Subaru needs to step up...
04-22-2014, 05:08 PM
#91
It's mostly weight. Modern cars have more amenities and safety requirements that makes them heavier. A 1997 ek civic is around 2400 lbs the newer civics probably closer to 2900lbs. 500 lbs is a lot to carry around and expect better mpg. If subaru made the cars lighter they would automatically get better fuel economy without any more or less power.
That's definitely part of it.
1997 EX Coupe. 127hp. average about 30mpg.
Power Steering. CC. Powered sunroof. AC. Driver and passenger airbags. Keyless entry. 2460 pounds.
2014 EX Coupe. 143hp.
Same features as above. But it has automatic climate. Push Button Start. Fancy Stereo and a bunch of LED lighting inside. Averages about 30mpg.
2800 pounds.
After reading that I'm gonna stop hating on Subaru for only giving the STI 5 hp in 10 years.
HOnda gave the civic less than 20 in 17 years and added 350 pounds of crap.
Pretty much heads up in the MPG game over a 17 year span. And guess what... they both ran a 16.8 second quarter mile.
WTF is going on here people? 17 years and you've essentially added an exhaust systems worth of HP to a car?
I may never buy another new car again. Screw that. I liked my 97 civic better than the new ones anyways.
I'm almost curious enough to see how true this is with most cars out there right now.
I mean my caddy is 60 years old. It's weight a couple tons. Stock had over 220hp. Highway gas mileage is no joke over 20mpg.
Few years later and you're talking about a slightly lighter car with well over 300hp.
04-22-2014, 05:50 PM
#93
Was just looking at HP #'s for a bunch of cars and noticed that Honda has been okay on their "performance" model of the civic.
The Si has had a 97hp gain in 24 years. (USDM only)
1990 108 HP 100TQ - 2291 lbs
2000 160HP 111TQ - 2601 lbs
2014 205HP 174TQ - 3002 lbs
Little over 700 pounds heavier tho. lol
The Si has had a 97hp gain in 24 years. (USDM only)
1990 108 HP 100TQ - 2291 lbs
2000 160HP 111TQ - 2601 lbs
2014 205HP 174TQ - 3002 lbs
Little over 700 pounds heavier tho. lol
04-22-2014, 06:22 PM
#94
VIP Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 7,441
Car Info: 2018 Golf R Variant
I know how people have marketed cars. 1. I'm in marketing for a living. 2. I own a 60 year old car that was in the middle of the exact same kind of increases your'e talking about. Year to year out of the same motor.
The only deal with my car was that the gains were real because they were improving a brand new type of motor.
But it is known that there are different reasons to say you have more or less hp than you actually have. One of those is on a dual platform car.
WRX... 227 (2004)
STI... 300 (2004)
When you're trying to upsell a car... you have essentially the same platform but it's $12k more. Buyers want to see more than just a 6spd and some wheels. That's all they're really seeing at first because buyers are dumb. So they're saying... what $12k more? Well you get all that and you get an extra
25% hp.
So in those cases you have to do things like downtune or lie. You put out a WRX that says 255hp and an STI that says 280hp... no one is gonna buy the STI.
So essentially... yeah. I get it (and I didn't read it as snippy. LOL!)
I get it.
In reality the 5hp gains you've seen in the STI over the years are more... and more importantly Torque went up.
The platform has improved.
I'm not saying I'd be happy if the next STI came out and it said 340hp on it but in reality it was all a lie... for one that would be bull**** and it would backfire on them in a HUGE way... and for two... it would be bull****.
I'm saying that in a 10 year span it's reasonable to expect them to increase performance say 1% a year on average... and I'm not talking about running the same motor but just upping the HP by 3hp in your brochure. I'm talking about increasing it by 3HP for real.
10 years... 10%. You're talking about 30hp. Reasonable. Appropriate.
EDIT... oh and MPG. Yeah you don't buy an AWD car to get 50mpg. But fact is... we don't expect enough out of auto manufacturers in this regard. Transmission will always limit an AWD compared to a FWD car for MPG... but that doesn't mean it shouldn't improve as time goes by.
Fact is... people are idiots if they think that 30mpg should be the benchmark for an economy FWD vehicle. There's no reason I should be forced to buy a hybrid or some other hippy jerk off stare at the lights to get 50mpg car to get 50mpg.
You can pick up a 70's compact car. Toss a modern motor in it. Get 35mpg. And have a crazy fast car because it's got double the hp it had in the 70's. Hell... that 70's motor... good chance it got over 30mpg.
My 1997 Civic before I started farting around with it was over 30mpg. The HX... I knew guys that were milking it for over 50mpg. That's damn near 20 years ago and the civic is getting??? well... not 50mpg that's for damned sure.
It's a huge flaw. Big business' helping each other out and taking advantage of a naive customer.
Same reason out telecom system is still in 1971 compared to the rest of the civilized world.
The only deal with my car was that the gains were real because they were improving a brand new type of motor.
But it is known that there are different reasons to say you have more or less hp than you actually have. One of those is on a dual platform car.
WRX... 227 (2004)
STI... 300 (2004)
When you're trying to upsell a car... you have essentially the same platform but it's $12k more. Buyers want to see more than just a 6spd and some wheels. That's all they're really seeing at first because buyers are dumb. So they're saying... what $12k more? Well you get all that and you get an extra
25% hp.
So in those cases you have to do things like downtune or lie. You put out a WRX that says 255hp and an STI that says 280hp... no one is gonna buy the STI.
So essentially... yeah. I get it (and I didn't read it as snippy. LOL!)
I get it.
In reality the 5hp gains you've seen in the STI over the years are more... and more importantly Torque went up.
The platform has improved.
I'm not saying I'd be happy if the next STI came out and it said 340hp on it but in reality it was all a lie... for one that would be bull**** and it would backfire on them in a HUGE way... and for two... it would be bull****.
I'm saying that in a 10 year span it's reasonable to expect them to increase performance say 1% a year on average... and I'm not talking about running the same motor but just upping the HP by 3hp in your brochure. I'm talking about increasing it by 3HP for real.
10 years... 10%. You're talking about 30hp. Reasonable. Appropriate.
EDIT... oh and MPG. Yeah you don't buy an AWD car to get 50mpg. But fact is... we don't expect enough out of auto manufacturers in this regard. Transmission will always limit an AWD compared to a FWD car for MPG... but that doesn't mean it shouldn't improve as time goes by.
Fact is... people are idiots if they think that 30mpg should be the benchmark for an economy FWD vehicle. There's no reason I should be forced to buy a hybrid or some other hippy jerk off stare at the lights to get 50mpg car to get 50mpg.
You can pick up a 70's compact car. Toss a modern motor in it. Get 35mpg. And have a crazy fast car because it's got double the hp it had in the 70's. Hell... that 70's motor... good chance it got over 30mpg.
My 1997 Civic before I started farting around with it was over 30mpg. The HX... I knew guys that were milking it for over 50mpg. That's damn near 20 years ago and the civic is getting??? well... not 50mpg that's for damned sure.
It's a huge flaw. Big business' helping each other out and taking advantage of a naive customer.
Same reason out telecom system is still in 1971 compared to the rest of the civilized world.
MPG has SO much to do with driving styles, and most people suck at driving across the board - meaning, suck at driving in an enthusiastic manner, as well as striving for economy. You see someone hauling ballz up a hill in a V8 SUV and then slamming on the brakes going UP the hill. I mean, I would be shocked if this were not also the same type of person that complains their SUV gets 12mpg when it was advertised to get 20.
Most people just "don't get" cars, and see them as some sort of appliance, where it does the same sort of "thing" in all aspects of it's operation. I used to regularly get 42-45mpg in my old 2009 Honda Fit but I have a friend who swears the car cannot possibly get better than 32mpg, oh yeah and it's slow. Different styles. There are a lot of people out there that will only drive well in the back seat of a self-driving car.
There is only so much car manufacturers can do when the laws require that our cars are much heavier than they ever were, and also require that people be able to be completely incompetent, but still able to pass a test and "operate" a vehicle.
Every single day out there on the roads, I see people operating vehicles in really weird ways, seemingly due to mood, attitude, pride and complacency more than anything related to driving or goals related to economy/performance. You see someone merge in front of someone else, and then watch that person use more fuel than necessary to accelerate and get in a car fight.
I doubt most people even think about how they are operating their cars, but they sure get pissed when it does not deliver the same exact numbers that were achieved on a test track in controlled circumstances, as they keep their feet floored in an effort to be a better *******.
I know I get a bit wordy here, but this MPG thing is related to momentum and is directly related to the countless discussions we have had here about needing more HP in order to drive, how low HP cars are not fun and other stupid ideas. Anyone that understands momentum and how to use it in driving will also get good MPG, maybe even better MPG than the vehicle was rated for, since that is an average and they are on the high side naturally.
Ha! Well, ok.
I think my 2013 is the same. Weighs ~2700lbs.
That's definitely part of it.
1997 EX Coupe. 127hp. average about 30mpg.
Power Steering. CC. Powered sunroof. AC. Driver and passenger airbags. Keyless entry. 2460 pounds.
2014 EX Coupe. 143hp.
Same features as above. But it has automatic climate. Push Button Start. Fancy Stereo and a bunch of LED lighting inside. Averages about 30mpg.
2800 pounds.
After reading that I'm gonna stop hating on Subaru for only giving the STI 5 hp in 10 years.
HOnda gave the civic less than 20 in 17 years and added 350 pounds of crap.
Pretty much heads up in the MPG game over a 17 year span. And guess what... they both ran a 16.8 second quarter mile.
WTF is going on here people? 17 years and you've essentially added an exhaust systems worth of HP to a car?
I may never buy another new car again. Screw that. I liked my 97 civic better than the new ones anyways.
I'm almost curious enough to see how true this is with most cars out there right now.
I mean my caddy is 60 years old. It's weight a couple tons. Stock had over 220hp. Highway gas mileage is no joke over 20mpg.
Few years later and you're talking about a slightly lighter car with well over 300hp.
1997 EX Coupe. 127hp. average about 30mpg.
Power Steering. CC. Powered sunroof. AC. Driver and passenger airbags. Keyless entry. 2460 pounds.
2014 EX Coupe. 143hp.
Same features as above. But it has automatic climate. Push Button Start. Fancy Stereo and a bunch of LED lighting inside. Averages about 30mpg.
2800 pounds.
After reading that I'm gonna stop hating on Subaru for only giving the STI 5 hp in 10 years.
HOnda gave the civic less than 20 in 17 years and added 350 pounds of crap.
Pretty much heads up in the MPG game over a 17 year span. And guess what... they both ran a 16.8 second quarter mile.
WTF is going on here people? 17 years and you've essentially added an exhaust systems worth of HP to a car?
I may never buy another new car again. Screw that. I liked my 97 civic better than the new ones anyways.
I'm almost curious enough to see how true this is with most cars out there right now.
I mean my caddy is 60 years old. It's weight a couple tons. Stock had over 220hp. Highway gas mileage is no joke over 20mpg.
Few years later and you're talking about a slightly lighter car with well over 300hp.
I LOL'd at a quip I read in Car & Driver on the new STi. It showed a pic of the dash and said something like "Men in their parents' basements everywhere lament that the new STi does not deliver 1000hp, but the interior is all business." Have to find the exact quote. I literally LOL'd.
04-22-2014, 10:43 PM
#95
I was green lit to buy a new STI (married men understand) and all I needed was the 'Forged Pistons' and some kind of upgrade to address this f'ing ringland issue....then I would have been in. Getting 300 from the factory is not a concern, I want to know I can mod, increase boost and build the motor I want without a major rebuild due to weak pistons. That's all. Is that too much?
I currently have more confidence raising boost on my weak *** 2.0 05 wrx
I currently have more confidence raising boost on my weak *** 2.0 05 wrx
04-22-2014, 10:52 PM
#96
Old School
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
I was green lit to buy a new STI (married men understand) and all I needed was the 'Forged Pistons' and some kind of upgrade to address this f'ing ringland issue....then I would have been in. Getting 300 from the factory is not a concern, I want to know I can mod, increase boost and build the motor I want without a major rebuild due to weak pistons. That's all. Is that too much?
I currently have more confidence raising boost on my weak *** 2.0 05 wrx
I currently have more confidence raising boost on my weak *** 2.0 05 wrx
I know you live far from e85, but even on 91 on a Cobb AP you are bound to make more power everywhere.
04-22-2014, 11:01 PM
#97
It's going to happen, but what with college saving for my boys and keeping up with SF life it takes a few months to slip it by the queen of numbers lol..it'll happen shortly I hope
04-23-2014, 02:21 PM
#102
The transmissions limit the ability to get better gas mileage. Car manufacturers are finally putting 5/6/7 or even 8 speed transmissions in order to achieve the regulated MPG's. I would have loved for Subaru to have put the 5 spd auto from the LGT in the WRX. If even just to show that they were considering the MPG's. MPG's would have improved imho. Obviously part of it goes into how the people are driving the cars. Redlining and power shifting and ****.
