anyone read the SJ mercury article about subaru?
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,150
From: Palo Alto
Car Info: GT35R, Meth
anyone read the SJ mercury article about subaru?
Yeah the VP of SOA basically said "we need to make more efficient vehicles so we can balance out our turbo polluters and make more turbo cars"
schweet
schweet
250,000-mile Club President
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,770
From: Bizerkeley
Car Info: MBP 02 WRX wagon
I think this is really being spun in a strange way- Subaru is making changes to the outback that will allow it to fit the SUV/truck catagory which is pretty much the tactic everyone in the industry has gone after with all of these car-like "crossover" SUV's.
Subie engines already burn quite cleanly, as evidenced by guys here who have taken off cats and such and still pass smog.
The silly federal regulations allow worse fuel economy and smog out of SUV's, so of course auto mfg's are going to exploit that anyway they can.
The whole corporate average fuel economy thing might have been a good idea in principle, but wound up being the only constraint to higher performance offerings from manufacturers with limited engine choices.
Subaru has only 3 engines currently offered in the US (in various states of tune and set-up), EJ20T EJ25 and EJ25T, with the popularity of the 2.5T's already offered, I expect they are getting challenged to meet the CAFE regs, so moving the outback will allow the CAFE numbers to line up better and at the same time provide another outlet for the 2.5T motor without killing their overall CAFE rating.
But seriously, Ford, GM and Chrysler led the chagre in this direction 10-15 years ago, and the big Japanese companies caught on a couple years later- for Subaru to get tons of flack for following suit in 2004 with ONE MODEL, is pathetic.
Subie engines already burn quite cleanly, as evidenced by guys here who have taken off cats and such and still pass smog.
The silly federal regulations allow worse fuel economy and smog out of SUV's, so of course auto mfg's are going to exploit that anyway they can.
The whole corporate average fuel economy thing might have been a good idea in principle, but wound up being the only constraint to higher performance offerings from manufacturers with limited engine choices.
Subaru has only 3 engines currently offered in the US (in various states of tune and set-up), EJ20T EJ25 and EJ25T, with the popularity of the 2.5T's already offered, I expect they are getting challenged to meet the CAFE regs, so moving the outback will allow the CAFE numbers to line up better and at the same time provide another outlet for the 2.5T motor without killing their overall CAFE rating.
But seriously, Ford, GM and Chrysler led the chagre in this direction 10-15 years ago, and the big Japanese companies caught on a couple years later- for Subaru to get tons of flack for following suit in 2004 with ONE MODEL, is pathetic.
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,150
From: Palo Alto
Car Info: GT35R, Meth
well, to quote the article, "This move will let Subaru sell more vehicles with turbocharger, which pep up performance but hurt miledge"
I guess the rule is that the average mpg of the fleet has to be above a certain amount? I didn't quite get it.
I guess the rule is that the average mpg of the fleet has to be above a certain amount? I didn't quite get it.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,402
From: Bay Area
Car Info: 02 WRX wagon=dead; rollin' in a Craptastic Camry!
Originally posted by psoper
But seriously, Ford, GM and Chrysler led the chagre in this direction 10-15 years ago, and the big Japanese companies caught on a couple years later- for Subaru to get tons of flack for following suit in 2004 with ONE MODEL, is pathetic.
But seriously, Ford, GM and Chrysler led the chagre in this direction 10-15 years ago, and the big Japanese companies caught on a couple years later- for Subaru to get tons of flack for following suit in 2004 with ONE MODEL, is pathetic.
It does irritate me that the government is essentially encouraging people to buy behemoths by not requiring them to meet the same emissions requirements as cars.
VIP Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 9,351
From: pompous douchebag
Car Info: $200,000 sports car
Originally posted by psoper
The silly federal regulations allow worse fuel economy and smog out of SUV's, so of course auto mfg's are going to exploit that anyway they can.
The whole corporate average fuel economy thing might have been a good idea in principle, but wound up being the only constraint to higher performance offerings from manufacturers with limited engine choices.
The silly federal regulations allow worse fuel economy and smog out of SUV's, so of course auto mfg's are going to exploit that anyway they can.
The whole corporate average fuel economy thing might have been a good idea in principle, but wound up being the only constraint to higher performance offerings from manufacturers with limited engine choices.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
slow04wrx
Bay Area
12
Nov 23, 2012 11:00 PM



