New info on 06' impreza

[Drift Monkey]

Also...the Impreza should get the 2.5 L NA as another optional engine...since the Impreza line already has a 2.0 L turbo and a 2.5 L turbo.

2.5RS much? The 2.0 is going to be gone so it'll just be 2.5RS, WRX(2.5L), STi...

[Driver72]

Well people usually don't care about the 1/4 but more about the 0-60 which is what manufactors brag about, and in that category the M3 was/is faster then the M5.

 

 

Sorry to have strayed off topic, but the M5 has been tested to 60 in 4.6 to 4.7 seconds by a couple car mags.

Most have the M3 in 4.7-4.8.

 

 

As for saying the WRX 2.5T Wagon renders the Forester XT obsolete.

The reason I said that is this.

Currently if you want the WRX but the utility of a wagon, you got the wagon.

If you wanted a wagon but don't like the gutless below 3500 rpm WRX wagon, and prefered a bit more performance, and the ability to go off road a bit more you got the Forester XT.

With a WRX 2.5T you are replacing every advantage the Forester XT gave you over the WRX Wagon, with the exception of the ground clearance for

off roading.

 

But that's what the Outback XT is for. Sure it's more luxurious than the Forester XT, but lets be honest...it's FAR better looking, and costs what about a grand or so more than a Forester XT?

 

True, the Forester XT offers lighter weight and more aggressive gearing so it

accelerates better. But I don't think anybodies PRIMARY reason for buying

the Forester XT is it's low gearing for acceleration. And the Outback XT offers some pretty strong acceleration too...enough to satisfy most any wagon buyer.

 

I just don't see the Forester XT selling at all at that point.

People who want a fast AWD wagon from Subaru, but don't need the

ground clearance but want the 2.5T motor, would now get the WRX Wagon.

 

Those who want a bit more upscale, better looking wagon with offroad capabilities will shell out the extra few grand and get the Outback XT.

The Forester will sell about as well as the Baja at that point.

[Deer Killer]

People don't generally think about these things rationally. outback = boring wagon, wrx = rice rocket, forester = suv.

 

Think about how many car brands and car models there are. They exist because the market is trying to take advantage of all the irrationalities.. It doesn't matter if the outback is a nice powerfull car with good ground clearance..

[gurpman]

Any guesses as to how the Rex will be tuned? Peak HP 245? 275? I was planning to buy a LGT this summer, but if the 06 WRX kills it performance wise, I'll have to think twice. Then there's talk of STI Foresters and Legacys coming out soon. Decisions, decisions.

[wunderkind]

So what happens to the STi now ? It doesn"t make sense to have to identical engines in the same body/ chassis, albeit tuned differently ? So, if this is true...about the 2.5L DOHC turbo WRX, this will render both the Legacy and the STi "obsolete" in terms of performance. In house competition...and marketing just like the GM brands: Chevrolet Impala/ Buick Regal/Pontiac Grand Prix/Boneville/Olds Alero etc. Same shit under a different name.

 

I guess u are new to Subarus. In the past, both the WRX and the STi versions share same engine capacity size. But both are tuned differently. And yet the STi back then were sold just as well. It is not just the engine that makes the STi... STi. There's more to it.

[arcsine]

Won't that take the Impreza out of a lot of race leagues with 2.0L displacement rules?

[Drift Monkey]

Won't that take the Impreza out of a lot of race leagues with 2.0L displacement rules?

Nope, still 2.0 in Japan.

[sde]

It also renders our Legacy GT obsolete in terms of performance, when compared to the other cars in the Subaru stable. We were happy to get the STi engine...and happy that stock for stock the GT was faster than the WRX. Now why get internal competition ? It doesn"t make sense...

 

And yeah...I know the two cars are in 2 different market segments: midsize vs. compact...but still...

if you want to have the fastest stock vehicle, and midsize vs compact is besides the point, then why didn't you get the STI?

[IwannaSportSedan]

Here's what I hope happens.

 

2.5 WRX sedan and wagon comes out in current body style, and the Import Tuner crowd jumps on it. It is few horsepower down from the Legacy GT/OBXT, but all the same tricks apply, so they all are easily tuned to more horespower than stock, anyway.

The B9X Tribeca sells well to to Nissan Murano crowd, who want the all season ability of AWD, but want more space, and are less concerned about driving through the woods.

This all serves by putting more cash in FHI/Subaru's wallet.

 

All the aftermarket goes nuts as the import tuners get ahold of all the new 2.5 WRXs, and Legacy GT modders have more options due to it, as I and others have mentioned.

 

In 2007, (spring/summer 06 release) Subaru shows the efforts of a busy year, comes out with the new bodystyle impreza line, as well as a mildly face-lifted Legacy line. All with a new corporate face that IS NOT the horseshoe grille, because they finally see that people think it's ugly. Something classy, simple, and substantive. Not austentacious, but not bland and forgettable, either. Mainly a bit of a slight clean-up on the Legacy's front end, with maybe a touch more flair.

 

The new impreza platform includes a new WRX STi, and also a New Legacy STi, and possibly even an STi version of the facelifted Forester, to generate more performance sales. By then, the factory performance level has been relatively flat between 250-300hp offerings across the line for a year, by this time. Subaru puts a big marketing push on STi as a performance sub-brand, rather than a single model.

 

The new bodystyle (07) Impreza includes a stylish WRX Coupe with the 2.5 Drivetrain, as well as the small Sedan and Wagon. WRX STi version comes with a hotter 320-340hp drivetrain. (not sure what the details would be) offered as a sedan and coupe body styles, which becomes the lightweight powerhouse of the brand. New Forester migrates to the new Impreza line a year later ('08)

 

The Legacy line, in addition to the facelift, gets a boost in feature content across all models (Leg,OB,B9X) and the STi Legacy Sedan and Wagon comes with a twin Turbo H6, and a taller-geared 6MT, or a new paddle shift 6EAT option on a telescoping tilt steering column. Optional HIDS, NAV, memory seats, more interior options, and all the stuff that we all think the line needs to compete with the TSX, TL, G35, etc. Well optioned models still priced $2-4K below the TL/G35.

 

I could also possibly see a 4th model on the Legacy platform, a unique, innovative medium-sized 3300lb sport-lux coupe, maybe 5 door with a hatch and rear suicide doors, folding rear seats and a flat load floor. but not as weird looking as the B11S concept.

Basically, Subaru's take on a BMW 6 crossed with an RX8, with a similar price to the RX8. Drivetrains/trim offered in common with the Legacy GT/STi (which would make the car more affordable/buildable, and FAST.) The return of the SVX, with all the coolness and then some, but slightly more svelte dimensions and a bit ligher weight, and more performance.

 

The Top end Outback (and maybe even B9X) also gets a lower hp, torque-oriented tune of the Twin Turbo H6 with the mentioned 6EAT, and becomes an underdog Porsche Cayenne eater. (also helps amortize the 3.0TT drivetrain costs.) Kind of like the new sport version of the range rover. Performance-ute, suby outback style.

 

The STi Legacy models, and 3.0TT Outback become the steak and potatoes of the Subaru line. Higher power and feature content, less sharply focused than the WRX STi models, but still performance per dollar benchmarks.

 

Subaru stays with all models having AWD, with 4 engines: 2.5NA, 2.5T, 3.0R, 3.0TT, with mechanical, proven AWD drivetrains in 5MT, 5EAT, 6MT, and 6EAT.

Through all this, Subaru becomes known as the stone-reliable, aspirational AND affordable high-performance, real-world, 4-season-useable brand, in addition to it's established engineering and reliability reputation.

[SC GT]

I hope the WRX gets our turbo and intercooler set up, as well as our downpipe configuration. This will open up the floodgates for us.

[Driver72]

Iwanna, I like your "dream".

I also noticed you spoke very little to almost nothing of

the Forester.

Just as I said, with the WRX 2.5T Wagon, the Outback and the Tribeca.

There is no need for a square box lifted wagon, and few would buy.

Forester STI would sell about 12 copies here. What's the point of it?

Want a fast wagon, people would prefer a Legacy STI wagon.

No STI Forester would be going off road or towing anything to where

the ground clearance would be a factor. And wouldn't it be lowered anyway?

 

2.5T WRX = death of Forester in 2-3 years. Well Subaru is hanging onto the

Baja for several years even though it's sold like 18 copies.

But mark my words, with a 2.5T WRX, the Forester's sales WILL tank!

 

I still think they should keep the 2.0T engine around as the base WRX engine.

It's capable of 30-40 more hp easy out of it from the factory.

 

The NA 2.5 engine needs to be tuned/upgraded to make 180 hp.

I think this would easily be possible.

 

This not only allow for A LOT of play room for the 2.5T engine to be

used in various states of tune in the Forester, Legacy, and Outback.

Of which the WRX STI wears it's top tune for 2007 of 330 hp.

The 2006 STI needs a bump from stock to 310-315 hp, to upstage

the EVO MR now.

A Forester STI just wouldn't make a lot of sense and not sell well.

BUT, with a facelift, adjustment to it's gearing ratios and the same

250 hp/ 250 tq of the Legacy GT, it would still have a place in the line up.

The standard Legacy GT would then get 270 hp / 270 tq for 2007 along with

mild refreshening.

 

The 3.0 H6 is a nice engine, but with only 220 ft-lbs of torque, is lacking

compared to it's competitors V and Inline 6's.

Punch it out to 3.2 liters, giving it 260+ hp and tuned for low to mid

range torque in the 250 ft-lbs area.

Then throw two small turbos on that bad boy making about 5-6 psi each for

a 350+ hp and 350+ torque top of the line engine for a Legacy STi

and Tribeca.

 

I also like your idea of a WRX coupe.

AND, there is no reason why they couldn't use the Legacy platform

for another CAR model. Maybe a slightly larger car, with the H6 as it's

only engine, and if sales were good, the twin turbo H6 as an STI upgrade.

 

This is fun, but we need to wake up I think...

[05LegacyGT330Ci]

Do you realize how front end heavy the Legacy would be with a TT H6?

[Drift Monkey]

Do you realize how front end heavy the Legacy would be with a TT H6?

Not too heavy.

[Driver72]

Do you realize how front end heavy the Legacy would be with a TT H6?

 

It wouldn't be too bad, especially if they did some adjustments.

The H6 engine is about 80-90 pounds heavier than our current 2.5T

 

With a one inch longer wheelbase (push the front wheels forward) and

either 1. Place the battery farther back, or in the back all together, it would

be fine.

[kage]

Regarding the Forester:

By the "logic" used by some in this thread, the Forester has no reason to exist at all, since the Impreza wagon existed before the Forester was even created. And yet the Forester sells quite nicely, and did so before the introduction of the XT. The Forester and the Impreza appeal to different people. Subaru obviously understood this, since they decided to create the Forester in the first place.

 

Regarding the 2.5 in the WRX:

Someone stated (and I've seen this same thought over on NASIOC): now the STi has no purpose if the WRX gets the same motor. Fact check: in every other market in the world, the STi and the WRX have the same motor - the 2.0. The STi's version is more highly tuned, as well as having a huge list of suspension, brake, and chassis mods. STi /= just a big motor.

 

And let me kill this idea before it comes up here: WRC homologation has nothing to do with the WRX. FIA's homologation rules have changed since the creation of the WRX. Note that none of the recent additions to the WRC have homologation specials like Subaru and Mitsubishi do. The Evo and the WRX/STi Impreza are holdovers from the old era. Not that I would be averse to a Peugeot 206 AWD turbo mind you.

 

And as a final thought: being the cheap bastard that I am, I can only thank the heavens for the coming of the 2.5 WRX. It will mean lots of young dumb guys trading in their WRXes for the new model, which means a cheap WRX for me. If it means some LegGT owners trade in too, all the better.

[timbuktu]

Regarding the Forester:

...

And as a final thought: being the cheap bastard that I am, I can only thank the heavens for the coming of the 2.5 WRX. It will mean lots of young dumb guys trading in their WRXes for the new model, which means a cheap WRX for me. If it means some LegGT owners trade in too, all the better.

 

I was sitting here thinking the same thing. All of a sudden, everyone's trading in the 2.0L WRX for a new 2.5L WRX, and lots are swamped with old WRXs. And then I can get one as my "other" car.

[kage]

Sure would beat the pants off a '95 Camry. Would beat the pants off my '98 Forester too.

[05LegacyGT330Ci]

Not too heavy.

 

 

The Legacy already understeer massively becuae of its front bias, the H6 TT would only add more weight. You are saying about 100 pounds now, then you need to add in all the turbochargers and equipment that would be needed. It would take more then repostioning the battery to help things out. This is the problme with AWD units. If they made the car RWD then they could really change the bias, but AWD with and H6 TT would be no fun to drive if you like to turn.

[IwannaSportSedan]

They could do AWD and change to a front-midship design.

 

It would take a little work, but basically the front Differential would have to be divorced from the trans, and moved to the front of the engine. Using a jack-shaft design, the differential could be offset, and the half shafts still be equal length.

 

You'd pay a bit of a weight penalty, but with 350-400hp, it might be worth it. It would take a platform redesign, and a lot of new drivetrain and suspension hardware.

 

Does the Outback H6, or the Legacy 3.0R in other markets understeer drastically more than a 2.0/2.5 turbo models? the added weight of the turbos and exhaust are very close to the front axle centerline, so while they add weight to the front, they don't add much leverage, where the extra mass of supporting a half liter more engine displacement off of the front of the engine would add leverage.

 

increasing front track width a bit, with the half shafts angled forward would also add a little bit to the wheel base, and change the geometry.

 

Moving a 35lb battery, or more, to the trunk would add leverage to the back of the car. I would think that suspension tuning could take care of the effects of weight added to the front, inducing understeer. It would still be better than an Audi S4 packing a 4.2 V8 up there.

[wayne53]

Cool deal..

 

-Tyler

[05LegacyGT330Ci]

They could do AWD and change to a front-midship design.

 

It would take a little work, but basically the front Differential would have to be divorced from the trans, and moved to the front of the engine. Using a jack-shaft design, the differential could be offset, and the half shafts still be equal length.

 

You'd pay a bit of a weight penalty, but with 350-400hp, it might be worth it. It would take a platform redesign, and a lot of new drivetrain and suspension hardware.

 

Does the Outback H6, or the Legacy 3.0R in other markets understeer drastically more than a 2.0/2.5 turbo models? the added weight of the turbos and exhaust are very close to the front axle centerline, so while they add weight to the front, they don't add much leverage, where the extra mass of supporting a half liter more engine displacement off of the front of the engine would add leverage.

 

increasing front track width a bit, with the half shafts angled forward would also add a little bit to the wheel base, and change the geometry.

 

Moving a 35lb battery, or more, to the trunk would add leverage to the back of the car. I would think that suspension tuning could take care of the effects of weight added to the front, inducing understeer. It would still be better than an Audi S4 packing a 4.2 V8 up there.

 

 

I agree with all you said, but I just feel like if your going to make a sports car and intend to make it truly sporty you work the best you can to get a 50/50 weight distribution you don't half ass it. Maybe thats why I love BMWs so much becuase they always work that extra bit to make sure their cars are as close as possible. And this can be felt anytime you start to push a car, you can easily feel (assuming you have been in a neutrally balanced car) the differnece between a front heavy and equally balancd car. I just don't think Subaru should throw in a bigger heavier engine when the car is already pretty loaded in the front end.

 

I also agree that the S4 is horribly weighted, which is just another reason I would never want to own one. 60/40 split is something you want your back seats to do not your front/rear weight bias to be. Audi has said they would rathy build sporty cars rather then sports cars. Obvious the S4 is sporty but it can not be considered a true sports car by any stretch, but rather a fast comfortable sedan that has a sporty nature.

 

Just my .2 cents I would rather have a well balanced car then one shoved with more power further reducing the balance of the car.

 

Song of Post- Bob Marley- Could You Be Loved

[sduford]

I think there is a LOT more to BMW's great handling and feel then their weight balance. Sure the weight plays a part, but they only have to work a bit harder on the suspension and tires to compensate for a less then ideal weight balance..

 

There has been plenty of great handling sports cars that are no where near 50/50. The Porsche 911 being the most obvious example.

[PGT]

I think there is a LOT more to BMW's great handling and feel then their weight balance. Sure the weight plays a part, but they only have to work a bit harder on the suspension and tires to compensate for a less then ideal weight balance..

 

A car mag a few years ago tried to pick apart a Bimmer and reverse engineer what made them handle and feel so good. Nothing magical.....just good engineering and refinement over the years. It had to do with the basic design......angles of certain steering mechanisms, relationships between the subsystems. You can't build that overnight....that's a design refined over decades.

[Tommyh]

And as a final thought: being the cheap bastard that I am, I can only thank the heavens for the coming of the 2.5 WRX. It will mean lots of young dumb guys trading in their WRXes for the new model, which means a cheap WRX for me. If it means some LegGT owners trade in too, all the better.

 

Which also means that I'll be able to pick up one of the cheap WRX's that have flooded the market to use/abuse as my new autocross toy...saving my LGT from the dramatic weight loss regiment that my Saturn has been run through...by the way anyone want some used sound deadening material from an SC2?....thought not...

[Driver72]

The Legacy already understeer massively becuae of its front bias, the H6 TT would only add more weight. You are saying about 100 pounds now, then you need to add in all the turbochargers and equipment that would be needed. It would take more then repostioning the battery to help things out. This is the problme with AWD units. If they made the car RWD then they could really change the bias, but AWD with and H6 TT would be no fun to drive if you like to turn.

 

I beg to differ.

The Audi A4 3.0 Quattro is a pretty front heavy car too.

When they said they were going to stuff the 4.2 liter V8 into the chassis

(which weighs about 250 pounds more) everyone thought, "man is that thing

going to be front heavy and handle like shiite.

Was that the case....nope, far from it.

 

Again, the H6 weighs about 80 or so pounds more than our 2.5T.

Add the turbos and plumbing and it might be 125-130 pounds.

Place the battery in the rear, you've lost 35 pounds in the front and put it

in the rear. With some other small changes, you'd have a weight distribution

darn close to what the LGT is now.

 

The Legacy isn't intended for all out handling anyway.

I'd take a Legacy with a twin turbo H6 that was 50-75 pounds more

front heavy than our cars anyday.