash test standards if they weren't safe.

SUVs and CUVS seem to sell well, with their Center of Gravity where it is... and Forester has one of the lowest for vehicles with similar ride height, due to it's drivetrain and engine being low in the chassis. Forester has long been cited as one of the most car-like vehicles in it's class, and before '09 and the SH generation, Forester was the only vehicle in it's class that DIDN'T require a roll-over warning label on the sun-visor.

And there is nothing to say that a sportier Forester wouldn't have a lower ride height than a stock Forester currently, even if not as low as a WRX or STI. Several SH Forester owners that modify their vehicles have lowered them slightly to very nice effect.

The blue Forester is a full '08 STI engine and driveline swap, with Stage 2 engine upgrades. The black one is stock.

http://www.subaruforester.org-sleepy1-2009-forester-2-5x-w-complete-08-sti-conversion-106814/

Track width is an issue, but mostly in relation to CG, rather than over-all height... and Forester has a low-ish CG in it's class, and even lower if the Forester is lowered an inch or so.

If I could buy a Forester like Sleepy1's modified Forester... I would consider it very quickly. I don't have the cash for an STI donor car, and the labor to swap it directly in.

If I did have the money... a nice blue Forester XT Touring, with a full STI swap with DCCD and SI-Drive, and the whole deal, all the way to the 5x114 hubs and wheels... that would be a NICE vehicle, and dare I say it... a better looking CUV as CUVs go, than WRX STI is as cars go.
HipToBeSquare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 04:27 PM   #48
JustyWRC
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
09 WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HipToBeSquare View Post
And they wouldn't meet current crash test standards if they weren't safe.

Forester was the only vehicle in it's class that DIDN'T require a roll-over warning label on the sun-visor.

And there is nothing to say that a sportier Forester wouldn't have a lower ride height than a stock Forester currently, even if not as low as a WRX or STI.

What are their crash test results? ANYTHING less than the Forester negates that to me, for this point.

Forester DOES have a roll-over warning sticker on it's sunvisor.

And, technically, the Forester XT(the current "sporty" Forester) has an 8.9" ground clearance over the N/A Foresters 8.7". Maybe a future "sporty" Forester will have a lowered ride height compared instead of a higher one.

I know several people that are with you though. Would love a Forester with some much better power.
JustyWRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 04:27 PM   #49
chanomatik
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159474
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: AKIC
Location: Anchorage (...for now...)
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Ltd 6MT CBS
SNOSLO

Default

I am thinking that there's a difference between selling the Forester XT as a WRX-type in the US and saying, "It doesn't sell," and making a full-blown Forester STI (XTi) that we've never been given a chance to have. The 2008 Sports XT was the closest we got (Canada got a better version).

I think that's where the issue lies. If the top-tier Forester was the STI-version, and not just a heavier WRX, I don't think it would be ignored, but I definitely think it's niche. More niche than what Subaru already is as a brand.
chanomatik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2012, 04:42 PM   #50
HipToBeSquare
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 119958
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: (IA) flyover cornfield country
Vehicle:
1992 SVX LS-L

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustyWRC View Post
What are their crash test results? ANYTHING less than the Forester negates that to me, for this point.

Forester DOES have a roll-over warning sticker on it's sunvisor.

And, technically, the Forester XT(the current "sporty" Forester) has an 8.9" ground clearance over the N/A Foresters 8.7". Maybe a future "sporty" Forester will have a lowered ride height compared instead of a higher one.

I know several people that are with you though. Would love a Forester with some much better power.
09-current Foester does have the warning, because it has a higher ride height than the 03-08 Forester ever did.

And like the Legacy GT Spec.B, which had a higher ride height than the GT and GT limited... most of that increased ride height of the SH Forester XT over the X, is likely due to larger diameter wheels, without sacrificing some tire sidewall to compensate. The suspension on the Forester XT is probably set up the same or very nearly the same otherwise. Impreza GT and '10+ Legacy GT would be precedents for that. Not much suspension change between non-turbo and turbo on those models. Not like WRX or STI compared to Impreza, or even 05-09 Legacy GT vs 2.5i, which actually had some differences in suspension pieces and brake sizes.

Forester XT isn't really appreciably sportier than the Forester X, other than having more power. That is like saying that the Impreza GT 4EAT is sportier than the base 2.5i Impreza was. It still is no WRX, and certainly no WRX STI.


I think the fact that at least 4 or 5 people have converted SH Foresters to WRX STI drivetrains... at SIGNIFICANT expense, shows that there is some demand for that.

The conversion is mechanically simple enough... nothing is incompatible... but it still would take a lot of paid labor hours (Sleepy1 did the work himself on that blue Forester X, very admirably) and a very expensive donor car that ends up being a shell, and a used Forester suspension and drivetrain that is worth salvage value for the parts.

Subaru could build that, on the factory line since the parts all bolt on and plug in directly, without the added cost of taking two manufactured cars to make one final product AFTER the fact.

Subaru doesn't fully build a WRX or Impreza, then tear it back down to re-build as an STI... it is built as an STI on the production line, there are no spare WRX or Impreza take-off parts.

And if WRX STI in it's next generation becomes smaller and more performance focused, I think there will be even MORE vacancy in Subaru's lineup for a premier Subaru drivetrain in a much more practical body-style, like Forester's.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chanomatik View Post
I think that's where the issue lies. If the top-tier Forester was the STI-version, and not just a heavier WRX, I don't think it would be ignored, but I definitely think it's niche. More niche than what Subaru already is as a brand.
I'll counter with Ford's SVT Raptor. Probably more specialized than even WRX STI, or a hypothetical Forester XTI, as Raptor is made for off-roading even at some handling cost on pavement.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2012/04...5-percent.html

Yet Raptor sells a larger percentage of F150 sales than Ford ever imagined it would. People really like it, and buy it. There is one I see locally that has all sorts of accessory lighting, that never has a speck of dirt on it. Say it is sad, if you wish... but Ford is making bank on it.

Personally, I think a Forester with STI drivetrain, and now with the advent of FA20DIT likely replacing all variants of EJ25 Turbo engines, that if Forester had 5-10hp less than the STI, but more than the next-gen WRX, and certainly more than just 240, which is barely more than the Impreza GT/Forester XT specification now, I think it would be a hit.

And if it had the appeal of a specialty performance vehicle, not just an invisible drivetrain change, and demonstrably beat the performance of the larger ecoBoost Escape, and the V6 RAV4, with Subaru DCCD, or at least VTD AWD.... I don't think there is a small or mid-sized CUV on the market that would out-perform it. In a different discussion on this topic, someone else mentioned that it would be like a smaller, affordable BMW X5-M.

And for Subaru, it wouldn't be and additional car in their CAFE fleet average, it would be a light truck in their fleet average. Just a little easier to justify, perhaps.

Last edited by HipToBeSquare; 09-13-2012 at 05:08 PM.
HipToBeSquare is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:07 PM.


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.