Turbo Forester......?
 

I saw a commercial on television yesterday for the new turbo forester.. personally, i don't understand what award-winning cyclist Lance Armstrong has in common with turbo 4x4's, but whatever..

the interesting thing about the commercial was when the camera zoomed up on the forester's badging.. it was called the "2.5 XT"

what interests me is the "2.5" bit... will the turbo forester have a 2.5 liter motor?? that'd be pretty neat

-adam

Yes it will use a 2.5L engine
 

Basically a de-tuned version of the 2.5L STi motor with reduced hp, but increased torque.

Todd

I call dibbs on the first wrecked ones engine!!!!! :):cool::D




<---------- Hey look at that!!!!! 700!!! Alright, I'm getting up there!!!

The Forester XT will "only" have 210hp. The people who drive Foresters are not normally part of the Fast and the Furious crowd. Maybe they should produce the Forester STi. Imagine the commercial: the innocent-looking 30-something female driver of the Forester STi revving the engine to 9K RPM and blowing the doors off some dude driving a semi-exotic sports car. Whoo-hoo!

Matt

Yeah, I was thinking the turbo foresters specs...were... a bit sad. Dodge got how much... 250hp... out of a 2.4 liter.

Jeez. Come on Subaru.

- Rob

Damn!!! Only 210hp for the Forrester XT??? WTF Subaru!!!!! Don't let dodge beay ya!!!! Your better than that!!!!:cool:

Turbo forester
 

That's the difference between Subaru and Dodge. Subaru knows that 90% of its typical cliental don't buy cars based on speed. Dodge has very little aside from speed and occationally a decent looker to go on anymore. The majority of Subaru buyers do care about what reviews say and if most say "great car, needs a few more ponies" they automatically think its slow (even though it fits what they need it for 99.9% of the time).

Subaru has a history of building fairly bullet proof engines that outlast everything else on the car. Usually when you boost it up you loose some of the reliability/longevity of the engine. This in the long run would hurt Subies rep more than 30 hp would. Remember the GL turbo EA82 got a rep for blowing turbos when really it was just that people weren't following the maint. schedule and changing the oil for 'em on a regular basis.

Also, you must factor CAFE into the equation and the need to stay above 24.9mpg average for the fleet. Assuming that since all Subies are AWD and that feature costs 10-15% in fuel economy they are already at a disadvantage in that respect.

Look at Subaru's rated 0-60 time for the Forester compared to the WRX.... The Forester XT is actually faster.

the Forester is not supposed to be a racecar. it "only" has 210hp, but DOES have 235ftlbs of torque. Subaru got 276hp out of the 2.0L, and 300hp out of the 2.5L. so they are better than Dodge. :rolleyes: and i'm sure the Forester's interior won't be rattling itself apart in a few years like a Dodge. ;)

Where? The STI?

- Rob

yup. STi=2.5L=300hp. that's WITH mufflers. Dodge cheated.

Bahaha. But they're so good at it! :D

Thats why their aero cars were banned from Nascar. :D

- Rob

while we're way off-topic, can anyone explain why NASCAR uses carbuerated old-school engines? while F1, WRC, etc. push the limits of technology, NASCAR (or as i like to call it "the Big Left Turn") just doesn't seem to care. <snore>

Different series. Don't get me wrong - I can't stand NASKER. But I have to admit that they have an entirely different set of priorities.

And it's not that NASKER 'doesn't care.' It's inherent in race teams to use any advantage or trick they can pull off - NASKER'S governance just chooses to squash any kind of innovation. Innovation isn't the name of the game, in that series.

I will say, though, that NASKER's priorities seem a little...weird. I mean, they still call them 'stock' cars, but they're hardly that. I think the trunk lid and maybe hood have to be stock, but that might be it. Under that, whether the car is badged a Ford, Dodge or Chevy, they're just tubular framed cars with shells.

I don't understand it, either, but they do seem to offer up a show that millions of people like, so whatever.

I wonder if a 2.5 tubo would fit in my Outback. I have an Outback with a 2.5L NA engine. It makes 165 HP and 1`63 fy-lbs. of torque at around 4300 rpm. IMHO it is a snail. Once it gets moving it's ok for what it is. But getting up to speed is a long long time. I really notice it when I come home driving the SVX then go out driving the Outback. What a difference. I would like to get more initial pickup on the Outback. I don't know if a turbo setup is the right thing. I drove the OB with the new Suby six and that cured most of the initial pickup problems from a standing start. The Outback seems to be like the old Timex watch commercials. It gets the crap beat out of it and just keeps going.