Oh my need of a 6th gear in the Leggy!

[robmarch]

(BTW, BMW is just now offering 6 speeds on their new 2006 3 series (sedans), 2005 were 5 speeds (and 2006 coupes). And Mazda is only offering a 6 speed on the Mazdaspeed 6 (the closest competitor to the Leg that I can think of.)

 

the 3 series was available with a 6 speed in the M3 and the sedan ZHP (or some other random abbreviation) performance version in the past several years.

 

it's quite possible that subaru will keep the 4EAT and 5 speed manual in the NA versions of their cars, and use the 5EAT and 6 speed manual in the turbo versions. other manufacturers have certainly done this. I would think the altima will keep it's 5 speed manual and non-sport shift transmission in the 4 cylinder models, for example, for a while.

[John M]

Keep us with a 5spd then -- just give us one with longer gears period. This car makes enough power that it doesn't need "Honda" gears unless you're racing the thing every day. I don't want a close-ratio gearbox. Give me something that a gearchange results in more than a 500 rpm difference.

 

My old (92) Stealth had a 5spd. 2nd was good for 90 mph and third would do 120. It had no issues with acceleration either (12.91 @ 106 w/ free & cheap mods) but in 5th you could do "insane" speeds at "sane" rpms. So, a 6spd isn't really required if they'll just make the gears for real world driving. A 6spd can have more agressive middle gears though (6spd Stealths usually run ~ 2 tenths quicker than 5spd's with the same mods) so I'd be happy with either.

[melayout]

John M, was your Stealth the twin-turbo 6-cyl one ?

[melayout]

Everybody is arguing that the LGT's competitors (BMW, Volvo, Nissan, Honda)are all offering the 6-speed and therefore Subaru should too, but you're all ignoring the following:

 

- Except for Volvo, all the other competitors don't offer a 4-cyl turbo-charged engine with an Full-Time Wheel Drive system

 

- For Volvo which offers the only directly comparable engine/drivetrain configuration, their 5-cyl turbo engine with the 6-speed gets the same mileage as our 4-cyl turbo with 5EAT/5MT and the 5-speed automatic on the Volvo is the one getting the best mileage.

 

- You're comparing the gas mileage of a 6-speed manual tranny on a naturally-aspirated engine or some other engine configuration not comparable to the LGT's which has a totally different power/torque curve.

 

- Currently, a tall 6th gear for significantly better gas mileage will affect drivability and customers will complain and increase costs without a lot of gain. Especially, that the more expensive 6-speed transmission will be forced on everybody that was fine with the 5-speed, its current gas mileage and lower cost.

 

Again, you can't argue that just because a car manufacturer offers a 6-speed, therefore Subaru should without taking into account the engine configuration and drivetrain. Sheessshhhh.

[robmarch]

what about audi, with a smaller displacement engine? The legacy GT, Audi A4 2.0 Quattro, and Volvo S40 are all pretty similar. You claim the automatic gets the best gas mileage on the volvo, have you checked the top gear ratios for the manual versus the automatic?

 

and, you say

Again, you can't argue that just because a car manufacturer offers a 6-speed, therefore Subaru should without taking into account the engine configuration and drivetrain. Sheessshhhh.

 

and I and others have said do the test yourself before you make all of the claims you make. drive with your car in [4] instead of [D] and see how your mileage changes. Even better, find someone to do the 5th/4th 55mph manual transmission challenge discussed above.

 

you are making the power/torque curve out to be a problem, when several have mentioned that the turbo 4 makes more low end torque than the H6, and the honda V6 and BMW (and audi v6) are not known to be very torquey (like the Nissan). you're claiming a drivability problem, and no mileage improvement, but you're the one comparing across different platforms.

 

The rest of us in the thread are trying to asses the impact of adding a gear TO THE LEGACY GT. The only mention of the other cars is to show that the other manufacturers have added a gear to balance acceleration and fuel economy, and that eventually the market won't support a 5 speed car in a sea of 6 speed competitors. If you don't believe this, I don't know what to say. The US cars with big v8's could easily get by with 4 speed manual transmissions with tall top gears, with all of the low end torque. Why give them 5 and 6 speed transmissions? MARKETING. If there is a car in the world that doesn't need a 6 speed, it's the GTO...Why do you think it has one? Even a 5 speed with a tall overdrive gear would give them plenty of fuel economy and still spread the powerband wide enough.

[franklin]

Everybody is arguing that the LGT's competitors (BMW, Volvo, Nissan, Honda)are all offering the 6-speed and therefore Subaru should too, but you're all ignoring the following:

 

- Except for Volvo, all the other competitors don't offer a 4-cyl turbo-charged engine with an Full-Time Wheel Drive system

 

- For Volvo which offers the only directly comparable engine/drivetrain configuration, their 5-cyl turbo engine with the 6-speed gets the same mileage as our 4-cyl turbo with 5EAT/5MT and the 5-speed automatic on the Volvo is the one getting the best mileage.

 

- You're comparing the gas mileage of a 6-speed manual tranny on a naturally-aspirated engine or some other engine configuration not comparable to the LGT's which has a totally different power/torque curve.

 

- Currently, a tall 6th gear for significantly better gas mileage will affect drivability and customers will complain and increase costs without a lot of gain. Especially, that the more expensive 6-speed transmission will be forced on everybody that was fine with the 5-speed, its current gas mileage and lower cost.

 

Again, you can't argue that just because a car manufacturer offers a 6-speed, therefore Subaru should without taking into account the engine configuration and drivetrain. Sheessshhhh.

Nobody will make people shift into 6th gear. Stay in 5th and be happy.

[andrew.anderson]

Forget the gear ratio's and gas milage. I just want a sturdier transmition. That is one less item I have to upgrade.

[robmarch]

Forget the gear ratio's and gas milage. I just want a sturdier transmition. That is one less item I have to upgrade.

 

for what kind of power numbers, and what kind of driving?

 

Unfortunately for you, this will probably be the last reason Subaru upgrades the current Manual Transmission, if it's reliable at stock power.

[jm02130]

I haven't found anything unsturdy about the 5-speed manual, at least not for street driving. You might want better mounts and a stiffer clutch, but that's about it.

 

But the Legacy needs a 6 speed with a lower ratio 6th gear because it revs too high at highway speeds. It's one of the first things you notice when you drive the car. EOD. The idea that this very torquey 2.5 engine will lug at 2500 rpm is ridiculous. And even if this engine needed more low-end torque, Subaru could easily accomplish that with a few minor modifications, such as exhaust modifications to reduce turbo lag.

[trabbic]

6-Speed turbo AWD cars:

 

Audi A4 Rated at 22/31

Volvo S40 Rated at 20/29 (one mpg better than the auto @ hwy speeds with the turbo, did you read incorrectly?)

Mazdaspeed 6 Rated at 20/26

 

Leg is rated at 19/25

 

Not direct competitors:

 

Lancer MR

WRX STi

 

melayout, are you complaining about the fact that Subaru FORCED a 5 speed transmission and the increased costs on you? Would you rather have the 4 speed?

 

People buying a stick with this car are enthusiasts, and almost every other car designed for enthusiasts is available with an extra cog.

 

Wait, I can't think of a turbocharged AWD car WITHOUT a 6speed??? (Except of course for Subaru's offerings...)

[pdw]

I paid $24k for my LGT un-LTD wagon. Good luck getting any of those competitors for close to that price. I would have paid $1k extra for a 6spd but not the 4-5K extra those other's would have cost.

[robmarch]

I paid $24k for my LGT un-LTD wagon. Good luck getting any of those competitors for close to that price. I would have paid $1k extra for a 6spd but not the 4-5K extra those other's would have cost.

 

equip them similarly, and they're pretty similarly priced, actually. MSRP at least.

 

the 6 speed isn't making these cars 4-5k more expensive, that's for sure.

[gfxdave99]

I have had 3 6mt cars and 3 5mt cars, The 3 6mts were two trans ams and a acura TSX, the Trans am most def needed the 6th gear, and the TSX needed the 6th gear because it needed short gearing to make 160lb/ft of torque feel peppy..

 

The 5 speeds ive had have been a saturn which didnt need a 6th cog for sure, the Cadillac CTS which could have used a 6th cog and now all manual CTS's are 6MT's.

 

Being spoiled by several 6MT cars, i would be lying if i didnt say I would have at least liked a 6MT in my LGT, but honestly I dont think its needed. I get plenty good gas milage cruising around 65-70 on the highway, and what i really like is that at highway speeds theres enough boost available that you can just dip your foot into the accelerator a bit and it pulls nicely especially when you are weaving through traffic

 

Just putting in my 2c

[pdw]

equip them similarly, and they're pretty similarly priced, actually. MSRP at least.

 

the 6 speed isn't making these cars 4-5k more expensive, that's for sure.

 

Disagree, price a bottom of the line A4 2.0TQ Avant and you still won't be that low. The Volvo with cloth won't either.

[melayout]

6-Speed turbo AWD cars:

 

Audi A4 Rated at 22/31

Volvo S40 Rated at 20/29 (one mpg better than the auto @ hwy speeds with the turbo, did you read incorrectly?)

Mazdaspeed 6 Rated at 20/26

 

Leg is rated at 19/25

 

Not direct competitors:

 

Lancer MR

WRX STi

 

melayout, are you complaining about the fact that Subaru FORCED a 5 speed transmission and the increased costs on you? Would you rather have the 4 speed?

 

People buying a stick with this car are enthusiasts, and almost every other car designed for enthusiasts is available with an extra cog.

 

Wait, I can't think of a turbocharged AWD car WITHOUT a 6speed??? (Except of course for Subaru's offerings...)

 

I quoted the mileage numbers for the S60R(sedan) and V70R(wagon), since they both have similar performance numbers to the LGT with 0-60 in 5.5 secs and 1/4 in 14.4 for the 6MT.

 

The following cars you mentioned are not even close performance-wise, so I don't think they can be compared.

 

2006 Audi A4 2.0FSI 6MT = 0-60 in 7.3, More than 1.5 secs slower

2006 Volvo S40 T5 AWD = 0-60 in 6.3, More than 1 sec slower

Btw, Volvo has the Haldex which is not fulltime AWD.

 

As for the MazdaSpeed 6, we don't have official numbers on the gas mileage, power levels or 0-60, so I don't think it is comparable till it is released.

 

I'm not complaining about any of Subaru current transmission offerings.

 

The LGT base offering is for most people and not the enthusiasts. Therefore I don't want to see the 5-speed manual being replaced, until the 6-speed is cheap enough to replace the 5-speed without a price increase. This is important because Subaru offerings always had the manual transmission trims as the cheapest, the easiest to fix/maintain ones and within reach of most buyers.

 

I'm not against adding the 6MT in the future(2-3years), but currently it doesn't look very appealing. If the 6MT was such a deal-breaker or "required" feature nobody would have bought the Legacy, but currently that's not the case.

 

Currently, I'm all for adding the 6MT as another transmission option that's available with the 5MT and 5EAT, as long as the R&D and production line change costs are recouped thru a premium, which will be substantial, on the 6MT trim only and not by increasing all the trim MSRPs.

 

Cordless mouse battery running out, uggghhhhhh.

[andrew.anderson]

for what kind of power numbers, and what kind of driving?....

 

BIG power numbers and fast driving

[robmarch]

I quoted the mileage numbers for the S60R(sedan) and V70R(wagon), since they both have similar performance numbers to the LGT with 0-60 in 5.5 secs and 1/4 in 14.4 for the 6MT.

 

The following cars you mentioned are not even close performance-wise, so I don't think they can be compared.

 

2006 Audi A4 2.0FSI 6MT = 0-60 in 7.3, More than 1.5 secs slower

2006 Volvo S40 T5 AWD = 0-60 in 6.3, More than 1 sec slower

Btw, Volvo has the Haldex which is not fulltime AWD

 

what's the source of these numbers? If they are the manufacturer's numbers, I think that Audi intentionally has handicapped the 2.0L a little so they still sell V6's. The volvo numbers are about what I'd expect, but a little faster than the only test I've seen.

 

Road and track recently tested all of the cars:

 

Audi: 3650 lbs 0-60 in 6.4, quarter in 14.9 @92. volvo: 3450 lbs 0-60 in 6.8, quarter in 15.1 @92.6. legacy GT 3415 lbs, 0-60 in 5.6, quarter in 14.3 @92. the acura tsx has the same top gear ratio as the legacy GT with ~90lb/ft less torque. yikes. the volvo turns 2000rpm at 60mph in 6th, the audi 2200, the legacy gt (and tsx) 2500. this car is geared aggressively.

 

as for not being able to compare them, for the 4th (or so) time, no problem. we'll ignore the fact that every other car in the segment selected 6 speeds to maximize the performance/fuel economy tradeoff, and included tall 6th gears in the 6 speed, keeping the 5th approximately the same (which is exactly what people here are asking for.) just throw that stuff right out the window, since the badges on the cars aren't the same, and they're IMPOSSIBLE to make any comparisons with.

 

Just take a 5 speed manual legacy, and compare it's fuel economy in 5th versus 4th in similar driving conditions. Adding a 6th gear and keeping 5th where it is (like those other totally unrelated morons designing the competitor's cars) keeps the performance of the car nearly identically the same (minus a little extra weight, probably). Those who want "punch it and go" highway acceleration can leave it in 5th. those who want a couple more mpg can shift to 6th. Ignore the fact that every other manufacturer sees this as the best compromise solution, and just look at your own car. What is the negative here?

 

For the record, I cruise in my totally unrelated STi around 2000 rpm very, very often, with no ill effects. I'm sure there are possibly even a few legacy GT owners that have accidentally cruised at 2000 rpm in 5th too, and I'm thinking they were ok also.

[robmarch]

The LGT base offering is for most people and not the enthusiasts. Therefore I don't want to see the 5-speed manual being replaced, until the 6-speed is cheap enough to replace the 5-speed without a price increase. This is important because Subaru offerings always had the manual transmission trims as the cheapest, the easiest to fix/maintain ones and within reach of most buyers.

 

I'm not against adding the 6MT in the future(2-3years), but currently it doesn't look very appealing. If the 6MT was such a deal-breaker or "required" feature nobody would have bought the Legacy, but currently that's not the case.

 

Currently, I'm all for adding the 6MT as another transmission option that's available with the 5MT and 5EAT, as long as the R&D and production line change costs are recouped thru a premium, which will be substantial, on the 6MT trim only and not by increasing all the trim MSRPs.

 

they did it with the 5EAT for this car, I don't see why you think it would be such a burden to add a 6MT. Think they only increased the prices of the cars that got the 5EAT, or did they absorb that cost into the entire legacy line? spreading the 6MT out across the legacy and impreza lines would make it a cheap update. Imagine what they spent to totally redesign the sheet metal on the impreza. TWICE. Either way, the 4EAT to 5EAT change was cheap enough to include it in the legacy without big heartburn to the people who bought it, and it's hard to believe a change to the manual (which has already been tweaked several times) wouldn't happen in a similar manner.

 

Fortunately, neither you, nor I, nor any of us have any real say into what happens here, because we don't have the market research insight, the design direction for where subaru is taking the legacy, or the visibility into how much adding a gear to the 5MT costs.

[robmarch]

BIG power numbers and fast driving

 

drag racing, track days, road course, autocross?

[John M]

John M, was your Stealth the twin-turbo 6-cyl one ?

 

But of course I sold this one to buy the LGT. Before that, I had a 92 model that I wrecked.

 

I really appreciated the longer gears in both cars. The LGT makes plenty of power and torque to not need the "screaming" gears they come with. Keep it a 5spd and space 'em out further with a deep 5th, or give us the same 5 gears and add a deep 6th for cruising.

 

I wouldn't care if the car didn't get one extra mpg with the added gear. I just want the engine to quit buzzing at 3500+ rpm when I'm trying to travel several hundred miles on the interstate. 90+ mph is very common all around GA; I'd like my car to be able to do it without sounding strained.

[melayout]

what's the source of these numbers? If they are the manufacturer's numbers, I think that Audi intentionally has handicapped the 2.0L a little so they still sell V6's. The volvo numbers are about what I'd expect, but a little faster than the only test I've seen.

 

Road and track recently tested all of the cars:

 

Audi: 3650 lbs 0-60 in 6.4, quarter in 14.9 @92. volvo: 3450 lbs 0-60 in 6.8, quarter in 15.1 @92.6. legacy GT 3415 lbs, 0-60 in 5.6, quarter in 14.3 @92. the acura tsx has the same top gear ratio as the legacy GT with ~90lb/ft less torque. yikes. the volvo turns 2000rpm at 60mph in 6th, the audi 2200, the legacy gt (and tsx) 2500. this car is geared aggressively.

 

The Audi A4 and Volvo S40 are still not even close performance-wise and if you're not going by manufacturer numbers, Autoweek got the LGT todo 0-60 in 5.2 and the 1/4 in 13.9, totally trumping the Audi or Volvo.

 

as for not being able to compare them, for the 4th (or so) time, no problem. we'll ignore the fact that every other car in the segment selected 6 speeds to maximize the performance/fuel economy tradeoff, and included tall 6th gears in the 6 speed, keeping the 5th approximately the same (which is exactly what people here are asking for.) just throw that stuff right out the window, since the badges on the cars aren't the same, and they're IMPOSSIBLE to make any comparisons with.

 

The badges on the car aren't the same, huh?!! If they are not equal performance-wise then that's not a fair comparison or do you disagree?

 

Just take a 5 speed manual legacy, and compare it's fuel economy in 5th versus 4th in similar driving conditions. Adding a 6th gear and keeping 5th where it is (like those other totally unrelated morons designing the competitor's cars) keeps the performance of the car nearly identically the same (minus a little extra weight, probably). Those who want "punch it and go" highway acceleration can leave it in 5th. those who want a couple more mpg can shift to 6th. Ignore the fact that every other manufacturer sees this as the best compromise solution, and just look at your own car. What is the negative here?

 

For the record, I cruise in my totally unrelated STi around 2000 rpm very, very often, with no ill effects. I'm sure there are possibly even a few legacy GT owners that have accidentally cruised at 2000 rpm in 5th too, and I'm thinking they were ok also.

 

Throw in a 6th gear and cruise at 1500RPM and you'll probably be straining the engine. Now with that same 6th gear try to cruise at a higher speed at 2000RPM and the power needed to overcome the non-linear increase in drag and supporting the weight of the car will either strain the engine or will require more power leading to more gas consumption. Just adding a gear doesn't mean gas mileage with increase linearly, you have to take into account the load(increased drag and drivetrain losses) placed on such a tall gear especially since our engine/turbo is basically an NA below 2500RPM.

 

What I said in my last post:

 

The LGT base offering is for most people and not the enthusiasts. Therefore I don't want to see the 5-speed manual being replaced, until the 6-speed is cheap enough to replace the 5-speed without a price increase. This is important because Subaru offerings always had the manual transmission trims as the cheapest, the easiest to fix/maintain ones and within reach of most buyers.

 

I'm not against adding the 6MT in the future(2-3years), but currently it doesn't look very appealing. If the 6MT was such a deal-breaker or "required" feature nobody would have bought the Legacy, but currently that's not the case.

 

Currently, I'm all for adding the 6MT as another transmission option that's available with the 5MT and 5EAT, as long as the R&D and production line change costs are recouped thru a premium, which will be substantial, on the 6MT trim only and not by increasing all the trim MSRPs.

[melayout]

But of course I sold this one to buy the LGT. Before that, I had a 92 model that I wrecked.

 

I really appreciated the longer gears in both cars. The LGT makes plenty of power and torque to not need the "screaming" gears they come with. Keep it a 5spd and space 'em out further with a deep 5th, or give us the same 5 gears and add a deep 6th for cruising.

 

I wouldn't care if the car didn't get one extra mpg with the added gear. I just want the engine to quit buzzing at 3500+ rpm when I'm trying to travel several hundred miles on the interstate. 90+ mph is very common all around GA; I'd like my car to be able to do it without sounding strained.

 

Exactly, compared to the single turbo H4 we have, the twin turbo V6 is not a dog when it is not boosting and therefore it can easily take advantage of a deep 6th gear.

 

Exactly like I said before, I can see reducing the engine noise levels at higher speeds as an argument for a 6th gear.

 

My whole opinion is that currently, like right now and not in the future(2-3years), the less-than-significant fuel mileage increases, the higher cost of a 6-speed and the minimal customer demand for a 6-speed on the LGT, makes the 6-speed not jive with Subaru's "mantra", customer base and past-offerings trend.

[robmarch]

it's pointless supporting an actual argument here, sorry guys.

 

I guess we should all be happy with 4EAT automatic transmissions and 4 speed manuals.

[melayout]

it's pointless supporting an actual argument here, sorry guys.

 

Dude it's a discussion. I mean Subaru can come out with a 6-speed that gets awesome gas mileage in next year's model and prove me totally wrong.

 

I guess we should all be happy with 4EAT automatic transmissions and 4 speed manuals.

 

You forgot, and an NA 166HP H4.

 

5-speed transmissions were even used in the 1990 Legacy(as far autos.msn.com will go back), so maybe Subaru will come out with a 6-speed soon, who knows. But IMHO I don't forsee that happening till 2-3 years down the road and I could be wrong.

[Stg3Avant]

stop whining... my 1.8t 5spd runs at just under 4k @ 80-85..

the nice thing is that, i sit right in the heart of the boost at that speed..

i never downshift on the freeway to overtake.. if im playin or racing, i will get into 4th for a bit but 5th is very useful.

ringing it out brings 150 at about 7100rpm..

dunno why im typin all this.. back to the point of the thread as i plan on purchasing

a gt in the spring and had the same curiousity as to why subaru went with a 5spd

or if a 6th was even needed.

seems it isnt from what im reading here.. but with the torque the boxer has, it would be nice to get into 6 from 4th etc etc..

its not all about just how much lower your rpms are at 80, 90 mph.. i like doing this

in s4's or any 6spd to be honest... its nice.