Go away, Toyota.

[TheOneDoubleN]

That's not an obscure reference to OneDoubleDouche, is it?

 

Wow, only a few months and I'm a household name here

[TheOneDoubleN]

Exactly. Of it was the Toyota of the supra mr2 and alltrac hey I'd be all for it. The quality of their cars was better in the 90s too.

 

New toyotas are absolute junk. The interior material quality is horrible....the plastic feels like early 2000s GM and the seats early 2000s Hyundai foam. They sell because of reputation and usually a degree of mechanical reliability.

 

The last thing we need is Toyota taking control. We will get big ass batteries cheap plastic amd fabric and absolutely no turbo. A 240 hp v6 with peak hp at 5100 revs and redline at 5900 is in the future.

 

I completely agree. I had a '95 Camry V6 that was great. It was powerful, comfortable, it handled nicely and had road feel, and was stylish for its time as a family sedan.

 

I rented a car from Hertz the other week and it was a new Camry. The thing felt like absolute junk. The Toyota Supra TT was my dream car when I was younger, and the undisputed king of many import drag races. The celica used to be a great car too and now its crap. When I sit in a new toyota now, it just, doesn't feel like a car! They're moving tin cans with peaky high hp motors that perform like crap! But all people see is "Oh, it has 270hp, and it gets 25mpg, and it's reliable." After all the stuck accelerator horror stories though, sales sank like crazy, because toyota's biggest selling point, reliability, was no longer. Just look at their new commercials. They're nothing but "Our cars are safe....they have the "star" safety system" (WTF is that anyway?).

 

Toyota better wise up and bring back their innovation and breakthrough R&D, or Honda and Hyundai are going to eat them alive.

[amp0412]

Why? You don't like this?

 

http://www.speedlux.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2012-subaru-impreza-w.jpg

 

Not unless it weights less than 3200lbs. Current stis are so overweight expensive and slow. They weigh almost as much or more than my 2005 wagon and are built on a frame thats about the same size too. Get rid of the bloat fat cars and build something that weighs less than 3000lbs and has 300 hp.

[fishbone]

It is easier to overcome weight than to reduce it. The CTS-V weighs over 2 tons and handles great.

[SurlyOldManMN]

Bad analogy. Buick is starting to rock and will soon see the same success as Cadillac. I see a Buick in my future.

 

Opel wha???

[DOHCEJ22E1]

It is easier to overcome weight than to reduce it. The CTS-V weighs over 2 tons and handles great.

All variations of CTS-V have over 400bhp & a good R&D team for them.

We don't want our cars to be pigs, be more expensive, & be like everyone else in the industry. If anything, Subaru + Porsche should collaborate. What a powerhouse that would be...hmph, pipe dreams.

[fishbone]

CTS-V is not a pig. It did better than an STi on a track in a recent Car and Driver lightning lap test, a thread which we are having fun with

http://legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php/help-me-understand-why-subarus-so-slow-road-course-153089.html

 

I was arguing that it may be cheaper to work on suspension/rigidity and up the power than try to shed weight, in this day and age where everyone fights over creature comforts and safety (both spell heavier cars). Getting hung up on weight and on an arbitrary number such as around 3K lbs is shortsighted. There are many light cars that handle like crap and heavy cars that handle awesome. Do you think I'd be attracted to a stripped down WRX with no amenities in the name of performance? No. If I wanted a pocket rocket and damn everything else ... maybe I'd have owned an SRT-4 Neon at some point in time ... And like me, many more people. Just look at how many WRX owners longed for heated seats for example and a nicer interior.

You are right, Subaru is not like everyone in the industry right now. They are behind

[Drew888]

^^^My Hero

[thefultonhow]

The Highlander & Tribeca would end up competing against each other & for some reason, I can see customers idiotically choosing the V6 over the H6 & sales for the Tribeca would drop dramatically. Let's not forget Lexus variations. They would outsell the Tribeca as well. I foresee Subaru losing for some reason.

 

Would you rather that Subaru spend millions of dollars developing the Tribeca and THEN have it not sell? Because, you know, that's what they did this time around. Very good way to turn a profit!

 

I don't mind if Toyota meddles with Subaru, as long as the AWD system is still awesome and still available with a high-output engine and a manual transmission. Hell, they could switch to Torsen AWD and a supercharged V6 and they would be an Audi S4 by another name, but I would still cheer!

 

I don't understand why everyone fixates on Symmetrical AWD and the boxer layout. Audi-style Torsen has all the same benefits of the Subaru AWD system (actually, it's better), and Subaru boxers tend to burn oil and aren't very smooth. As long as they can produce a torque monster like the EJ255 some other way, I won't complain.

[BobGee]

Sooo much nonsense hearsay in this thread.

[ehsnils]

It is easier to overcome weight than to reduce it. The CTS-V weighs over 2 tons and handles great.

 

More weight means higher fuel consumption - especially for city driving.

[TheOneDoubleN]

Get rid of the bloat fat cars and build something that weighs less than 3000lbs and has 300 hp.

 

I think those cars run in the 6 figure range....even the '11 corvette Z06 ways 3175lbs....and costs $75K. I don't think Subaru will be building any carbon fiber STI's any time soon....and if they did, they probably would be in the 6 figure range . And how many people are going to pay $100k for a Subaru? Look how well VW's attempt at a $70-100K car did with the Phaeton that lasted all of three years because no one wanted to pay that much for a VW....

 

Subaru is much more concerned with producing quality cars for a CHEAP price for the masses. We as die-hard car enthusiasts probably represent less than 2% of Subaru's worldwide sales. There's a good reason why Subaru does not produce anything over $40k...

 

People get so uppity that the new legacy has cheaper interior materials (which I couldn't care less about) and no longer has a rear LSD (which few people in their market really need). If the new legacy had the same interior and drivetrain as the old one, I'm sure it would cost thousands more. I'd rather have the money in my pocket to invest in better areas of the car than for the dashboard to be made of leather.

[05LGTLtd]

why does the front clip on everything have to look like an evo?

 

For the record, they stopped building real subaru's in 1988....

[DOHCEJ22E1]

CTS-V is not a pig.

1G = 3,850 lbs. 2G = 4,250 lbs. Not pigs, you say? These cars are heavy and can't be compared to the STi as they are in a different class. They might handle better but for the price they're selling for, they had better beat any Subaru at anything except weather conditions.

 

Just look at how many WRX owners longed for heated seats for example and a nicer interior.

No offense but this is the problem. We should be very happy that Subaru even thought to bring the WRX or WRX-STi over. These are cars that were not originally designed for creature comforts>performance but the other way around. But now since we're too lazy to roll the window down with a hand crank or wait until our butts make the seat warm like in the old days, these 'performance' brands/types of cars will eventually slide into being pseudo-luxury cars. As lazy consumers/buyers, our demands are causing heightened prices on these cars.

 

Do you think I'd be attracted to a stripped down WRX with no amenities in the name of performance?

I would. A WRX isn't supposed to have leather seats or navigation. It's supposed to be a road mock rally machine.

 

Getting hung up on weight and on an arbitrary number such as around 3K lbs is shortsighted.

When Subaru IMPREZAS started surpassing this weight, let alone Legacies, that should have been a sign that things were going into the sh***er.

 

 

Would you rather that Subaru spend millions of dollars developing the Tribeca and THEN have it not sell? Because, you know, that's what they did this time around. Very good way to turn a profit!

Whose fault is it that things like the Tribeca were built in the first place? Subaru's? Negative. This is the consumer's fault & now it won't sell well because of our bitchiness & picky attitudes. Nice job, humanity. You've succeeded in making the auto industry think we're out of our minds.

 

I don't mind if Toyota meddles with Subaru, as long as the AWD system is still awesome and still available with a high-output engine and a manual transmission. Hell, they could switch to Torsen AWD and a supercharged V6 and they would be an Audi S4 by another name, but I would still cheer!

There was a time when Subaru's EJ205 engine had sufficient power. I mean 230bhp isn't weak by any means. Now, the WRX has 265bhp & it's still not enough? Hah! People are asking way more than they bargain for & this is why these cars aren't selling. An STi with 300bhp should be more than enough for it's price range & it should compete with no other than the Mitsubishi Evolution.

 

I don't understand why everyone fixates on Symmetrical AWD and the boxer layout.

That AWD/Boxer combo is what a Subaru is. It's what we have come to identify a Subaru as. It's what sells Subarus. As a Subaru fan, simplicity, AWD, & the boxer engine is why I like a Subaru. If it had an I-engine & AWD, it might as well be called a Mitsubishi or a Volvo.

 

Audi-style Torsen has all the same benefits of the Subaru AWD system (actually, it's better), and Subaru boxers tend to burn oil and aren't very smooth. As long as they can produce a torque monster like the EJ255 some other way, I won't complain.

Audi's system should be better, being a more expensive brand & all.

Any engine that gets pushed hard will burn oil. Make a car heavier without changing the engine's internal parts & see just how much more oil it'll burn not to mention the loss of smoothness.

 

More weight means higher fuel consumption - especially for city driving.

Simple & direct use of logic. 2.8K lbs is okay but 3.5K is too much for a 170bhp/165lbs-ft 4cyl to move from a stop off-boost. It's that simple & our Subarus are approaching this problem.

 

For the record, they stopped building real subaru's in 1998....

Fixed.

[thefultonhow]

No offense but this is the problem. We should be very happy that Subaru even thought to bring the WRX or WRX-STi over. These are cars that were not originally designed for creature comforts>performance but the other way around. But now since we're too lazy to roll the window down with a hand crank or wait until our butts make the seat warm like in the old days, these 'performance' brands/types of cars will eventually slide into being pseudo-luxury cars. As lazy consumers/buyers, our demands are causing heightened prices on these cars.

 

...

 

Whose fault is it that things like the Tribeca were built in the first place? Subaru's? Negative. This is the consumer's fault & now it won't sell well because of our bitchiness & picky attitudes. Nice job, humanity. You've succeeded in making the auto industry think we're out of our minds.

 

:lol::lol:

 

Sorry, but there's no reason consumers should say, "Oh almighty car companies, thank you for building cars, we don't care if they meet our needs or not." If a car company does not have a product that is competitive with, you know, their competitors, in the ways that are important to consumers, the consumers go elsewhere and the car companies go out of business. That's what consumer-based capitalism is all about, really.

 

Also, it goes both ways. You are a consumer. Your demands for Subaru's design philosophy run counter to some other consumers'. Guess what? Subaru is a for-profit company. They are going to do what makes them the most money, just like any other for-profit company. Because people like you are in the minority, Subaru is going to design for the majority of consumers, because that's what makes them money. If you were in the majority, they would design for you, but you're just going to have to live with the fact that most people aren't enthusiasts.

 

There was a time when Subaru's EJ205 engine had sufficient power. I mean 230bhp isn't weak by any means. Now, the WRX has 265bhp & it's still not enough? Hah! People are asking way more than they bargain for & this is why these cars aren't selling. An STi with 300bhp should be more than enough for it's price range & it should compete with no other than the Mitsubishi Evolution.

 

You missed my point... which relates to the next part of your post too...

 

That AWD/Boxer combo is what a Subaru is. It's what we have come to identify a Subaru as. It's what sells Subarus. As a Subaru fan, simplicity, AWD, & the boxer engine is why I like a Subaru. If it had an I-engine & AWD, it might as well be called a Mitsubishi or a Volvo.

 

Hey, guess what? You and all the other people who give a shit about this are once again in the minority. My parents continue to buy Subarus because they are the one non-premium brand that offers AWD with a manual transmission. Many other people buy Subarus because there aren't many other cars that are non-premium and AWD, whether or not they want a manual. My girlfriend wants an Impreza because it's AWD and looks cool; I don't think she even knows what a horizontally-opposed engine IS. I would venture to say that 95% of consumers are like that. To them, "boxer engine" is just another marketing gimmick that they don't really care about.

 

Then there are people like me, who know the difference and STILL don't care. When I was looking at cars, I was considering LGTs and Forester XTs, but also Volvo V70Rs and Infiniti G35s. My criteria were high power (turbo 4 or 6-cyl), not FWD, manual transmission, fun to drive, reliable, in my price range. If a car besides a Subaru meets my criteria the best, I'd buy that instead. I am not loyal to a company just because they use a certain technology that, let's face it, is not all that.

 

Any engine that gets pushed hard will burn oil. Make a car heavier without changing the engine's internal parts & see just how much more oil it'll burn not to mention the loss of smoothness.

 

Wrong. I rev my Infiniti G20 up to 8000 rpm multiple times every time I drive it. I am not easy on that car. It has leaked oil in the past due to aging seals, but never burned it.

 

Let's face it -- you are one of about 5 people that would stop buying Subarus if they no longer used horizontally opposed engines. As long as their AWD system is still up to snuff and they continue to offer manual transmissions and a range of engine options, almost nobody cares.

[05LGTLtd]

I've owned six subaru's and three of those were new car purchases. I might consider a 5door hatch wrx at this point, but subaru continues to move away from why I've stayed with them. I doubt my next car will be a subaru, unless they surprise me some how.

 

The boxer engine has become to subaru what the V-twin is to harley. If they are just going to sell re-badged toyota's what's the point?

 

I really don't see why the largest car company in world needs to take a niche producer and "mainstream" them?? Just cause the brand has a value? lets see how long that takes to dry up.

[fishbone]

1G = 3,850 lbs. 2G = 4,250 lbs. Not pigs, you say? These cars are heavy and can't be compared to the STi as they are in a different class. They might handle better but for the price they're selling for, they had better beat any Subaru at anything except weather conditions.

Fixed.

I don't know what your definition of pig is, but pig means heavy AND handles like crap. If it's heavy but handles like it's on rails, it is not a pig.

http://legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php/help-me-understand-why-subarus-so-slow-road-course-153089.html

 

I, too, do NOT want to see the Boxer motor go away. Ever.

[DOHCEJ22E1]

:lol::lol:

Sorry, but there's no reason consumers should say, "Oh almighty car companies, thank you for building cars, we don't care if they meet our needs or not." If a car company does not have a product that is competitive with, you know, their competitors, in the ways that are important to consumers, the consumers go elsewhere and the car companies go out of business. That's what consumer-based capitalism is all about, really.

You're right. This is a dog eat dog world & unfortunately, that's the way the game is played now. Still, back in the 90's, what sold Subaru products happened to be the same 'unique quirkiness' that every tester seems to rail the product on. The Outback in America, being a massive player in it's own segment, is what increased Subaru sales after the 1st generation. If Subaru starts trying to be like everyone else, it will be the end of them.

 

Also, it goes both ways. You are a consumer. Your demands for Subaru's design philosophy run counter to some other consumers'. Guess what? Subaru is a for-profit company. They are going to do what makes them the most money, just like any other for-profit company. Because people like you are in the minority, Subaru is going to design for the majority of consumers, because that's what makes them money. If you were in the majority, they would design for you, but you're just going to have to live with the fact that most people aren't enthusiasts.

This is a sad reality. To even think that a Subaru would be a Toyota is horrid. Now if a merger like this were made in Toyota's prime (which is 80's-90's), I'd have absolutely no objections. But now, it's like the WHOLE auto industry is forgetting what a car really is & it's now producing giant electrical generators & passing them off as 'cars' like they're out of ideas. I'm pretty sure if someone who liked Hondas found out that company was going to merge with Ford, they'd flip out but it's as you said, most people don't know or care about the brand being what it is as long as it produces producing what they want. I think this is a retarded way to think as a collective but then, just probably just me.

 

Then there are people like me, who know the difference and STILL don't care. When I was looking at cars, I was considering LGTs and Forester XTs, but also Volvo V70Rs and Infiniti G35s. My criteria were high power (turbo 4 or 6-cyl), not FWD, manual transmission, fun to drive, reliable, in my price range. If a car besides a Subaru meets my criteria the best, I'd buy that instead. I am not loyal to a company just because they use a certain technology that, let's face it, is not all that.

I'm not saying that Volvos are bad (I'm somewhat of a fan of Volvos too.) However, what makes Subaru is that they produce relatively cheap cars with AWD & a boxer engine. Are their AWD systems & boxer engines top notch? No, they're not exactly Porsche material. I like them anyways because of the vast interchangeability of parts across the brand's main models. Being someone who likes to tinker with machines, they appeal to me. Subaru isn't the best brand in the universe but I'm going to defend it to some degree because they're not all that bad.

 

 

Wrong. I rev my Infiniti G20 up to 8000 rpm multiple times every time I drive it. I am not easy on that car. It has leaked oil in the past due to aging seals, but never burned it.

Now add 1000lbs to your car & run it the same way. Something will fail. Subaru hasn't changed the internals for it's engines in about 6 or 7 years. Possibly even longer. You can't use the same engine for a heavier car with no internal changes.

 

Let's face it -- you are one of about 5 people that would stop buying Subarus if they no longer used horizontally opposed engines. As long as their AWD system is still up to snuff and they continue to offer manual transmissions and a range of engine options, almost nobody cares.

That's a fact. If I found a factory Subaru with an I4 or a V6 in it, I'd be mad that they sold out (I'd be that 1 out of 5 people telling the other 4 that they suck & that Subarus aren't Toyotas, they are Subarus). Will they run better? Possibly. Then again, with Toyota's nonsense, I don't foresee this. Look at Porsche's history of horizontally opposed engines. They've even combined AWD with some of their engines at certain points in time & those things sold like crazy. Was it because of the brand name? Definitely. During the course of time, they've kept the thing that makes them sell while giving the people what they want because they can do that. People want expensive things from an inexpensive brand (Subaru) & they need to understand that if they want so much of that stuff, why NOT just buy an Audi if they have THAT much money? They have AWD & even more power.

[thefultonhow]

Still, back in the 90's, what sold Subaru products happened to be the same 'unique quirkiness' that every tester seems to rail the product on. The Outback in America, being a massive player in it's own segment, is what increased Subaru sales after the 1st generation. If Subaru starts trying to be like everyone else, it will be the end of them.

 

You do know that Subaru almost went bankrupt in the 1990s, right? It shows in the interiors of its cars of the period -- the BD Legacy, facelifted GC Impreza, and SF Forester all have horribly plasticky interiors. The Outback did save them once they figured out how to market it, but that wasn't until 1996.

 

Now add 1000lbs to your car & run it the same way. Something will fail. Subaru hasn't changed the internals for it's engines in about 6 or 7 years. Possibly even longer. You can't use the same engine for a heavier car with no internal changes.

 

Are you seriously trying to tell me weight has something to do with oil consumption? Even if it does, my brother's 2001 Forester (which came out when the EJ251 was still new and weighs ~3100 lbs) has been burning at least one quart per 1000 mi for at least the past 10,000 mi. At one point, it was up to a quart every 700 mi. Meanwhile, my G20 is 2800 lbs and burns no oil. My mom's 2006 Audi A4, while lower mileage, is 3500 lbs and burns no oil. So even if we take your statement at face value, it's still wrong.

 

Face it -- the boxer engine has nice packaging, but there are more issues with it than with other Japanese engines, regardless of weight.

[DOHCEJ22E1]

Are you seriously trying to tell me weight has something to do with oil consumption? Even if it does, my brother's 2001 Forester (which came out when the EJ251 was still new and weighs ~3100 lbs) has been burning at least one quart per 1000 mi for at least the past 10,000 mi. At one point, it was up to a quart every 700 mi. Meanwhile, my G20 is 2800 lbs and burns no oil. My mom's 2006 Audi A4, while lower mileage, is 3500 lbs and burns no oil. So even if we take your statement at face value, it's still wrong.

With more weight, the same engine would work harder. The oil would then wear down faster so I should have chosen my words carefully & said 'wear' instead of 'burn'. My apologies. But you should get what I mean after this. There's no way that the engine's oil wouldn't wear down faster, especially if it's pulling along a heavier car.

 

Face it -- the boxer engine has nice packaging, but there are more issues with it than with other Japanese engines, regardless of weight.

True. I've never had a problem with either of my 22Es but I've seen, read, & heard horror stories about the 25Ds, 20Rs, & I could go on. Then again, they aren't Porsches. We can only have so much from Subaru, which is why people shouldn't be demanding from it like it's an Audi or a BMW. They're not even in the same league.

[thefultonhow]

Why can't it be in the same league as a Honda or Toyota, though? Or a Hyundai, for that matter?

[red beast]

exactly, this is really the only benefit i can see from toyota tinkering with subaru. i know i wouldnt buy it jus because do any research on how they make the batteries for prius' and you'll realize that hybrid isnt the way to go. but for another market such as families and older people (50's+) can benefit from an awd hybrid in one of subaru's platforms. but building off of what penguin said, the way of the future is electric and hybrid technologies. also awd drive trains, they're safer and that's a huge selling point for any car company. but overall, i wouldnt invest my money (financing a car for years lol) in something that toyota tuned down to sell to a larger demographic. but thats jus my 2 cents

 

stop drinking

 

wtf are you trying to say?

[Jay Speed]

He what do you think the TREZIA is !

For sale this moment in Belgium and the Subaru dealers love them because the ship them.

No flat four, no AWD just an Auris in B-MPV cloth.

The call it ‘New Compact Smart Wagon' and yes it will sell well here in Europe.

The same thing happened when Jaguar was from Ford, the S-type was a Taurus with other shell and Peugoet diesel engine, the X-type a Modeo with luckily 4WD drive in the six but also sold with the 4 cil diesel ( I still have to trow up from it )

[thefultonhow]

The S-type was a Lincoln LS, not a Taurus.

[Penguin]

stop drinking

 

wtf are you trying to say?

 

I believe what he is pointing out is that the process of mining, refining, transporting, and manufacturing the batteries is pretty destructive environmentally.

 

I find it terribly amusing to think of all the heavy equipment used to mine nickel for example spewing untreated diesel exhaust into the air in order to remove thousands of tons of overburden. Then all the fossil fuels and emissions expended in moving the raw ore to a refinery/smelter, then all the fuel used to transport nickel to a battery manufacturer, then the battery to the automaker, then on to you the consumer. Not to mention the chemical processes used to extract the nickel from the ore, and the energy used to process the metal itself. All so some dip shit Prius driver who has no concept of a supply chain can drive around smugly convinced he is saving the environment, because he's never seen a nickel mine.

 

Then there are the Prius drivers that are convinced that a Prius will save them money in operating costs, which is also bullshit. Considering the price premium of a Prius over say a Corolla which gets pretty good mileage too. How much gas will that price difference buy you?

 

Next up in the douche bag pompous assholes will be the plug in hybrid drivers who will contribute to all the nickel or lithium mining emissions and side affects, but will also be plugging in their cars to charge up the batteries convinced they are saving the world. Except for the fact that roughly 50-55% of US electricity is generated from coal fired power plants. Oh well at least you are sending your money to Campbell county Wyoming in that case instead of the middle east...... but you're still burning a fossil fuel. You will also be contributing to my continued prosperity in the low sulfur coal hauling business.