Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Saturday December 15, 2018
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru 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 11-30-2018, 03:38 PM   #51
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

Even the Civic Type-R had a rear beam setup for a little while (ditching the usual double wishbone) until Honda went to a multi-link for the current Type-R.
Almost every single French hot hatch that I grew up around had a rear beam: Peugeot 205 GTI, Peugeot 306 GTI, Renault Clio Williams, Clio 172/182/192/200 ...Megane RS.
It's cheap/inexpensive, certainly not ideal, but, when done right, it just works.

Nowadays, there are quite a few cars with nice multi-link or double wishbone setups tuned for runflat tires. IMO, they ride no better that cars with cheap torsion beams on regular tires.
I know, not relevant to hot hatches, but maybe it's worth mentioning.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
neg_matnik is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 11-30-2018, 03:48 PM   #52
RODSCALIP5
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 65170
Join Date: Jun 2004
Default

Doesnt the Fiesta ST have a Torsion Beam?
RODSCALIP5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2018, 03:54 PM   #53
Skylab
n00b Moderator
Moderator
 
Member#: 4263
Join Date: Feb 2001
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Encinitas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chanomatik
I'm a weirdo because the rear end is my favorite part. *shrug*

I just don't like how small the rear passenger window is. I watched a Redline overview where they got to open the doors and look inside. The rear passenger volume seems small too.

Remember when we hated huge grill
openings? Nobody even blinks at them anymore.


Itís unique looking. I like it.

Skylab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2018, 04:52 PM   #54
JustyWRC
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
06/04 For 18 Imp 4dr Sprt

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylab View Post
Remember when we hated huge grill
openings? Nobody even blinks at them anymore.
Still do
JustyWRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2018, 09:43 PM   #55
poison
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 37678
Join Date: May 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chanomatik View Post
I'm a weirdo because the rear end is my favorite part. *shrug*

I just don't like how small the rear passenger window is. I watched a Redline overview where they got to open the doors and look inside. The rear passenger volume seems small too.

I still hate the tacked-on infotainment center.
The infotainment isn't tacked on. The reason Mazda does this, as well as mb, is to lower the sight lines out the front window. When you cram a giant screen into the dash, it raises the sight lines, and makes you feel like you're slouched in a bathtub.

BTW, this is why I love mazda:

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-shows/los-angeles-auto-show/a25356804/mazda3-skyactiv-x-future-internal-combustion/
poison is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2018, 08:11 AM   #56
pgh88
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 316756
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alape8 View Post
The torsion beam rear was disclosed several months ago and the reason they stated (we all know cost savings, but meh) was that it drastically helped with NVH that customers had been complaining about. That being said, the Fiesta ST also had a torsion beam rear so maybe they have some decent implementation of it? Who knows

I have always been a hatch/wagon guy (and currently own a '15 mazda3 hatch), but holy crap I cannot get on board with that rear end. Maybe it looks better in real life but in photos it's just SO awkward, particularly that giant swath of sheet metal for a C-pillar. The sedan in comparison is absolutely gorgeous.
IMO The Impreza hatch is better looking inside and out. This car looks like styling took over the function part. If Subaru pumped up the Impreza engine output a little and screwed down the suspension a tad it would be perfect
pgh88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2018, 09:28 AM   #57
quentinberg007
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7887
Join Date: Jun 2001
Vehicle:
2016 Toyota 4Runner
Barcelona Red

Default

Torsion beam is fine for performance in a car this size... on perfect roads. It is going to be pretty ****ty on the real world back roads that have patches and dips near the edge.

Interior and overall look is really nice except for that train wreck of a C pillar on the hatch. I prefer the sedan in both the new 3 and the new Corolla. Weird.
quentinberg007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2018, 04:03 PM   #58
FaastLegacy
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 11671
Join Date: Oct 2001
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pgh88 View Post
IMO The Impreza hatch is better looking inside and out. This car looks like styling took over the function part. If Subaru pumped up the Impreza engine output a little and screwed down the suspension a tad it would be perfect
It's certainly subjective. Every time I see a new generation Impreza, I think, "What a boring little crapbox".
FaastLegacy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2018, 04:08 PM   #59
FaastLegacy
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 11671
Join Date: Oct 2001
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Default



Sight lines that would make a Camaro proud.
FaastLegacy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2018, 05:11 PM   #60
JustyWRC
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
06/04 For 18 Imp 4dr Sprt

Default

So, I have a legit question. A little snarky-ness is in this question; but, legit still. Will this car, with that horrible of visibility be enough? Mazda seems to have had a good beginning of the year; but, has had 3 solid months of slides. The CX-9, if it continues it's recent slide, is in danger of having a YTD loss of sales. The CX-5 has a comfortable margin to finish up and the 3 probably won't finish down either. I do say that without last months numbers out though. They are at less than half Subaru sales. I wouldn't think that number puts them in danger of leaving the U.S. market, right? I just wonder if this form over function is helping or hurting them.....
JustyWRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2018, 08:06 PM   #61
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 JustyWRC View Post
So, I have a legit question. A little snarky-ness is in this question; but, legit still. Will this car, with that horrible of visibility be enough? Mazda seems to have had a good beginning of the year; but, has had 3 solid months of slides. The CX-9, if it continues it's recent slide, is in danger of having a YTD loss of sales. The CX-5 has a comfortable margin to finish up and the 3 probably won't finish down either. I do say that without last months numbers out though. They are at less than half Subaru sales. I wouldn't think that number puts them in danger of leaving the U.S. market, right? I just wonder if this form over function is helping or hurting them.....
Based on October data, Mazda has sold 5.3% more vehicles compared to October of last year. Granted, it's almost entirely due to CX-5 doing really well.
So, no, I don't think they are about to pack up and leave just yet.
Also, keep in mind that, globally, Mazda has sold $1.6M vehicles (they say it's their 3rd record year); I don't think they will walk away from selling at least 400K vehicles over here.
neg_matnik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2018, 06:35 AM   #62
Blitzkrieg
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 14913
Join Date: Feb 2002
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Vehicle:
2003 Lock Stock and
2 Smoking Barrels "wrx"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FaastLegacy View Post


Sight lines that would make a Camaro proud.
Holly Hand grenades is that tiny. A mail carrier driving crazy like down a side access road couldn't hit that slot without stopping.
Blitzkrieg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2018, 08:18 AM   #63
Calamity Jesus
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 44501
Join Date: Oct 2003
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Yeah, well, you know
Vehicle:
that 's, like, your
alternate facts, man.

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neg_matnik View Post
Even the Civic Type-R had a rear beam setup for a little while (ditching the usual double wishbone) until Honda went to a multi-link for the current Type-R.
Honda based their little egg-shaped FN2 off the Fit platform. That ended up being the bastard child of all performance Civics.. and it followed the EP3.

https://www.carthrottle.com/post/w97xy92/
Quote:
The problem is the FN2 doesn’t at any time feel fast. You can buzz it up to the 8000rpm red line all you want, but save for a mild increase in poke from around 5500rpm, there’s no VTEC kicked in yo force pinning you in the back of your seat. The gear change isn’t as slick as the FK2 either, but the biggest problem is with the suspension. Not just because the chassis lacks the fluidity of the old EP3’s - no lift-off oversteer heroics here, I’m afraid - but also because it’s absurdly firm.

You’ve probably heard us and pretty much every other UK car publication out there complain about the overly harsh ‘+R’ mode on the latest Type R. The FN2 rides rather like that, except there are no adaptive dampers here, so you’re stuck with the firmness all the time.

It just never seems to settle: you’re constantly jiggling around. It’s irritating in town, and when you’re on a bumpy B road it’s downright scary when the chassis’ firmness and lack of finesse sees you skating around and grappling with the wheel just to stay on the tarmac.
The Japanese market got the FD2 Type-R which was just like our USDM Civic sedan and only got the FN2 in some Mugen special editions.

Honda actually had the FK2 Type-R for 2 years with the turbocharged engine, dual-axis front geometry, and multi-link rear with adaptable shocks before bringing them to the US on the current Civic. It's also the genesis of all those stupid spoilers.


Quote:
Originally Posted by neg_matnik View Post
Almost every single French hot hatch that I grew up around had a rear beam: Peugeot 205 GTI, Peugeot 306 GTI, Renault Clio Williams, Clio 172/182/192/200 ...Megane RS.
It's cheap/inexpensive, certainly not ideal, but, when done right, it just works.
Here's the thing. If you don't need much travel, such as with a tightly sprung Megane RS, suspension type matters very little. If you want a smooth riding and capable car on the crumbling streets of a nation that fails to invest into existing infrastructure, you want those nicer suspensions to keep your tires in proper alignment through longer wheel travel.

I just don't see this as a good move by Mazda. Toyota and Hyundai are ditching their torsion beams for multi-links that allow a better mix of roadholding and handling. Mazda is clearly just trying to offset their engine development costs.

We're going to see a bunch of reviews from folks that got wined and dined at a junket, and then got to throw the cars around a smooth race track in Spain or Italy, and then they're going to tell us that the Mazda3's suspension is incredible! It's just the same damn game being played over and over again.
Calamity Jesus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2018, 08:40 AM   #64
KC
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 442
Join Date: Oct 1999
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: RI/SE Mass
Vehicle:
17 Imp Spurt
00 S2k | 14 BRZ (SSC)

Default

Dave Coleman explains the 3's AWD system and claims it will be as fun to drive, if not more so, than the outgoing one...


--kC

Last edited by KC; 12-02-2018 at 11:31 AM.
KC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2018, 10:58 AM   #65
chanomatik
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159474
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Mahwah, New Jersey
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Ltd 6MT CBS
SNOSLO

Default

It's that Type R magic all over again.
chanomatik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2018, 11:31 AM   #66
JustyWRC
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 153088
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arlington, TN
Vehicle:
2005 Baja Turbo
06/04 For 18 Imp 4dr Sprt

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neg_matnik View Post
Based on October data, Mazda has sold 5.3% more vehicles compared to October of last year. Granted, it's almost entirely due to CX-5 doing really well.
So, no, I don't think they are about to pack up and leave just yet.
Also, keep in mind that, globally, Mazda has sold $1.6M vehicles (they say it's their 3rd record year); I don't think they will walk away from selling at least 400K vehicles over here.

Right, but I was talking about a 3 month slide. They are 5% up YTD but 3 months of slides has bit into that(well, 2 really). October showed a 10%+ drop in sales. Including a 10% drop in the CX-5, and a 15% drop in Sept for the CX-5. Weird that followed a 10% increase. Was that a new model launch? I'm wondering if the slide continues to a YTD loss and then will this new CX-3 really matter? Are these new designs coming and people are all "woowoo. cool looking car" then getting into them and going "nope. Don't really like it". Or is it just really bad marketing from Mazda. I kinda think the latter. I can't recall the last time I've seen a commercial. For anything.
JustyWRC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2018, 01:37 PM   #67
Pre
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 139693
Join Date: Feb 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FaastLegacy View Post


Sight lines that would make a Camaro proud.
Wow. Great find. Thatís terrible.
Pre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2018, 09:20 PM   #68
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 Calamity Jesus View Post
Honda based their little egg-shaped FN2 off the Fit platform. That ended up being the bastard child of all performance Civics.. and it followed the EP3.

https://www.carthrottle.com/post/w97xy92/


The Japanese market got the FD2 Type-R which was just like our USDM Civic sedan and only got the FN2 in some Mugen special editions.

Honda actually had the FK2 Type-R for 2 years with the turbocharged engine, dual-axis front geometry, and multi-link rear with adaptable shocks before bringing them to the US on the current Civic. It's also the genesis of all those stupid spoilers.
Fair enough.

Quote:
Here's the thing. If you don't need much travel, such as with a tightly sprung Megane RS, suspension type matters very little. If you want a smooth riding and capable car on the crumbling streets of a nation that fails to invest into existing infrastructure, you want those nicer suspensions to keep your tires in proper alignment through longer wheel travel.
Yes, I agree.
Maybe I'm spoiled because my go-to backroads are decently paved, for the most part.

Quote:
[...]Mazda is clearly just trying to offset their engine development costs.
Yeah, maybe that's what's going on.
They most likely sunk a lot of R&D money into their Diesel-like compression ignition gas engine.
neg_matnik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2018, 01:06 AM   #69
n2oiroc
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 141952
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: milwaukee'ish
Vehicle:
18 golf arrrr!

Default

looks like the sedan is the winner here, better visibility and styling.
n2oiroc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2018, 03:54 PM   #70
subyski
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 202642
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Centennial, Colorado
Vehicle:
08 Impreza,80Vette
68 Impala, 15 SantaFe

Default

That rear visibility in the hatch is awful. As much as I like the hatch, I don't know if I would like the lack of visibility.
subyski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2018, 04:04 PM   #71
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 subyski View Post
That rear visibility in the hatch is awful. As much as I like the hatch, I don't know if I would like the lack of visibility.
How does it compare to the current/outgoing hatchback?
Is it actually worse? I can't really tell from the pics whether or not rear window is indeed smaller on the new car.
neg_matnik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2018, 04:23 PM   #72
subyski
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 202642
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Centennial, Colorado
Vehicle:
08 Impreza,80Vette
68 Impala, 15 SantaFe

Default

I can't say for sure but based on the photo above, it is worse than the current hatch. I think the current hatch visibility is fine but not Subaru good.
subyski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2018, 05:49 PM   #73
n2oiroc
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 141952
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: milwaukee'ish
Vehicle:
18 golf arrrr!

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neg_matnik View Post
How does it compare to the current/outgoing hatchback?
Is it actually worse? I can't really tell from the pics whether or not rear window is indeed smaller on the new car.
the current model is nowhere near that bad.
n2oiroc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2018, 01:28 AM   #74
hi5.0
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 340456
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Vehicle:
2013 Impreza

Default

I'll stand more firmly behind my assessment of the sedan being better looking than the hatchback not only from the outside, but from inside as well. Now that is some crappy rearward visibility.
hi5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2018, 08:02 PM   #75
alape8
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 337748
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Denver
Default

As a current hatch owner that photo makes the new car's visibility look absolutely dreadful, but I'll reserve judgement until I can sit in one. Could be a trick of perspective or the camera lens, who knows.
alape8 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 08:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2018 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2017, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.