View Single Post
  #51  
Old 03-20-2009, 10:57 PM
Alcyone's Avatar
Alcyone Alcyone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Edm, AB
Posts: 98
Re: the ugly wood dash is killing me!

Quote:
Originally Posted by svxistentialist View Post
I don't accept the "auto gearbox was the only available model that could take the torque from the EG 33" reasoning either.

Twin turbo Legacys dish out more torque and they could be had manual. Likewise the Sti Impreza made very high figures in Japan guise, no problem getting a manual to work with it. Subaru was insinuating that the new EG 33 engine was so powerful it needed a special gearbox. Marketing hype.

It was a conscious decision to go auto only, and the reasons are multiple. IMO the primary factor was the fact that you guys in the US have a strong preference for autos. Fuji saw the US as the major market for the SVX in a volume sense, and to keep costs as low as possible it was offered only as an auto. The numbers sold tell the story; USA 15,000, UK 260, Australia 250.

The other factor affecting the gearbox choice is what Fuji saw as competitors. The car was designed as a GT, a long distance comfortable cruiser, rather than as an out and out sports car. The Jaguar XJ-S would be a European equivalent. I'm willing to bet 90 plus percent of XJ-S Jags sold in the States are auto. They are often slated for getting the marketing wrong. Measured against those predictors they actually got it right. It's just that the world changed soon after the car was launched.

according to a bit of light reading, twin turbo legacys werent available untill 1996...

so the claim that they didnt have a tranny "powerful enough" to handle the 230 lb/ft of torque might be true?

i mean there was a turbo variant of the legacy avail from 91-94? that used the EJ22T, but that only put out 163 hp, somehow i doubt its torque was in a comparable range...?


and then i continued reading, and it turns out there was a legacy turbo (JDM model tho) that had about the same numbers as the EG33
227 hp (169 kW) @ 4000 rpm and 230 bhp (172 kW; 233 PS) at 5,400 rpm, respectively

now i'm wondering the same thing...
i doubt COST coulda been the issue if the afforementioned holds true. a manual tranny is ALWAYS cheaper than an auto, what stopped them from just throwing some MTs
perhaps we would have had too much space left over in the engine bay...
Reply With Quote