Subaru XV Crosstrek

Printable View

  • 02-02-2013
    gravitylover
    I obviously haven't driven the '14 Forester yet but my XV is a pleasure to drive on the open road as long as it isn't too windy. The tall(ish) narrow profile means it gets buffeted pretty badly but nothing I can't deal with. Compared to my father in laws '13 Forester I find it to require considerably less driver input, possibly due to having a slightly quicker steering ratio. It rides great and is very well composed on rough pavement. The worse the weather gets the more confident you feel behind the wheel. I've driven in some pretty horrendous conditions and never felt the need to back off and it tracks great through beat up slush and snow.

    Over 7,000 miles I'm averaging 27.3mpg with a pretty equal mix of urban/suburban and highway driving. Straight city/suburban is about 25 and all highway is 33-35 depending on how hilly and how fast. The car gets the best mpg at about 60 so if you're going to be doing 70+ I'd expect 30-32.

    The power is definitely sufficient but certainly not too little. There are times though where I'd like a bit more torque at the low end and the CVT means you have to TELL the car when to go compared to many cars today where you just ask and you're there.

    Bottom line - I love it so far and know that I made the right choice.
  • 02-02-2013
    gravitylover
    One more thought - I think this car handles SO MUCH better than the Forester and is just a lot more fun to drive. It's possible that the new XT will solve that but I have a hard time thinking that the additional height won't be felt on off camber turns and general hard cornering. That and going to the XT will put a hurt on gas mileage.
  • 02-03-2013
    Harold
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by XJaredX View Post
    Absolutely blown out of proportion! People were just looking at the drop of HP from 170 to 148, yet for some reason nobody mentions that the new car is actually slightly faster than the 08-11 Imprezas, or that the 12+ weigh like 150-180 lbs less than the 08-11. It's stupid, every time I see someone whine about that on the internet I bang my head on the desk.

    Now, yeah, it would have been sweet if they kept the 170 hp on the 12+ cars with the less weight and such, but they wanted fuel economy, so to increase fuel economy ** a full 30% while not making the car slower is quite a nice balance, methinks.

    When I was evaluating the XV on paper before test driving it, I compared the hp/weight ratio to the other cars we currently have. It's pretty dumb to look at HP without looking at how much the vehicle weighs.
  • 02-03-2013
    Jayem
    True, but Subaru has been guilty of a little deception over the years using their "look at the numbers rather than the HP" thing. Of course the LGT and WRX would accelerate fast when you dump the clutch at 5000 due to AWD, but it wrecks the clutch/trans and compared to other similar cars they lacked a lot of top end/upper end acceleration due to lower HP AND AWD loss. They were pushing this idea pretty heavily back in the day when they were stagnating against their competitors in the power arena.
  • 02-20-2013
    summud
    1 Attachment(s)
    Our New XV!!
    Well, i guess since i started this thread i should post up a pick of our new Crosstrek Limited, Dark Gray...

    Attachment 773882
  • 02-20-2013
    rideut
    Looking to install a roof box on ours and noticed the antenna does not fold down like on previous Imprezas. I swear I saw another Crosstrek w/the antenna folded & a Thule box - aftermarket?
  • 02-20-2013
    XJaredX
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rideut View Post
    Looking to install a roof box on ours and noticed the antenna does not fold down like on previous Imprezas. I swear I saw another Crosstrek w/the antenna folded & a Thule box - aftermarket?

    Do you have a navigation-equipped Crosstrek? I'm not at work but I'm pretty sure the navi cars have a fixed FM/XM antenna, the non-navi cars have the floppy antenna. With that said, do you listen to FM often? If not, just remove it, it just screws off, you'll still probably receive the stronger local signals.
  • 02-20-2013
    pimpbot
    Also, look at the torque and where it peaks. I swear my 115hp GTi was faster than a Honda that weighed 300 pounds less and had 20 more HP, just because the GTi's 122 ft/lbs of torque hit at 3200 RPM, with most of the torque available at 2000 RPM. It had an 8 valve crossflow head with super long intake runners, all of that adds up to more low end torqoe at the expense of less top end HP. That thing pulled nicely from a red light up to 60 MPH.

    The Honda's peak torque of 107 ft/lbs hit at mostly over 4500 RPM, meaning the power really didn't kick in unless you wound the engine out. Who wants to redline the engine just to get it to pull?

    Yeah, forget the numbers on paper. Better to drive it for reals.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    When I was evaluating the XV on paper before test driving it, I compared the hp/weight ratio to the other cars we currently have. It's pretty dumb to look at HP without looking at how much the vehicle weighs.

  • 02-20-2013
    stremf
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pimpbot View Post
    Also, look at the torque and where it peaks. I swear my 115hp GTi was faster than a Honda that weighed 300 pounds less and had 20 more HP, just because the GTi's 122 ft/lbs of torque hit at 3200 RPM, with most of the torque available at 2000 RPM. That thing pulled nicely from a red light up to 60 MPH.

    The Honda's peak torque of 107 ft/lbs hit at mostly over 4500 RPM, meaning the power really didn't kick in unless you wound the engine out. Who wants to redline the engine just to get it to pull?

    Yeah, forget the numbers on paper. Better to drive it for reals.

    Honda's been trying to up the torque and engine size due to the "demand" for a "faster" car. Honda engines have never been considered torque-y. Mainly because that's not what they were designed for. Their philosophy from the beginning was efficiency and reliability first before performance. Even their VTEC utilizes gas efficient torqueless performance down low and power up above ~6k RPM. Personally, I like this and hope they continue building cars like this. Some don't like having to rev up to get power, but I think it adds more fun, especially on the track. It's almost like riding gears vs SS--timing, anticipation, momentum all play a key role and make the ride much more interesting. For me.

    But the way it's going, the engines are getting bigger, cars are getting bloated which really dumbs down the car on performance. I had more fun in a 89 Si than the new 2.4L bloated sedan they call a Civic now. The only true Honda in the Honda line up is the Fit, IMO. This goes same for the GTI's. MKI's were sweet. The new ones are still fun to drive, but feels dumbed down.
  • 02-21-2013
    BlackCanoeDog
    Anybody cross shop the XV with Countryman All4. Curious what your impressions were if you test drove both.
  • 02-21-2013
    SS Hack
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by stremf View Post
    Honda's been trying to up the torque and engine size due to the "demand" for a "faster" car. Honda engines have never been considered torque-y. Mainly because that's not what they were designed for. Their philosophy from the beginning was efficiency and reliability first before performance. Even their VTEC utilizes gas efficient torqueless performance down low and power up above ~6k RPM. Personally, I like this and hope they continue building cars like this. Some don't like having to rev up to get power, but I think it adds more fun, especially on the track. It's almost like riding gears vs SS--timing, anticipation, momentum all play a key role and make the ride much more interesting. For me.

    But the way it's going, the engines are getting bigger, cars are getting bloated which really dumbs down the car on performance. I had more fun in a 89 Si than the new 2.4L bloated sedan they call a Civic now. The only true Honda in the Honda line up is the Fit, IMO. This goes same for the GTI's. MKI's were sweet. The new ones are still fun to drive, but feels dumbed down.

    I'd agree that the only real Honda left, at least in the US, is the Fit (so handy and cheap). I'm a former owner of a few Hondas and they just sent me a brochure in the mail and an email (same day even) that "showcased" their new "refinements" and inviting me back. What a bloated lineup! Who ever designed that abomination of an Accord wagon should go to jail - you'd need to be drunk to buy it.
  • 02-21-2013
    pimpbot
    That bad? I kinda like wagons. If you mean that Accord crossover thingy, yeah. Mega-Fugly. I miss the Element. I seriously considered one, but fuel consumption was too high as a DD for me, and the wife wouldn't drive it. We ended up with an older A4 Wagon that has been fabulous. It completely sucks for usable hauling space, but at least it's sporty and gets 30mpg.


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SS Hack View Post
    I'd agree that the only real Honda left, at least in the US, is the Fit (so handy and cheap). I'm a former owner of a few Hondas and they just sent me a brochure in the mail and an email (same day even) that "showcased" their new "refinements" and inviting me back. What a bloated lineup! Who ever designed that abomination of an Accord wagon should go to jail - you'd need to be drunk to buy it.

  • 02-21-2013
    SS Hack
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pimpbot View Post
    That bad? I kinda like wagons. If you mean that Accord crossover thingy, yeah. Mega-Fugly. I miss the Element. I seriously considered one, but fuel consumption was too high as a DD for me, and the wife wouldn't drive it. We ended up with an older A4 Wagon that has been fabulous. It completely sucks for usable hauling space, but at least it's sporty and gets 30mpg.

    IMHO at least at the momment and Toyota is about the same for some modes. The crazy thing is Honda makes and sells great cars for other countries such as the Stream (Fits big bro). I like the styling of Audi much better than most, if I needed a premium car I'd get one over the other guys for sure.
  • 02-21-2013
    rideut
    No nav, I will just try unscrewing it. We do listen to FM a good amount.
  • 02-21-2013
    pimpbot
    What kind of antenna is it? The little rubber ducky antennas just flex over. My antenna hits my roof box, but there is some space in there so it's like like it's gonna break it off.

    Yeah, or just unscrew it. Those things are pretty standard. Maybe you can replace the whip with a shorter or more flexible one. Check the fleabay.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rideut View Post
    No nav, I will just try unscrewing it. We do listen to FM a good amount.

  • 02-24-2013
    fc
    Our review is here!!!

    Review: Subaru XV Crosstrek – Ideal Mountain Biker Vehicle? | Mountain Bike Review

    <img src="http://reviews.mtbr.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/DSC_0042.jpg">
  • 02-24-2013
    trojan08
    XV is on my short list, so I appreciate this forum and Francois' review. Can any XV owners with roof racks comment on MTBR's observation re difficulty/awkwardness of lifting and reaching a roof-mounted bike? Also, I've seen a lot of back-and-forth on this, but is there a definitive "best" when it comes to the hitch receiver (factory installed or UHaul)? Thanks guys.
  • 02-24-2013
    Harold
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by trojan08 View Post
    XV is on my short list, so I appreciate this forum and Francois' review. Can any XV owners with roof racks comment on MTBR's observation re difficulty/awkwardness of lifting and reaching a roof-mounted bike? Also, I've seen a lot of back-and-forth on this, but is there a definitive "best" when it comes to the hitch receiver (factory installed or UHaul)? Thanks guys.

    ease of use of a roof rack will depend on your height and your rack. this car is fairly tall, so keep that in mind.
  • 02-25-2013
    Silvestri
    Needs a turbo...
  • 02-25-2013
    Harold
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Silvestri View Post
    Needs a turbo...

    No it doesn't
  • 02-25-2013
    fc
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by trojan08 View Post
    XV is on my short list, so I appreciate this forum and Francois' review. Can any XV owners with roof racks comment on MTBR's observation re difficulty/awkwardness of lifting and reaching a roof-mounted bike? Also, I've seen a lot of back-and-forth on this, but is there a definitive "best" when it comes to the hitch receiver (factory installed or UHaul)? Thanks guys.

    So the problem is two-fold. First, is it's 9 inches of clearance so you're gonna need a short step ladder or step on the car itself to reach the roof rack.

    The rails are near the rear of the car so you have to step on the smaller rear passenger opening to reach the roof. There's no side step-rails so you're foot space is limited with the door opening. I was using a rack which mounted the bike with the front wheel so I had the full 32 lbs of the bike every time I put the bikes up there. I tweaked my shoulder, banged my elbow, etc. when taking the bikes down by myself. Not the end of the world but it was harder after a big ride on uneven terrain.

    I would definitely do a hitch rack. It turns out Subaru sells a hitch mount. One of those and a 1upusa rack and this thing will be dialed.

    Subaru Drive : Fall12: Genuine Subaru Accessories for 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek

    I've also had good luck with etrailers.com and hiddenhitch.com.

    This car has a tow rating of 1500 lbs.

    fc
  • 02-25-2013
    fc
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Silvestri View Post
    Needs a turbo...

    This car is pretty darn capable and quick around town so it is a good package.

    If you like to drive fast, live in high elevation where engines suck or need to do a lot of passing on country roads, then a turbo option would be nice. Maybe put that Subaru BRZ engine in it.
  • 02-25-2013
    JAvendan
    i found a pic of, what i think, the factory subaru hitch looks like on this page:

    Subaru XV Crosstrek Options and Upgrades Photo Page #3

    i have a '12 outback and installed the subaru factory hitch myself.

    it appears that the crosstrek's factory hitch is similar in that you have to trim a portion of the bumper to install the hitch.

    so, be aware of that.

    third party hitches, for the 4th gen outbacks, "hang" under the bumper so no trimming is needed.

    this method will decrease your... going up angle ( i can't remember the term - lol ), as the aftermarket hitch rides lower.

    joel
  • 02-25-2013
    SS Hack
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by francois View Post
    This car is pretty darn capable and quick around town so it is a good package.

    If you like to drive fast, live in high elevation where engines suck or need to do a lot of passing on country roads, then a turbo option would be nice. Maybe put that Subaru BRZ engine in it.

    Nice job Francois from a cycling perspective. Now we need another review beat-running one off road - I mean testing the off road capacities.
  • 02-25-2013
    JustMtnB44
    Thanks for the review francois. This does look like a really good car for mountain bikers. How is the handling on paved roads? Is it noticeably worse than an Impreza due to the increased ground clearance, or not bad? Is it still fun to drive on twisty mountain roads?

    I haven't driven one yet, but I think for now I will have to agree with the needs a turbo comment. Coming from an Audi allroad with a 320hp V8, a 150hp 4 cylinder is not going to feel very inspired, even if it does weigh 1000lbs less. Maybe that will be an option in the future? However the XV is rated at basically double the mpg's I currently get in the allroad, so maybe it's a worthwhile tradeoff. But the Forester XT still gets decent mpg's as well.
  • 02-25-2013
    jcaino
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by francois View Post
    This car is pretty darn capable and quick around town so it is a good package.

    If you like to drive fast, live in high elevation where engines suck or need to do a lot of passing on country roads, then a turbo option would be nice. Maybe put that Subaru BRZ engine in it.

    Actually, the direct-injection motor from the BRZ would be a wise addition. This would provide even better fuel economy.
  • 02-25-2013
    SS Hack
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JustMtnB44 View Post
    Thanks for the review francois. This does look like a really good car for mountain bikers. How is the handling on paved roads? Is it noticeably worse than an Impreza due to the increased ground clearance, or not bad? Is it still fun to drive on twisty mountain roads?

    I haven't driven one yet, but I think for now I will have to agree with the needs a turbo comment. Coming from an Audi allroad with a 320hp V8, a 150hp 4 cylinder is not going to feel very inspired, even if it does weigh 1000lbs less. Maybe that will be an option in the future? However the XV is rated at basically double the mpg's I currently get in the allroad, so maybe it's a worthwhile tradeoff. But the Forester XT still gets decent mpg's as well.

    I'd like a comparison too. I have a Forester and Impreza - the Impreza out handles the taller car no problem. The Forester has zero percent interest right now as an FYI. I happen to like free money a lot!
  • 02-25-2013
    fc
    Here's the off road capabilities.
    Driving Sports TV - 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek Tropical Test and Review - YouTube

    Should be better than most SUVs!!!

    Ride quality on the street is good. Same as any other car. I don't think they increased the travel or firmed up the suspension.

    Handling is awesome. There's a bit of tire squeal at the limit but the car is composed.
  • 02-25-2013
    XJaredX
    The handling is shockingly similar to a normal Impreza Sport. I daresay one can notice the Geolandars more than they can notice the suspension changes over a normal Impreza.
  • 02-25-2013
    SS Hack
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Subaru has a history of noisy OEM tires for sure, good news about the handling. If my Subarus ever wear out, I may have to check one out.
  • 02-25-2013
    XJaredX
    Considering it's the same wheel and tire size as the Forester, I'm curious to see if some General Grabbers would fit. Not that they would be my choice if I had an XV, but they'd probably look pretty *****in'
  • 02-25-2013
    pimpbot
    Aren't they all direct injection these days... like since 2005? I mean, that is a big gas saver and emissions saver.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jcaino View Post
    Actually, the direct-injection motor from the BRZ would be a wise addition. This would provide even better fuel economy.

  • 02-25-2013
    pimpbot
    Here's a better one... and with a Manual transmission:

    <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/H1ZkZU85sE0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

    Wow... I gotta say, I'm impressed.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by francois View Post
    Here's the off road capabilities.
    Driving Sports TV - 2013 Subaru XV Crosstrek Tropical Test and Review - YouTube

    Should be better than most SUVs!!!

    Ride quality on the street is good. Same as any other car. I don't think they increased the travel or firmed up the suspension.

    Handling is awesome. There's a bit of tire squeal at the limit but the car is composed.

  • 02-25-2013
    SS Hack
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pimpbot View Post
    Here's a better one... and with a Manual transmission:

    &lt;iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/H1ZkZU85sE0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;

    Wow... I gotta say, I'm impressed.

    Not too bad ... although it could take a lot more. The color would even match one of my bikes.
  • 02-26-2013
    Silentfoe
    Re: Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Putting a deposit down on an orange limited tomorrow. Dealer said it'll be about 30 days. Pretty stoked. I needed good gas mileage, ground clearance and decent cargo space. I think this'll be a great car.
  • 02-26-2013
    Harold
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    Putting a deposit down on an orange limited tomorrow. Dealer said it'll be about 30 days. Pretty stoked. I needed good gas mileage, ground clearance and decent cargo space. I think this'll be a great car.

    uhhhh....I wouldn't bank on that 30 day estimate. We ordered ours on Jan 5 and still do not have the call that it's arrived in Seattle.

    unless your dealer is getting you one that's already here and shipping it from another Subaru dealer.
  • 02-26-2013
    crux
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    uhhhh....I wouldn't bank on that 30 day estimate. We ordered ours on Jan 5 and still do not have the call that it's arrived in Seattle.

    Might depend upon location. Local dealer in Albuquerque NM had 5 of them over the past two weeks. Went into look at the XV as we are considering replacing a SUV with something utilitarian yet fuel efficient.
  • 02-26-2013
    Silentfoe
    Re: Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Yeah. They are pouring in to Utah. I've already test driven several and I'm getting one that the dealer already had on order. It's not a special order. He seemed to think 30 days was a generous estimate.
  • 02-26-2013
    Jayem
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pimpbot View Post
    Aren't they all direct injection these days... like since 2005? I mean, that is a big gas saver and emissions saver.

    On the one hand, Subaru offers AWD cars and some of their stuff is pretty dead reliable, impressive especially when considering how many moving parts they got and the extra driveshafts/differentials.

    On the other hand, they are often one of the last to entertain new technologys.

    4EAT? Seriously? That should have been gone at least 5 years ago, if not more.

    Tiny TD04 turbo for so long, shoulda been using something a little bigger and giving the WRX a good bump like it finally got in 2009, took way too long to get to that point though. The power issue is one where they seem to fail across multiple fronts. Effectively about 250hp for the LGT models? That's kind of pathetic given today's cars with 300hp V6s, and the Subarus are losing a lot more of their power to parasitic drivetrain losses due to the AWD. Same thing with the WRX and even STi. Sure, you can launch from a standstill faster than nearly everything else, which is hugely bad for your transmission and drivetrain, but if you ever try to hang with something that only has to send 300hp to two wheels you'll be smoked. The handling is good, but they should have been following the natural progression of technology and embracing:

    twin-scroll turbos (available in JDM market)

    Direct Injection

    High compression normally aspirated engines with advanced timing controls.

    Minimum of 6spd auto and manual transmissions for LGT models.

    So while I love the cars and will likely get another one at some point in the future, there are weak points too and subaru could do with better R&D/application of technology. The BRZ is a good example of what they can do if willing. All too often much of the good-stuff never makes it to the US market, but it exists in the JDM.
  • 02-27-2013
    Ilikemtb999
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    So whats the real world gas mileage from owners in this thread? We're looking to potentially replace our 06 civic.
  • 02-27-2013
    A1an
    Curious about this as well. Getting the new car bug and this is on my list.
  • 02-27-2013
    HondaMotocross
    How are the CVT transmissions? I love every aspect of this car except the dreaded CVT transmission that 90% of new cars are getting....

    I know Fords and Nissans with CVT's commonly have problems before 100k and are very costly to fix ($4k-5k according to my neighbor and his ford freestyle).

    Don't really feel like getting the manual and dealing with chicagoland traffic either...
  • 02-27-2013
    pimpbot
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    On the one hand, Subaru offers AWD cars and some of their stuff is pretty dead reliable, impressive especially when considering how many moving parts they got and the extra driveshafts/differentials.

    On the other hand, they are often one of the last to entertain new technologys.

    4EAT? Seriously? That should have been gone at least 5 years ago, if not more.

    Tiny TD04 turbo for so long, shoulda been using something a little bigger and giving the WRX a good bump like it finally got in 2009, took way too long to get to that point though. The power issue is one where they seem to fail across multiple fronts. Effectively about 250hp for the LGT models? That's kind of pathetic given today's cars with 300hp V6s, and the Subarus are losing a lot more of their power to parasitic drivetrain losses due to the AWD. Same thing with the WRX and even STi. Sure, you can launch from a standstill faster than nearly everything else, which is hugely bad for your transmission and drivetrain, but if you ever try to hang with something that only has to send 300hp to two wheels you'll be smoked. The handling is good, but they should have been following the natural progression of technology and embracing:

    twin-scroll turbos (available in JDM market)

    Direct Injection

    High compression normally aspirated engines with advanced timing controls.

    Minimum of 6spd auto and manual transmissions for LGT models.

    So while I love the cars and will likely get another one at some point in the future, there are weak points too and subaru could do with better R&D/application of technology. The BRZ is a good example of what they can do if willing. All too often much of the good-stuff never makes it to the US market, but it exists in the JDM.

    There is that much drag for the AWD? They're pretty much doing the same thing as Audi/VW, layout-wise. On the VAG B chassis cars (Passat, A4, A5, Q5, Quantum, Audi 80/90, Skoda Octavia) and they only get 1mpg hit for the AWD versions (EPA estimates) over the FWD versions of their cars. It only adds 150 pounds to the whole system. Then again, they are using low drag roller bearings on everything inside the gearbox, and using roller bearing style CV Joints everywhere outside except the propeller shaft (which is only there to allow some chassis flex), and maybe Subaru isn't doing that.

    The A chassis cars use a viscous coupling on the older cars (pre 1998), or a Haldex clutch on the newer cars.

    I can't imagine Subaru is doing anything much different.

    Point is, I think the AWD is a very minimal efficiency suck. Of course, you can't compare it to anything. The only 2WD Subaru in recent memory is the BRZ.

    With the impressive efficiency numbers on the 2.0 Subaru VX engine, I would be surprised if they weren't using direct injection. Geez, even Nissan has direct injection on their $12k Versa.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by HondaMotocross View Post
    How are the CVT transmissions? I love every aspect of this car except the dreaded CVT transmission that 90% of new cars are getting....

    I know Fords and Nissans with CVT's commonly have problems before 100k and are very costly to fix ($4k-5k according to my neighbor and his ford freestyle).

    Don't really feel like getting the manual and dealing with chicagoland traffic either...

    The CVT Audi A4/B6 on the FWD cars (2002-2005) was a disaster. Those things failed at 80k like clockwork. They run them on the Prius and Highlander, and they seem to be holding up just fine. I personally have two friends with 120k+ mile Priuses (Prii?) with no issues.

    It's probably too soon to tell for Subaru, but they are usually pretty durable in the drivetrain department... unless you're a 20 year old driving a WRX trying to impress your friends with AWD burnout clutch dumps.
  • 02-27-2013
    Jayem
    Yes, there is absolutely that much drag for an AWD system like subaru that is fully engaged. Have you ever tried to run with something like a bmw 328 on the highway? They'll smoke a "230hp" WRX because they are putting much more power to the drive wheels. Those WRXs were lucky to dyno 170hp to the wheels, sometimes less. That's a huge loss and typical. STIs dynoed around 230 or so stock, again, to the wheels. That's the real difference right there.

    I think you were quoting those figures a few years back and the entire audi car is on the heavy side, WRXs are around 3200lbs or so, anything crosstrek, impreza or forester wise isn't going to be far from that range. Some cars are geared differently too, some are shorter for more acceleration, some are longer to allow for lower RPMs when cruising, and so on. There's unlikely to be excessive magic going on here, but the point was that subaru doesn't embrace technology all that well. 6spd transmissions should be standard for just about everything they have, and 7spds in the LGT auto models. They kind of get by with their 5000rpm clutch drops for the 0-60 figures though, so at lower speeds they can be quick.
  • 02-27-2013
    pimpbot
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Yes, there is absolutely that much drag for an AWD system like subaru that is fully engaged. Have you ever tried to run with something like a bmw 328 on the highway? They'll smoke a "230hp" WRX because they are putting much more power to the drive wheels. Those WRXs were lucky to dyno 170hp to the wheels, sometimes less. That's a huge loss and typical. STIs dynoed around 230 or so stock, again, to the wheels. That's the real difference right there.

    I think you were quoting those figures a few years back and the entire audi car is on the heavy side, WRXs are around 3200lbs or so, anything crosstrek, impreza or forester wise isn't going to be far from that range. Some cars are geared differently too, some are shorter for more acceleration, some are longer to allow for lower RPMs when cruising, and so on. There's unlikely to be excessive magic going on here, but the point was that subaru doesn't embrace technology all that well. 6spd transmissions should be standard for just about everything they have, and 7spds in the LGT auto models. They kind of get by with their 5000rpm clutch drops for the 0-60 figures though, so at lower speeds they can be quick.

    My B6 Audi A4 quattro 5speed manual sedan weighs in at 3400 pounds. My wife's B5 A4 Avant 5 speed manual (all Avants have Quattro) is 3300 pounds, so it's right on par with the WRX. FWIU, the automatic adds 100 pounds, adn the V6 version another 100 pounds.

    The A4 Quattro system is fully engaged all the time (on the B5-B7 with a Torsen center diff, on B8 and later cars with a variable open diff with a clutch lock-up), not that it really makes a difference in drag. The clutch based systems (like on the A3) are always turning too. The rear wheels will turn the driveshafts, rear diff, and propeller shaft whether or not the center clutch (to engage the AWD) is closed or open. So, as long as the car is moving, the motor is still turning the rear driveline... it's just connected by road and tires instead of directly, so it is still using the same energy.

    Heh... somehow, I thought WRXs were lighter. They're quite a bit smaller, but I know they make those bodies super stiff and very crash worthy. There's a lot of 14ga steel in those things. I read somewhere that Subaru actually sends special instructions out to first responders to show them how to cut through the car bodies to cut people out in a bad crash.
  • 02-28-2013
    SS Hack
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Yes, there is absolutely that much drag for an AWD system like subaru that is fully engaged. Have you ever tried to run with something like a bmw 328 on the highway? They'll smoke a "230hp" WRX because they are putting much more power to the drive wheels. Those WRXs were lucky to dyno 170hp to the wheels, sometimes less. That's a huge loss and typical. STIs dynoed around 230 or so stock, again, to the wheels. That's the real difference right there.

    I think you were quoting those figures a few years back and the entire audi car is on the heavy side, WRXs are around 3200lbs or so, anything crosstrek, impreza or forester wise isn't going to be far from that range. Some cars are geared differently too, some are shorter for more acceleration, some are longer to allow for lower RPMs when cruising, and so on. There's unlikely to be excessive magic going on here, but the point was that subaru doesn't embrace technology all that well. 6spd transmissions should be standard for just about everything they have, and 7spds in the LGT auto models. They kind of get by with their 5000rpm clutch drops for the 0-60 figures though, so at lower speeds they can be quick.

    I bet I can give the BMW a run for the money on dirt, otherwise known as the Subaru's preferred terrain. I also bet the BMW could not handle the beatings I give my cars in the national forest.
  • 02-28-2013
    Ilikemtb999
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Wrx's are quick for their hp levels....I don't know what this dude is talking about. The 227hp models run low 14's. show me another car with that much weight and that little hp running that. The new ones are mid 13 cars.
  • 02-28-2013
    Jayem
    Go look at the passing times and compare to other cars, that really tells the tale. The WRX is fun and fast at low speeds, but the drag and lack of hp really affects them at high speed, to really see this, look up the 0-60 time from a roll, very telling. I think these cars are practically fast, vs some others that can go 200mph and there's nowhere to drive that illegally, but again, the WRX and Subaru times are due to awd and clutch drops or brake+gas for the auto models. I know, I owned a "227hp" model for 5 years, modded for 280-300hp. At low speed I could easily outrun a 300hp v8 mustang gt (previous generation), as speeds got past legal limits they'd start pulling ahead. Much more hp going to the rear wheels.

    http://www.modularfords.com/threads/174421-2011-Mustang-V6-Slower-than-2011-WRX

    This is the 265hp WRX no less.

    There's also a good article on a V6 Camry vs the WRX, showing the Camry is just as fast, if not faster. Do the searches and you'll see.
  • 02-28-2013
    SS Hack
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Go look at the passing times and compare to other cars, that really tells the tale. The WRX is fun and fast at low speeds, but the drag and lack of hp really affects them at high speed, to really see this, look up the 0-60 time from a roll, very telling. I think these cars are practically fast, vs some others that can go 200mph and there's nowhere to drive that illegally, but again, the WRX and Subaru times are due to awd and clutch drops or brake+gas for the auto models. I know, I owned a "227hp" model for 5 years, modded for 280-300hp. At low speed I could easily outrun a 300hp v8 mustang gt (previous generation), as speeds got past legal limits they'd start pulling ahead. Much more hp going to the rear wheels.http://www.modularfords.com/threads/...-than-2011-WRX

    This is the 265hp WRX no less.

    There's also a good article on a V6 Camry vs the WRX, showing the Camry is just as fast, if not faster. Do the searches and you'll see.

    What happens when you go around a corner? Does that 1950s rear end hinder the Ford?
  • 02-28-2013
    Ilikemtb999
    Subaru XV Crosstrek
    This should probably all be in the subaru general thread instead of the xv thread