Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Saturday August 30, 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 11-30-2012, 09:53 AM   #1351
Cocoa Beach Bum
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 17355
Join Date: Apr 2002
Default

About a month ago, FHI flew a bunch of North American car journalists to FHI's test facility in Japan for test drives of the North American version of the new Forester. The resulting "first drive impressions" articles all appeared almost simultaneously earlier this month and there is a post at http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...&postcount=952 which contains links to most of them.

By all accounts, it was a one-day whirlwind event. A dramatic unveiling of two show cars, followed by presentations by executives, project managers and engineers. Then it was outside to the track where the journos took turns driving laps on a high-speed oval and riding as passengers while expert drivers negotiated an off-road course.

I wouldn't have thought there was enough opportunity to futz around with the navigation system to be able to form an opinion about it, but the writer for Automobile magazine apparently managed to do so, according to http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews...ter_prototype/.
Quote:
We're less excited about the navigation system, which debuted on the BRZ and now features Aha Radio app integration. Subaru, which arguably had one of the worst navigation systems in the business with its outgoing system, has come up with an even worse head unit. The resolution is poor, the information is difficult to read, and the buttons on the touchscreen are small and often unresponsive.
It now occurs to me that one of the presentations probably explained that the new Forester's NAV was essentially the same as the one on the BRZ and that the Automobile writer's opinion was based on his experiences with the BRZ's system.

There is a thread in the BRZ forum about its NAV at http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2431426 and it appears most posters there would agree with Automobile magazine's assessment.

Unfortunately for those Forester buyers who want the Driver Assist Technology package (EyeSight, Keyless Access and Start, and HID headlights), the Touring trim level is a prerequisite and it contains NAV as standard equipment.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Last edited by Cocoa Beach Bum; 11-30-2012 at 10:06 AM.
Cocoa Beach Bum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 11:17 AM   #1352
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 SoDealer View Post
Funny how the octane thing has been a non issue for awhile on turbo Subarus. All of a sudden it's a big deal. The Escape 1.6L DI turbo loses a whopping 5 hp going from premium to regular.
It was always an issue that we knew about. This is most likely due to the magazines showing poor performance results on the MY11 STI and WRX vs MY10. The magazines use 91 oct in CA, when the numbers produced at peak efficiency, 93 are faster.

Last edited by Snow Drift; 11-30-2012 at 11:22 AM.
Snow Drift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 11:28 AM   #1353
Cocoa Beach Bum
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 17355
Join Date: Apr 2002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoDealer View Post
Funny how the octane thing has been a non issue for awhile on turbo Subarus. All of a sudden it's a big deal. The Escape 1.6L DI turbo loses a whopping 5 hp going from premium to regular.
Subaru's new DIT, at least, seems very sensitive to octane level. According to the "First Look" article from Edmunds at http://www.insideline.com/subaru/for...irst-look.html:
Quote:
This new downsized FA20 engine a harbinger of what we may see in the Subaru BRZ turbo has direct injection, a high (for a turbo) 10.6:1 compression ratio, and independently variable intake and exhaust valve timing. It's good for 250 hp on 93-octane unleaded (230 horses on 91 octane) and will scoot from zero to 60 mph in 6.2 seconds, according to Subaru.
Cocoa Beach Bum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 12:04 PM   #1354
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 Cocoa Beach Bum View Post
About a month ago, FHI flew a bunch of North American car journalists to FHI's test facility in Japan for test drives of the North American version of the new Forester. The resulting "first drive impressions" articles all appeared almost simultaneously earlier this month and there is a post at http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...&postcount=952 which contains links to most of them.

By all accounts, it was a one-day whirlwind event. A dramatic unveiling of two show cars, followed by presentations by executives, project managers and engineers. Then it was outside to the track where the journos took turns driving laps on a high-speed oval and riding as passengers while expert drivers negotiated an off-road course.

I wouldn't have thought there was enough opportunity to futz around with the navigation system to be able to form an opinion about it, but the writer for Automobile magazine apparently managed to do so, according to http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews...ter_prototype/.It now occurs to me that one of the presentations probably explained that the new Forester's NAV was essentially the same as the one on the BRZ and that the Automobile writer's opinion was based on his experiences with the BRZ's system.

There is a thread in the BRZ forum about its NAV at http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2431426 and it appears most posters there would agree with Automobile magazine's assessment.

Unfortunately for those Forester buyers who want the Driver Assist Technology package (EyeSight, Keyless Access and Start, and HID headlights), the Touring trim level is a prerequisite and it contains NAV as standard equipment.
Thanks for that, CBB. I can attest to how terrible the BRZ's NAV is. It's not so terrible that I've made it a priority to swap it out right now, but it WILL be swapped. It had so many promising features. Even the Canadian BRZ gets better NAV. I believe their's even plays DVD! I've never even seen an inexpensive aftermarket NAV unit not play DVD.

I'm sad to see this unit carried through to the new Forester. At least the back-up camera feature is decent. I've seen it on my buddy's (furtive) BRZ Premium. Forester owners would be wise to enable that feature if it doesn't already come as an option.
chanomatik is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 01:25 PM   #1355
subyski
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 202642
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Centennial, Colorado
Vehicle:
'08 2.5i,'65 Stang
'80 Vette L82,'73 914 2.0

Default

I'm going to wait until actual dealer information is available to fully determine tow ratings, power, fuel requirements or recommended, options, etc. I've seen too many errors and discrepancies in the past from manufacturer's press releases for these auto shows.
subyski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 02:12 PM   #1356
Cocoa Beach Bum
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 17355
Join Date: Apr 2002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by subyski View Post
I'm going to wait until actual dealer information is available to fully determine tow ratings, power, fuel requirements or recommended, options, etc. I've seen too many errors and discrepancies in the past from manufacturer's press releases for these auto shows.
I once toured southeast Australia for a few weeks by car and noticed that they're mad about towing trailers down there. It seemed like every other car there was pulling a trailer. The current Forester XT models down there have a 1600 kg (3527 lb) towing capability.

The new Forester should arrive down there starting next February and I expect specification details to be announced just after New Year's. Should be interesting.

http://subaru.com.au/forester/xt

Last edited by Cocoa Beach Bum; 11-30-2012 at 02:46 PM.
Cocoa Beach Bum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 02:26 PM   #1357
4S-TURBO
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 67807
Join Date: Aug 2004
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Vehicle:
4-14 Happy 10 Years
Nasioc Member

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustyWRC View Post
Pretty dang big refresh.
Being that the SH never actually had a refresh in the 5 MY's of production, this is more of an evolution of the SH. It gained .9 inches of wheelbase, .7 and .9 inches of track, with 1.4 inches of overall length. The SG to SH gained what, 4-5 inches of wheelbase?

With that said, where did the towing capacity go? Shouldn't it be rated higher with the added weight and stability associated with designing more weight into the platform? Maybe the added weight is what lowered the rating? Bummer if so.

I was its biggest fan, too.

Last edited by 4S-TURBO; 11-30-2012 at 02:47 PM.
4S-TURBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 02:47 PM   #1358
chanomatik
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 159474
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: AKIC
Location: Anchorage (...for now...)
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Ltd 6MT CBS
SNOSLO

Default

Sooo... I think I'm getting confused. Are we saying that the USDM Forester's tow rating is substantially less than AUS, EDM and JDM models? Or are the models themselves getting "worse" across the board with each successive change?
chanomatik is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 02:52 PM   #1359
4S-TURBO
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 67807
Join Date: Aug 2004
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Vehicle:
4-14 Happy 10 Years
Nasioc Member

Default

We don't know and I personally do not care about what it's rated elsewhere. I want SOA to tell me what the car, as equipped, is capable here. It's a liability to strap a big hunk of something to the rear of your car. If it exceeds the manufacturer's rating, you are SOL in an event of something bad happening (like hubs failing, brakes failing, trans failing, engine failing, tires failing, deformation of frame), or an accident.
4S-TURBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 02:56 PM   #1360
crash
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 1440
Join Date: May 2000
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Keeps Bumpers Fresher, Longer!
Vehicle:
05 LGT Wgn; 04 FXT
BDSM -- Birmingham, AL

Default

From what I've seen the USDM Subaru models have ALWAYS been rated with a lower tow rating than all of Subaru's other markets...

Methinks it's the US litigious society that leads to that...

We all know that the unibody and mounting points on the cars are identical...
crash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 03:01 PM   #1361
4S-TURBO
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 67807
Join Date: Aug 2004
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Vehicle:
4-14 Happy 10 Years
Nasioc Member

Default

I think SOA is telling us that all of those failures that are possible are possible because they do not have faith they will hold up to any more than 1500 lbs and the weight of the vehicle itself. Pretty crappy, IMO. Current Outback is almost twice that rating with CVT and N/A 2.5 motor...same litigious society. Weird.
4S-TURBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 03:01 PM   #1362
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 crash View Post
From what I've seen the USDM Subaru models have ALWAYS been rated with a lower tow rating than all of Subaru's other markets...

Methinks it's the US litigious society that leads to that...

We all know that the unibody and mounting points on the cars are identical...
See, this is what I mean. Why on earth would other places on earth be rated higher for the SAME vehicle?
chanomatik is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 03:11 PM   #1363
4S-TURBO
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 67807
Join Date: Aug 2004
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Vehicle:
4-14 Happy 10 Years
Nasioc Member

Default

Dunno, but why is the BM and SH platform rated so high and this so little?
4S-TURBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 03:20 PM   #1364
subyski
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 202642
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Centennial, Colorado
Vehicle:
'08 2.5i,'65 Stang
'80 Vette L82,'73 914 2.0

Default

I wish it was a misprint..... ....Or maybe they meant 1500 kg....
subyski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 03:41 PM   #1365
silver arrow
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 25859
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Foriderp
Vehicle:
1965 MGB yellow
2008 Black Miata

Default

What replaced the 4 spd auto in the FXT?
silver arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 03:41 PM   #1366
4S-TURBO
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 67807
Join Date: Aug 2004
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Vehicle:
4-14 Happy 10 Years
Nasioc Member

Default

subyski^^^ THIS is what I was hoping to find out with my incessant and annoying blabbering.

The tow rating is the only reason holding be back from buying a new XT. If SOA is not confident enough, neither am I.

CVT replaced 4EAT.
4S-TURBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 04:13 PM   #1367
4S-TURBO
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 67807
Join Date: Aug 2004
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Vehicle:
4-14 Happy 10 Years
Nasioc Member

Default

Ford Escape with turbo has 1500 standard tow rating and 3500 max tow rating. Riding on 19's no less. Here's to hoping...
4S-TURBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 05:08 PM   #1368
Brahmzy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 3293
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: CO
Vehicle:
'14 FXT-T
'15 WRX? '15 STI?

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cocoa Beach Bum View Post
About a month ago, FHI flew a bunch of North American car journalists to FHI's test facility in Japan for test drives of the North American version of the new Forester. The resulting "first drive impressions" articles all appeared almost simultaneously earlier this month and there is a post at http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...&postcount=952 which contains links to most of them.

By all accounts, it was a one-day whirlwind event. A dramatic unveiling of two show cars, followed by presentations by executives, project managers and engineers. Then it was outside to the track where the journos took turns driving laps on a high-speed oval and riding as passengers while expert drivers negotiated an off-road course.

I wouldn't have thought there was enough opportunity to futz around with the navigation system to be able to form an opinion about it, but the writer for Automobile magazine apparently managed to do so, according to http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews...ter_prototype/.It now occurs to me that one of the presentations probably explained that the new Forester's NAV was essentially the same as the one on the BRZ and that the Automobile writer's opinion was based on his experiences with the BRZ's system.

There is a thread in the BRZ forum about its NAV at http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2431426 and it appears most posters there would agree with Automobile magazine's assessment.

Unfortunately for those Forester buyers who want the Driver Assist Technology package (EyeSight, Keyless Access and Start, and HID headlights), the Touring trim level is a prerequisite and it contains NAV as standard equipment.
W T F Subaru
On current models, the POS nav is a separate option from the Touring trim. You can have HIDs all day long without nav.
WTF do I need to press a button every time I start my car to agree to a damn EULA and be forced to pay for $hit I will NEVER use. ARGH.
Brahmzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 05:16 PM   #1369
JustyWRC
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
09 WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chanomatik View Post

I'm sad to see this unit carried through to the new Forester.
The article is wrong. This NAV debuted in the 2012 Forester. Long before the BRZ came out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by subyski View Post
I'm going to wait until actual dealer information is available to fully determine tow ratings, power, fuel requirements or recommended, options, etc. I've seen too many errors and discrepancies in the past from manufacturer's press releases for these auto shows.

From Subaru?
JustyWRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 05:22 PM   #1370
JustyWRC
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
09 WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahmzy View Post
W T F Subaru
On current models, the POS nav is a separate option from the Touring trim. You can have HIDs all day long without nav.
WTF do I need to press a button every time I start my car to agree to a damn EULA and be forced to pay for $hit I will NEVER use. ARGH.

It has got to do something with EyeSight. Probably the computer that runs them.

I would think if you had it, you would use it. The bluetooth that comes with it is superior right now in the fact that it is the only one that downloads your phonebook.

If you really don't want to use the NAV, then you wouldn't ever have to agree to the EULA. Leave it in the audio screen.
JustyWRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 05:33 PM   #1371
A W
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 265433
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahmzy View Post
W T F Subaru
On current models, the POS nav is a separate option from the Touring trim. You can have HIDs all day long without nav.
WTF do I need to press a button every time I start my car to agree to a damn EULA and be forced to pay for $hit I will NEVER use. ARGH.
I assure you, your wife will use the nagivation to find you when your BMW breaks down.

Seriously, it's just like setting the climate control temperatures each time you get into the car if you didn't do it the last time you were in it. One simple click or rotation of a control handle and you have your sight-blinding HID's on or your navigation started up.
A W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 05:36 PM   #1372
subyski
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 202642
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Centennial, Colorado
Vehicle:
'08 2.5i,'65 Stang
'80 Vette L82,'73 914 2.0

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustyWRC View Post

From Subaru?
I meant it more of a generalization. Not saying what Subaru printed is wrong but there still needs some clarifications. For example for the XT, the pdf provided earlier in the thread by Subaru states the fuel requirement is "91 min" where as Subaru's website for the 2014 Forester, under Specs, states fuel requirement is "91 premium recommended". This, to me, has a different meaning. It's more of the nit picky stuff that needs to be cleaned up by the time it goes on sale. Unfortunately, I don't think the tow rating stated is incorrect.
subyski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 05:40 PM   #1373
Beyer Subaru
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 206860
Join Date: Mar 2009
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Alexandria, VA
Vehicle:
13 BRZ 05 92X Aero
White, Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustyWRC View Post
The article is wrong. This NAV debuted in the 2012 Forester. Long before the BRZ came out.




From Subaru?

Hopefully my sarcasm meter is reading you correctly. I thought it was great that our Showroom Subaru Book (That every customer looks in) showed that the new Impreza comes with Dual Zone Climate Control.
Beyer Subaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 06:41 PM   #1374
JustyWRC
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
09 WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by subyski View Post
I meant it more of a generalization. Not saying what Subaru printed is wrong but there still needs some clarifications. For example for the XT, the pdf provided earlier in the thread by Subaru states the fuel requirement is "91 min" where as Subaru's website for the 2014 Forester, under Specs, states fuel requirement is "91 premium recommended". This, to me, has a different meaning. It's more of the nit picky stuff that needs to be cleaned up by the time it goes on sale. Unfortunately, I don't think the tow rating stated is incorrect.
I have always remembered that the minimum that they recommend is 91. 93 is what it is designed for and, to me and my travels, seem to be more widely available. I have yet to not come across it. Now, that is speaking for the Rockies and east.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Beyer Subaru View Post
Hopefully my sarcasm meter is reading you correctly. I thought it was great that our Showroom Subaru Book (That every customer looks in) showed that the new Impreza comes with Dual Zone Climate Control.
Yep, and they fixed that very quick; but, he was talking about Autoshow press releases.
JustyWRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2012, 09:07 PM   #1375
neg_matnik
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 132389
Join Date: Nov 2006
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: SF Bay Area
Vehicle:
2006 WRX Wagon SGM
2003 SV1000S, 2014 DL650

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cocoa Beach Bum View Post
Subaru's new DIT, at least, seems very sensitive to octane level. According to the "First Look" article from Edmunds at http://www.insideline.com/subaru/for...irst-look.html:
And yet, the 2.0 DIT on 91 AKI gas most likely produces more torque/power everywhere in the rev range as compared to the outgoing EJ255 with it's low static compression and its remotely located super tiny turbo.
Bottom line, IMO, we don't have to worry about power/torque production on 91 AKI gas from a relatively high compression direct injected engine that has a decently sized turbo located very close to the exhaust ports.
My guess is that we'll all be pleasantly surprised (even with 91 AKI gas in the tank). Peak power numbers don't tell the actual story.
neg_matnik 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 11:38 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.