I was implying WRX engine is inferior to the engine in the Forester XT for the purposes of normal street driving and there is no reason to keep it for the US market. I don't care much if they'd even rename WRX into Impreza XT after the switch. Most people who wanted WRX have it already anyway. I hope the wrx sales will taper off soon to support my argument. Then the engine swap is a way to go to find yet another niche market (something Fuji was good at so far :-).
On road trips in my XS, I think I get in the low 300s. I've done 470 or (slightly) better in my Maxima.
That's because your Maxima probably has a 18 gal tank. And so does Audi A4. I'd rather have an 18 gal. tank and a spare with the width of a bicycle wheel than the 14.9 gal tank and a 4 inch spare :-) Now, if they could retrofit the seats from first generation Legacy to fit into Impreza the only thing left on the wish list for the new TS and WRX would be the STi transmission and suspension. Oh, upgraded front brakes would be nice to have too, which would require to bring 17" STi wheels also. They could label them differently and paint black for all I care. I think that's it :-) Front LSD is optional. Oh, did I forget to ask for stiffer chassis?
Not true for all Audis: my 1998 2.8 A4 Quattro 5-speed has a 15.6 gallon tank. I think the automatics have a 16.2 gallon tank, but none, to my knowledge, have 18 gallon tanks. I get about 25 mpg on the highway (sometimes as high as 28 on really long drives), 20 in the city in the winter, 22 in the summer.
470 miles is a long way to go in one stretch! That works out to be about 6 hours of drive time. I have to get out and stretch my legs a little more often than that. I usually don't go much more than about 4 hours without pullling over to get something to eat or hit the bathroom. BlueSTi "Scary-Fast"
Sounds like you just need to go buy an STi ; - ) But, IMHO, the STi ride is a little stiff and noisey say compared to my old Subaru Legacy. But, the trade is worth it.
BlueSTi "Scary-Fast"
You can pull over when you want, but gas isn't always convenient, and it's nice to not go hunting for it as often. Oh, and it has a 16 gal. tank, compared with I think around 14 in my Forester.
BTW I've only checked fuel economy on two road trips in the Forester. For the first (29.5MPG), I had left the tires at 32PSI from the oil-changer. For the second (~27MPG) I had lowered them to factory specs (29/28). It isn't clear how accurate those measurements are (gotta do several tanks, or have some precision in the topping up point), but I think I'll go back to higher pressure. Oh, and they're quicker to squeel at the lower pressure.
it's not as weak as you think... how about ~450hp out of the stock block?
see
also, be aware that the usdm sti engine (the ej257) does NOT use forged pistons.
jm2c ken
My (US) 2004 Forester XS has a 15.9 gallon tank.
Interesting. Have you added that much fuel before?
I've only had my US 2003 XS down to where the refuel light comes on once, and I think it took about 13.5 gallons to fill it. I wouldn't think they would have changed the tank from '03 to '04. Maybe I had more gas left in the tank than I thought, or maybe the pump auto shut-off cut off too early (I think I read something about that happening on some Subes).
I was thinking about something with less flash and trash and less power to fly under the radar of most insurance companies :-)
My ideal car would be WRX wagon body STi suspension, tranny and brakes an engine producing 500 ft.lbs torque at 2000 rpm and 140 hp at 6000 rpm
"Yes, it's a station wagon... Rated at 140 hp. $500 a year? Full coverage? Yes, I think I'll take it" :-)))
Seriously, if Subaru takes XT engine, puts it into WRX and detunes it further to get more torque and less hp it will probably help with the insurance because younger drivers maybe more readily afford it.
Next item on the laundry list for TS/WRX/Sti: lower drag.
My 2003 Forester XS also lists the 15.9 gallon tank. I've put in 15.4 or so before, and this was after it got jerky around corners, so I believe it.
I used to have a GMC Safari minivan with a 27 gallon tank and highway mileage in the low 30's. It was a conversion van with the captain's chairs in front and rear and cruise control. If I'd owned it during my road trip days, it's quite possible I'd have carried a small bucket AND driven in shifts to make non-stop trips that used the entire tank. :)
-DanD
According to the user's manual, the fuel light comes on when there is 2.3 gallons left in the tank. So your observations sound about right.
Manual? I shouldda read the manual? Anyway, I think now I could update my cruising range expectations for the Forester. Thanks guys!
Ummm.
Mine sure as hell does.
Cheers!
My '01 Volvo 2.4T holds almost 22 gallons. Very nice for summer trips. Given moderate speeds, the car will easily do in the upper 20s MPG. We've been over 30 several times. Hmmm...times 22....
HW
Torque and horsepower are mathematically related. You can't decrease one and increase the other. Horsepower = (Torque * RPM) / 5252
Your 500 ft.lb.-140HP engine would be a 7.3 Powerstroke diesel, which would suck guite a bit in a Subaru with such a steep drop in the torque curve.
Ditto for my STi 15.9 gallons. I am assuming with a 1/2 gallon of gas safety margin i could go 387 miles on a tank on the freeway and about
299 if I'm lead-footing it. I'm going on a 300 mile drive tomorrow and I will have to see what kind of mileage I getting. I will be averaging 80 mph so that may affect the gas mileage a little.BlueSTi "Scary-Fast"
Except 500ft-lbs of torque at 2000rpm = 190hp!
>
Why? Shuffle thru the gears quick to get up to speed fast and that's it. Are you implying you need an 18 speed geatbox to go with it? :-)
But it's not possible to build a light and compact dieses with these specs. Is it? I'll settle for a super powerful electric motor teamed up with a wimpo gasoline engine for cruising above 50 mph then :-(
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.