jeffwe Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 So, I've got an 02 WRX wagon and I want to upgrade but I'm in no hurry. I like my 02 WRX but I am not the biggest fan of the turbo lag. I've been reading rumors that Subaru is going to make a bigger version of the H6 for the Tribeca (maybe). Is there any chance that bigger H6 normally aspirated might find its way into the Legacy GT for 2008? I really don't like turbo lag. Another random question... I was looking at one of the Legacy competitors... Does anyone know how well the new Infiniti G35X all wheel drive system works? I've been thinking about that since its normally aspirated, looks good and has all wheel drive. However, if the all wheel drive system is like a Haldex style system I'd prefer to pass on it. I might be wrong but I feel like the Subaru all wheel drive system provides a lot of stability during mountain descents by providing nearly equal engine braking on all 4 wheels. I do a lot of driving on snow in the winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
executor485 Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Subaru AWD>all others... IMO As for the turbo lag, from what I've heard from friends who've driven the 06 WRX, the lag isnt as bad in the 06 model WRX... Im not sure about other cars, but the turbo lag in my 05 Legacy doesnt seem to be that bad overall... Of course it has some, but I think its pretty minor for the performance it gives And welcome to the forums If I pass you on the right, I'm flipping you off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 2.5L makes tremendous difference in lag department. LGT is not laggy at all! Test drive one! Rumor is H6 Legacy is in the works for MY2008. But I'd surprised if it comes with MT (if you care about it). Currrent H6 3.0 with AT is reportedly quite a dog. Test drive LGT H4-turbo, chances are you'll love it. And, yes, real AWD has two names: Subaru and Audi. Forget the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDork Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 I guess everything is relative. My LGT is the first turbo car I've driven daily (wife has turbo saab and brother a 2.7TT s4). The lag in the LGT is by far the most noticable and definitely a huge change from the NA motors Ive had in the past. If it wasn't for the boxer burble, I'd be wishing for NA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaWolverine Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Stupid question: Unclemat, when you said "quite a dog", is that good or bad? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Stupid question: Unclemat, when you said "quite a dog", is that good or bad? Thanks. Bad. Dog = slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaWolverine Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 That's what I thought from looking at the 8 sec 0-60 times, but I didn't know if there was something I didn't know b/c I know you more than me about this stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garandman Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 That's what I thought from looking at the 8 sec 0-60 times, but I didn't know if there was something I didn't know b/c I know you more than me about this stuff. Some people look at 0-60 times. Others look at useful over the road performance, where there is a much smaller difference. A guy at work has an LGT now so we can compare head-to-head, which is interesting. In the UK and ROW they have a Legacy Spec B sports Tourer [wagon] with the H6 and 6 speed manual. It also has the SI-Drive - US NA engines do not. They quote 0-100km time of 6.9 seconds. As long as most of the interest of US knuckle-dragging "enthusiasts" is 0-60 time, we won't be seeing it, or even a manual H6. http://www.subaru.co.uk/IMGGB/WWW/subaru_co_uk.nsf/LiveByRef/PMAS-6UNMJB?OpenDocument Who Dares Wins スバル Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffwe Posted December 7, 2006 Author Share Posted December 7, 2006 Right, for me I'd prefer a bigger H6. When I want the power, I want it now. I'd prefer to have a bit less power and get it sooner and smoother than getting a big hit after a second of turbo spoolup. Most of the time when I want power it is for passing and merging. Turbo spool takes too long in those situations. My 02 WRX is fun when the turbo kicks in .5 - 1 second after you nail the throttle. Unfortunately I've probably already lost the road rage battle because of that .5 second delay. I'm also 40 years old, and I don't think hood scoops are cool. In fact, they look damned silly and stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwiener2 Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 I'd like to say I hate everything you just stated^^^ top gear passing is next to nothing for me. Downshift to 4th and see ya!!! hood scoops scare porches so what do you have to say to that? My Mods List (Updated 8/22/17) 2005 Outback FMT Running on Electrons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Love turbos. Lag scare is overrated. Second? What second? Maybe with an AT when you floor it mindlessly. MT + 2.5L torquey turbo boxer = almost no lag for teh win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWP-LegacyGT Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Love turbos. Lag scare is overrated. Second? What second? Maybe with an AT when you floor it mindlessly. MT + 2.5L torquey turbo boxer = almost no lag for teh win Hardly, if you know the AT well enough, there's virtually no turbo lag when I downshift into 4th to pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravisS Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 MT + 2.5L torquey turbo boxer = almost no lag for teh win Absolutely. For that matter, thanks to the huge, low down torque I don't even need to bother to shift half the time. You may not have to deal with turbo lag with the n/a engine, but you do have to worry about downshifting and keeping the revs up. So really, 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. It's all the same in the long run (without the satisfaction of face melting acceleration in the H6) [edit] SWP, or any of you 5EAT guys... when you punch the throttle at say, 3500 RPM, when not in sport mode does it downshift? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_galt Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 And, yes, real AWD has two names: Subaru and Audi. Forget the rest. truer words were never spoken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JessterCPA Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 SWP, or any of you 5EAT guys... when you punch the throttle at say, 3500 RPM, when not in sport mode does it downshift? Yes., And if it doesnt, I nail the steering wheel button. Jesse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fzanetti Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 And, yes, real AWD has two names: Subaru and Audi. Forget the rest. I vouch for that.. Have owned a couple of Audi's and a LGT, and the others are really inferior quality and technology of the two... Flavio Zanetti Boston, MA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaWolverine Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Some people look at 0-60 times. Others look at useful over the road performance, where there is a much smaller difference. A guy at work has an LGT now so we can compare head-to-head, which is interesting. In the UK and ROW they have a Legacy Spec B sports Tourer [wagon] with the H6 and 6 speed manual. It also has the SI-Drive - US NA engines do not. They quote 0-100km time of 6.9 seconds. As long as most of the interest of US knuckle-dragging "enthusiasts" is 0-60 time, we won't be seeing it, or even a manual H6. http://www.subaru.co.uk/IMGGB/WWW/subaru_co_uk.nsf/LiveByRef/PMAS-6UNMJB?OpenDocument I have nothing against NA engines. But I don't have enough money to justify paying as much as you need to modify them. The new Altima has great acceleration, and most NA engines have a better top end than the LGTs, so what I said wasn't as much a knock on NA engines, just the one that I saw quoted on the CAR magazine website which is where I first saw it. I just remember seeing 8 secs, and as I'm not one of those types you'd find on a GM forum, I do car about handling and fun to drive factor, but 8 sec. is still 8 sec. and a Legacy is not a Miata. If it's not really 8 secs and closer to 7, that's fine too, I'll just have to look into it if it comes here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garandman Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Right, for me I'd prefer a bigger H6. When I want the power, I want it now. I'd prefer to have a bit less power and get it sooner and smoother than getting a big hit after a second of turbo spoolup. Most of the time when I want power it is for passing and merging. Turbo spool takes too long in those situations. My 02 WRX is fun when the turbo kicks in .5 - 1 second after you nail the throttle. Unfortunately I've probably already lost the road rage battle because of that .5 second delay. I'm also 40 years old, and I don't think hood scoops are cool. In fact, they look damned silly and stupid. +1 Who Dares Wins スバル Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravisS Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Yes., And if it doesnt, I nail the steering wheel button. Jesse See, if I'm at 3500 RPM I don't downshift. That's the "sweet spot" and staying in gear + mashing the gas = instant power. The engine mometarily loses power when shifting, which means the turbo starts to spool down. So between the time it takes to shift, and the turbo spooling back up, I'd have to imagine it does have worse throttle response then an H6 would. If for any reason I need to downshift (say I'm cruising at 2k RPM), I try to do so in advance. Downshift, give it a little time to get some spool, then mash the throttle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krzyss Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 ...I want power it is for passing and merging. Turbo spool takes too long in those situations. As far as I can tell both passing and merging can be predicted so I just downshift earlier. Krzys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffwe Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 It seems like nobody here really wants to admit there is any drawback to turbocharged power.... Frankly I'm surprised. When people ask if my car is powerful or fast I always reply the same way. "It feels like two cars in one, one is sorta slow when the car is not in the boost, and one is very powerful when the turbo has spooled up". That is not the optimal way to describe a car is it? Given the choice between a normally aspirated 3.5l six producing 250hp/250ft-lbs torque and a 2.5l turbo 4 cylinder producing 250hp/250ft-lbs of torque which would you all choose? I would prefer the normally aspirated motor with more displacement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Turbo. Not everybody is from the no replacement for displacement camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffwe Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 Why? At some point the engine is just a box under the hood that twists a shaft. If you like the "hit" of the turbo coming into boost I'm sure we could mess around with ignition curves and fuel maps on a normally aspirated motor to provide that kind of silliness. I'm a motorcycle roadracer, I race a Honda RS125R Grand Prix Bike. Its a two stoke 125cc motorcycle that produces 44 horsepower, does 135mph, and weighs 155lbs! There is no racing motorcycle of any kind that can do corners faster than a 125GP bike. I can pass Yamaha R1s and Ducati 999s on the outside mid-corner (then they rocket away down the straight). The powerband is incredibly tight and if you fall off the power you have NOTHING until you get it back onto the pipe. While I love racing this machine that doesn't mean that I don't recognize its faults. For instance it would be completely unusable on the street due to its powerband characteristics. I feel the turbo motor in our Subarus are sort of like this... Its just less "streetable" then a normally aspirated motor. I feel like some folks here have become blind to the faults of their vehicles. I'm not asking for big-block V8, I'm just comparing two engines that probably don't weigh all that much different. I can't imagine the weight of the turbo, plumbing, and intercooler are completely negligible. If the box under the hood twists with the same horsepower and torque and weighs the same why would you prefer turbo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravisS Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 It seems like nobody here really wants to admit there is any drawback to turbocharged power.... Frankly I'm surprised. When people ask if my car is powerful or fast I always reply the same way. "It feels like two cars in one, one is sorta slow when the car is not in the boost, and one is very powerful when the turbo has spooled up". That is not the optimal way to describe a car is it? Given the choice between a normally aspirated 3.5l six producing 250hp/250ft-lbs torque and a 2.5l turbo 4 cylinder producing 250hp/250ft-lbs of torque which would you all choose? I would prefer the normally aspirated motor with more displacement. That sounds more like a description of N2O then a turbo honestly. My car doesn't feel like two, it feels like one. If you can seriously consider the < 1 second time it takes to build boost as "another car" then you're driving it wrong. The ONLY time turbo lag is noticable to me is when I'm going around a turn, with no throttle, and then punch it. But, I've adopted... give it gas mid turn and by the time your on the straight it will be fully boosted. How would I have described my '01 Accord 4-cyl? It felt like two cars. Below 3800 RPM, it was a dog. Over that, and it was still slow but at least it felt like it was going somewhere. My Legacy has more torque at 2000 RPM then my Accord did peak... That said, if you could give me a naturally aspirated motor that has the same dyno plot, I'd take it in a heart beat... but it's not going happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwiener2 Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 Given the choice between a normally aspirated 3.5l six producing 250hp/250ft-lbs torque and a 2.5l turbo 4 cylinder producing 250hp/250ft-lbs of torque which would you all choose? I would prefer the normally aspirated motor with more displacement. the problem with that comparison is that those are peak numbers. The H6 hits 250hp at redline, and so does the 2.5T. The H6 also hits peak torque at redline. The 2.5T hits peak torque at around 3200rpm and holds it untill about 5000rpm. My dad has an OB LLBeanie and I have the OBXT. As smooth as that engine is, it is no cmparison to the 2.5T. He had a 2.7TT audi before and got the H6 becasue he hated the turbo lag.....no he's considering trading in the LL beanie for an XT because he likes mine so much an the lag is minimal. Don't even get started with modding.... dollar for dollar the turbo is hands down the winner My Mods List (Updated 8/22/17) 2005 Outback FMT Running on Electrons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.