Subaru annouces new boxer engine series

[rao]

But what brand - that makes a HUGE difference.

 

+1 on the intense design, what will they think of next?

[Gire]

How has this thread NOT been rated 5 stars yet???

 

 

 

 

Edit- there we go!

[ehsnils]

Indeed. But if any of them would have been commercially viable, we would have seen them already.

 

Again: bandaid, broken leg.

 

I would say that they suffer from the NIH syndrome.

 

 

NIH = Not Invented Here. (And with patent licensing paranoia added)

[ece_tim]

I would say that they suffer from the NIH syndrome.

 

 

NIH = Not Invented Here. (And with patent licensing paranoia added)

If a technology is truly capable of providing significantly increased fuel efficiency without other critical issues (like excessive cost, packaging problems, etc), then they would just buy out the technology and go to town. Why wouldn't a large automotive company want to implement the "silver bullet" solution to fuel economy and emissions?

 

Reality is that it doesn't exist yet. All of these alternative ICE designs have their own drawbacks. Sure, maybe some of them would be more efficient than current engines, but the companies have ZERO incentive to switch them.

 

As they have all stated around the CAFE regulations, meeting new fuel economy standards will add thousands of dollars to the cost of new vehicles. Note that they did not say "this is impossible, we can't meet these goals." They've got plenty of fuel economy enhancing technologies and designs, but without compulsory implementation the market just isn't there to pay thousands more for a few more MPG.

 

When you bought your Subaru, would you have paid say $3000 more for an extra 3 MPG? What about 5 MPG? What if those extra MPG compromised some other aspects of driving the car, like LRR tires or taller gears?

 

I didn't think so.

[GTS Jeff]

you must be more dense than I imagined...

 

aka: don't change things that work just fine for the sake of changing them...

 

double meaning: when they do that it makes it harder to work on...

 

keep up junior!

 

If someone smart reads your post, they'll think that you just owned yourself. If someone stupid reads your post, they'll think that you just owned me. Unfortunately for me though, there are far more stupid people in this world than smart ones, so regardless, you've owned me.

[Yamarocket630]

There are 3 reasons auto companies make changes to cars:

 

1. To save money

 

2. To sell more cars

 

3. To meet government regulations.

 

 

Note that adding DI to an engine just to make a small population of early adopter enthusiasts happy doesn't really fall into any of those categories. Mr. and Mrs. Average don't care if a car has DI or not. If the fuel economy and power of the car are as good as or better than the competition without the added expense of DI why bother?

 

The only advantage to DI is that it allows you to run a leaner mixture under most conditions without detonation or excessive NOx emissions. The latent cooling effect of spraying the fuel directly onto a hot piston allows this. Modern catalysts can take care of the CO emissions. NOx can only be effectively controlled by keeping combustion temperatures down.

 

I would be willing to bet this new engine has also been designed so that DI can easily be added in the future. Chances are there are un-machined castings for the injectors and pump already on the heads, rather like the castings for exhaust side AVCS that are on my 2005 legacy.

[Kario]

My friend has a 4.2FSI A6. It dynos at around 280KM instead of 350. My brother had a 1.8 DI carisma one - nice engine, but had issues with compression and oil consumption. I would not buy a DI car. There are far better upgrades that can be done to an engine like using variable valve lift instead of a throttle or using intelligent engine accessories line water or oil pump.

Sadly new Subaru engines do not incorporate any of this innovations AFAIK.

Still engine technical advancement is only important as far as fuel consumption is important. You can always use bigger engine to get the same power and performance. Its all about saving fuel.

So in the end only performance and fuel consumptions and a vehicle price are things to judge. Do you really want to buy an Audi and spent 10k more, have problems with DI only to potentially save some money on fuel later? You will still spend less with a Subaru... so at this moment I would say no to DI that is until it gets very chip and reliable.

I think that most manufactures are starting to use DI for marketing reasons. Most cars are very similar. FWD with a traverse engine layout. If one adds a feature to differentiate its product all other must follow. Subaru makes different cars by definition and that allows it to not follow the crowd blindly but to simply use things that work.

[ece_tim]

I think that most manufactures are starting to use DI for marketing reasons. Most cars are very similar. FWD with a traverse engine layout. If one adds a feature to differentiate its product all other must follow. Subaru makes different cars by definition and that allows it to not follow the crowd blindly but to simply use things that work.

That's a good point. The big auto companies HAVE to stay on top of the new tech or they will be left behind. Subaru competes on a far different level from them and doesn't have to radically change to stay in the public eye.

[JoeFromPA]

Subaru doesn't amortize the cost of development across a few million models sold either (in the U.S., that is, I don't know what their global volume is).

 

If, for example, Toyota adds DI to their bread and butter engine and it adds $75 to the cost of each car with that engine, then for Subaru the equivalent amortization of technology across the line might be $350-400.

 

Obviously, I don't know the actual numbers. My point is simply that the cost it raises a car for toyota/honda/bmw/vw is different for Subaru, a more niche player.

 

Now some of that cost is hard-wired in $s per # of parts. Others are not.

[ece_tim]

^^

Bingo.

[bosco]

I just received my Drive magazine and the new FB25 engine is not going to be used in the turbo Forester models. My guess is this will cover all turbo models as well.

Page 19 of Drive magazine "the EJ25 (which remains the engine of choice for turbocharged Forester models)".

[socalsleeper]

I assure you that VW had has it share of issues with the 2.0t DI engine. As a former Audi tech I saw many a 2.0 with carbon issues and what not. But what VW has going for them is that they are huge and that 2.0 engine goes in many different platforms A4's A5's A3's GTI's Jetta's. So the investment in r&d is worth it for VW as a group. But lonely little Subaru is not a position to make such a big jump looks like they want to prove that case design first and they add DI heads and pistons. Kind of smart after the VW 2.0 was a turdzilla

 

 

 

Hmmm....

 

Honda, the finest small engine maker in the world, not yet embracing DI on their economy-rooted engines. Toyota, not yet embracing in their economy-rooted engines.

 

Nissan, not yet embracing.

 

I could go on and on. With the exception of volkswagon, who has done it on the GTI.

 

DI is a good technology advance, but much like so many technologies before it, it adds cost and complication.

[fishbone]

So I was over visiting Europe and I thought I'd snap these pics for you guys. Drool. Yes, the Legacy was diesel too

[ehsnils]

About half of the Subies sold in Sweden are diesels. And in some European countries 80% of the cars sold are diesels.

 

As for the FB25 and turbo - I suspect that it will get a turbo, but only in a year or two when it has been running as a NA engine on the market. That way they will have a chance to figure out the weak spots. A new engine that blows itself to pieces because someone pulls too much power from it will just cause bad reputation and hurt the sales. So selling the safe and reliable alternative is the way to go if you want to survive. And then there are always some people that puts aftermarket kits on their engines to pull out more power and that can also add to knowledge. (Hey - if I do this and this while turning right under full throttle that hose pops off...)

[bosco]

About half of the Subies sold in Sweden are diesels. And in some European countries 80% of the cars sold are diesels.

 

 

Doesn't the European Governments charge less taxes on diesel fuel than gasoline which could account for diesels being more popular?

[ehsnils]

The price per liter is about the same as for gasoline, the road taxes varies from country to country but in Sweden the road tax for diesels is about 2 to 3 times higher. However the lower fuel consumption makes up for it so if you drive about 10000km or more in a year it's cheaper with diesel.

[fishbone]

And that's one nuance many Americans don't know or don't get (taxes factored based on displacement) when they "knock" European motors. If things were the same here, the "muscle" Mustang would probably be powered by a 2.5 litre DI turbo Hell, we're headed to that direction with the introduction of the V6 turbo F-150, ain't we?

[Viber]

It's completely ignorant that automakers don't offer more diesels here in the USA.

 

Doubly so when they are selling diesel models in other nations.

[Kario]

Diesels in Europe are more expensive to buy, more expensive to maintain and far less reliable (injection systems and turbos).

With introduction of Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) you have to be insain to buy disels. DPF make diesel engines use almosy as much fuel as gasoline engines if you drive short distances and those filters are very fragile and very expensive to replace.

Also H4 subaru diesel engine is the only diesel car I have driven with a engine refined enough that I can stand it. Even BMW R6 disel engines make vibrations and noise. R4 audi's and vw's are worse of course. However if you pick up speed on a highway this becomes less of an issue. So diesel makes sense ONLY if you do high mileages on a highway.

I thing that we will see a come back of a gasoline engine in Europe. Low displacement + turbo + inteligent engine accesories + stop&go + DI + variable valve lift and timing (FIAT new hydraulic multiair system is brilliant) is the future.

There are also prototypes of gasoline engines that can use compression ignition to improve efficiency already being tested.

[ehsnils]

I wouldn't say that DPF has any major impact on the consumption. The Subaru H4 diesel has it and it has good figures on consumption.

 

As for reliability - that depends a lot on the manufacturer of the engine. Don't compare early car diesels with modern ones. And diesels in large trucks lives for a lot of miles without major issues.

 

In the long run the diesels has to be an economic advantage or how would you else explain the large amount of diesels in Europe?

 

As for the lack of diesels in the US - the fuel price makes a difference, when the fuel is cheap it doesn't matter as much how much fuel the car uses. European prices are 3 to 4 times higher than US prices, but the prices will probably rise in the US in the future making more fuel efficient cars interesting. The prices will raise in Europe too, but when the cost of driving a car takes a larger part of the household economy people will look for alternatives.

 

And in the future the emissions regulations for the US and Europe will be harmonized making it easier for the manufacturers to have the same configuration for both markets. Right now the US has higher demands on NOx and lower demands on particles than Europe.

 

As for road tax in Europe - it depends on which country, some like Italy base it on engine displacement, Sweden on weight and emissions.

[Kario]

People are buying diesels in Europe because they don't include higher maintenance costs and repair costs in their calculation.

Diesels are also pushed by marketing. When making gasoline about the same amount of diesel fuel is being made at the same time and with lots of diesel cars in europe this diesel fuel can be sold at higher prices.

I forgot to mention that diesel cars have problems with dual-mass fly wheels and this is another expensive part to replace. DPF and dual mass fly wheels are not covered under warranty.

Disels are popular in europe only becouse high fuel costs enable marketing to push them. Many cars in EU are still cheaper to run with gasoline over long time because of the issues that I have mentioned earlier.

DPF diesels burn lots of fuel because DPF in order to operate has to reach high temperature and untill that temperature is reached engine is running at very ritch mixture so some fuel is burn in the filter to rise its temperature.

There are also other issues with diesels like:

- much more heavy engine -> worse handling,

- problems with geting full engine operational temperature when its cold outside,

- problems with heating cabin (engine gets warm much slower, and might even not get warm enough at all),

- clutch is more difficult to operate in some cars.

[ehsnils]

And how many diesels with dual mass flywheels are there? Not all do use it and the designs may vary between manufacturers. And compared to the number of cars out there this would have been a well-known problem if it was frequently occurring.

 

As for heating problems - that's because the losses are lower in a diesel. However many manufacturers have resolved this too, sometimes with a separate heater (which of course is a catch)

 

Saying that the engine is much heavier - it is somewhat heavier to withstand the higher compression ratio.

 

In any case - it depends on which country you live in (impact of taxes) and how much you drive if it's economy in getting a diesel. But since people buy them there has to be a reason.

 

And usually diesels do have a better economy when towing.

[Kario]

And how many diesels with dual mass flywheels are there? Not all do use it and the designs may vary between manufacturers. And compared to the number of cars out there this would have been a well-known problem if it was frequently occurring.

 

Almost every modern diesel car with manual transmission uses dual mass flywheel. Different cars with different design and part manufactures have problems with DMFW. Its a well-known common problem and that includes subaru. I my self had a issue with DMWF with a gasoline subaru and have replace it with classic cluch system. And diesels are much harder on DMFW of course.

[ece_tim]

Yay, more of this "it is inexcusable for this super-awesome-technology to not be everywhere" crap.

 

The U.S. infrastructure is not setup to produce and distribute large amounts of diesel fuel, because the U.S. public does not demand it. Manufacturers would be utterly stupid to suddenly introduce a bunch of diesel family vehicles for both of those reasons. Your average car buyer will not pay the premium for a diesel car and/or will have too many negative preconceptions over diesel to be interested.

[rao]

It's a good thing that Semis don't run on diesel, otherwise they would never be able to buy it