Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Wagons Subaru Crew Subaru Forester 2009 Subaru Forester
3656 messages, Last post on Nov 26, 2009 at 11:01 AM
You are in the Subaru Forester Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: saedave (Jul 01, 2009 12:29 pm) Several articles said the Subaru CVT's chain is licensed and sourced from the same company building Audi's CVT's (it does not use a belt - the chain has much greater strength and wear resistance). The rest of the CVT is built by Subaru. The 5-speed auto is probably the same one Subaru has used in the past with a few updates. I've read it's sourced from Nissan and is in limited supply.
|
|
|
|
|
Those wanting to report their Forester's reliability, especially those with XT's, might want to visit the truedelta.com website and give them your service history. They ask very few "personal" questions. I don't work for them, BTW. |
|
|
Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (Jul 01, 2009 4:18 pm) Subaru has previously stated that it is a JATCO 4 speed modified by Subaru to five speeds. I believe the modification process is the bottleneck. If the CVT chain and pulleys are common with Audi why the seemingly low torque capacity? Or is there a fore-and-aft dimension increase that is incompatible with the six cylinder in the chassis?
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jul 01, 2009 9:46 am) The '10 OB CVT is rated 29 MPG on the highway. Legacy CVT is 31. |
|
|
Replying to: saedave (Jul 02, 2009 5:48 am) Bob
|
|
|
Replying to: rsholland (Jul 02, 2009 8:29 am) Or cheap. The cost of re-certifying a low volume product with the CVT could have been too much....and if fuel economy rules are tightened much more the 3.6 liter engine with either transmission may become history.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: saedave (Jul 02, 2009 1:17 pm) That should improve fuel economy and low end power for all their engines.  They also should get rid of the series coolant flow of the H-4 engines and use the parallel flow scheme the H-6 gained when adapted for the Tribeca. That change in cooling was one reason the H-6 became able to use regular grade gasoline. ....and yeah, they'll have to redesign the H-4 engine block for that, which is a big expense. 
|
|
|
Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (Jul 02, 2009 9:00 pm) ....and yeah, they'll have to redesign the H-4 engine block for that, which is a big expense I know they bored and stroked the 3.0 block and employed the odd assembly procedure for pistons and rods, but was not aware of new coolant passages other than in the head which they discussed publically. Are you sure the block got that change? Even with direct injection and CVT the fleet average fuel consumption might still be too high to keep the six unless they successfully introduce a small high mpg model. Perhaps the Toybaru roadster would help. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: saedave (Jul 03, 2009 10:00 am) However, I don't remember whether the block and head, or just the head, were changed to allow parallel coolant flow. The XT's turbo engine still uses series cooling, and one cylinder (#3 or #4, I forget which) runs hotter than others and has the knock sensor for that reason.
|
|
|
Replying to: kurtamaxxxguy (Jul 03, 2009 11:04 am) While I personally chose the 3.0 over the turbo in 2005 because of excessive turbo lag, with a rumored 8.0 sec 0-60 for the CVT 4 I would choose the normally aspirated four today. That 8 second rumor may be incorrect, however. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Wagons Subaru Crew Subaru Forester 2009 Subaru Forester
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Subaru Forester
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
