Last post on Jan 04, 2010 at 11:53 AM
You are in the Subaru Legacy & Outback
What is this discussion about?
Subaru Legacy, Subaru Outback, Sedan, Wagon
#36 of 75 Re: 2010 Subaru Legacy 3.6 R [rsholland]
Oct 11, 2009 (6:47 pm)
The bottom line is, this is not a decision of their own making, but rather a decision by various governmental vehicle sanctioning bodies that's being forced upon them.
Yup, that sums up a lot of what is wrong with America these days. Home of the not-so-free
#37 of 75 Re: EcoBoost torque curve [kcram]
Oct 12, 2009 (10:30 am)
I am less concerned with what the graph says than how it says it. I spent 33 years analyzing and presenting data as well as studying the capabilities of control systems and the resultant variability on a product. I have also looked at hundreds of dyno graphs, and have never seen one without any ripple. There are smoothing techniques available to remove noise and provide a cleaner picture but they have limited use in a dyno graph. Higher frequency ripple causes no distraction in what the graph purports to show. This graph is either overly and unnecessarily numb or it is an artist rendition. The only thing that remotely looks like ripple is the plotter pen jitters on the rising part of the torque curve. That is why I made my "drawn with a ruler" comment.
In your example there is at least 3 lb-ft variation in a 1500 RPM range, here there is no variation in about 4000. I also bet that Diesel curve showed ripple too.
I also understand the technology and believe that what they are trying to show for torque performance CAN be done. This should be relatively easy to design with today's sophisticated engine control capability, and 2 turbos. You take the normal engine curve and use the design of the turbos to each help a different part of the curve, and control the whole result with the computers, sensors, and mapping. Ford should be praised for taking the time and spending the resources to do it.
Way back, Saab was an innovator in this type of technology with their APC engine management/turbo control system. They toned down peak torque to provide a much flatter and usable torque curve, and they did it with one turbo on a 4 cyl and electronics that can't compare to what the capabilities are now.
#38 of 75 Re: 2010 Subaru Legacy 3.6 R [paisan]
Oct 12, 2009 (11:04 am)
Hi Mike. I only commented on the HP because that is all that was being mentioned. Back in the muscle days with the horsepower wars there were many vehicles with higher claimed HP that were getting dusted by vehicles with less listed HP but had much better torque characteristics, gearing, and overall balance.
I agree that they COULD do as you ask, but think about whether a small company would want to direct their resources to that task. Some things to consider:
1. Would that be an "extra" engine or would they tweak the 1 3.6? They just got the H6 away from premium fuel, would they want to move back in that direction when their target is clearly mainstream use?
2. There are higher costs incurred with developing a higher output non-mainstream engine, as well as higher warranty costs from higher stressed engines. They don't seem to dilute their efforts and the current achievement is the CVT, and now getting it spread out to other vehicles. Since this helps the MPG due to the lower final drive ratio it is obvious that this is their big-picture view.
3. There have been issues selling the upmarket Tribeca even though it is an excellent vehicle. Do they want to keep pushing vehicle prices higher to try and pick up some additional specialized sales, or do they focus more on the mainstream market with their limited resources, especially in a bad economy? "Horsepower wars" have been replaced with "advertised price and MPG wars".
As I mentioned, they could have given more performance by keeping the Tribeca gearing with the 3.6, even if they only did that for a top sporty model. They didn't do that either, and there are added costs to do things like that both from a manufacturing/assembly standpoint as well as EPA certification of any combo they plan to sell, in addition to the overall brand MPG average that others have mentioned. They are clearly keeping their conservative approach and staying focused on the sweet-spot of buyers, not those of us that always want more performance, more power, and more gears. We may want something different but the stockholders are probably happy with how the money is getting spent, and the results.
#39 of 75 Re: 2010 Subaru Legacy 3.6 R [bigfrank3]
Oct 14, 2009 (5:26 pm)
Oh I agree, I prefaced the whole discussion that the new Legacy is a great way to take on the Camcord. However there is no way to retain buyers that want to have all the niceties of the size of the legacy but are looking to move up to a classier car with all the bells and whistles. I think that the G37x can walk all over the 3.6R unfortunately not a much higher of a price. I held out before plunging in on the 05 CTS-V but when they confirmed the non-upscale 2010 3.6R I had to part from the Subies
I still race/track my 05 LGT Wagon 5MT and love it. Also run a Subaru aftermarket Install shop, so hopefully they'll come around with something to lure me in again.
#40 of 75 Re: 2010 Subaru Legacy 3.6 R [paisan]
Oct 15, 2009 (5:58 am)
I think that the G37x can walk all over the 3.6R unfortunately not a much higher of a price.
Unless the G37 is greatly improved over the G35 that I have driven, The 3.6R has a much more comfortable ride.
The styling of the 3.6R may be its real weak point, not 0-60 time.
#41 of 75 Re: 2010 Subaru Legacy 3.6 R [saedave]
Oct 15, 2009 (9:56 am)
Styling? It looks just like the G37...
#42 of 75 Re: 2010 Subaru Legacy 3.6 R [saedave]
Oct 19, 2009 (6:03 pm)
Some of our local Portland tuner shops told me Subaru turbos (and other engines) don't make as much HP as they could.
The claim's apparently Subaru engines were originally intended for 98 Octane, but had to be de-tuned significantly for USA's much lower 91-92 Premium Octane. The result is the USA engines both burn as lean as possible and ride the ragged edge of detonation.
The tuner shops have ECU programs that will get 40 - 50 HP more out of the turbos (they showed me their dyno curves), but at the price of using more fuel, possibly overheating the CAT converter, and voiding your Subaru engine warranty.
One of the before-after profiles came from Cobb.
#43 of 75 Re: 2010 Subaru Legacy 3.6 R [kurtamaxxxguy]
Oct 20, 2009 (7:46 am)
98 octane is racing fuel.
Maybe you mean RON or MON ratings, as opposed to the (R+M)/2 measured used here in the US. We basically use the average of those two ratings.
#44 of 75 Re: 2010 Subaru Legacy 3.6 R [ateixeira]
Oct 20, 2009 (9:36 am)
Unfortunately, the tuner shops I talked to didn't tell me whether they were referring to MON or RON. So I'm in the dark here.
Anyway, I've no desire to void my engine warranty so ECU experiments are out for the time being.
#45 of 75 Re: 2010 Subaru Legacy 3.6 R [kurtamaxxxguy]
Oct 20, 2009 (5:39 pm)
Yes that's on the turbo motors. ALL turbo and SC motors can be tuned (not just subaru ones) to gain easily 40-50 more HP.
I have an Access Port on my car and easily it puts out 40-50hp more with it at the crank.