For five years, there’s been an all-wheel-drive rift in the Japanese performance car market. The 2021 model year marked the final time any of us could get a Subaru WRX STI, the last of the old-school rally-bred all-wheel-drive sedans. Since then, it’s been a stream of capable WRXs, but nothing to hold a candle to the apex predator of the Subaru range. That changes soon, as the marque just teased three new stick-shift high-performance models coming by 2027. Maybe miracles do exist.
As competitors grew quicker, a big part of what made the WRX STI unique was its transmission and all-wheel-drive system. The TY85 six-speed manual was famously strong, capable of handling far more than the old STI’s standard output of 310 horsepower. What’s more, it came attached to a driver controlled center differential, which could vary its lockup automatically or be dialled in a via a center console-mounted switch.
That particular six-speed gearbox is a hugely popular swap in high-horsepower Subaru builds, and while we haven’t seen it in a new car for quite some time, it’s coming back from the dead. According to Subaru’s Japanese website, at least when run through Google Translate, a WRX with this legendary transmission is on its way for 2027.
WRX with TY85 Transmission
It is currently under development as a catalog model equipped with the “TY85” type transmission, which was also used in the previous WRX STI and boasts high durability and reliability. As the name suggests, it aims to revive Subaru’s “WRX”.
Well, that certainly sounds tantalizing. Keep in mind, there’s no word one way or another whether this new WRX variant will feature the driver-controlled center differential, but a gearbox this strong is at the very minimum, a nod for tuners to go wild with wastegate settings. Oh, and if that seems a bit anticlimactic, wait until you hear what Subaru has up its other sleeve.
Yes, the worst-kept Subaru secret is officially happening. Under the cover sits an Impreza hatchback with a hood scoop, and these days, that can only mean one thing. Remember the “Performance-B STI” concept from last year? Well, here’s what Subaru has to say now:
We are currently developing a production version of the “Performance-B STI concept” that was exhibited at Japan Mobility Show 2025. We plan to create a model with a new personality that is different from the WRX and BRZ.
Oh snap. Again, by 2027, Subaru plans to launch a manual hot hatch based on a concept with “STI” in its name. What does that actually mean? Well, it’s tough to say right now, but it should be at least moderately fun. The teaser photo doesn’t show any huge spoilers, but even a WRX-ified hatchback would go a long way towards satiating Subaru loyalists. The factory-modified BRZ sitting in between the hatch and sedan is also promising, as Subaru claims it will be “even lighter and more enjoyable to drive.”
In the meantime, maybe it’s best to temper expectations. The old EJ engine is out of production, and while the 2.4-liter turbocharged flat-four in the current WRX has plenty of headroom, emissions regulations make playing with states of factory tune expensive. At the same time, it’s worth noting that none of these teased models are officially STI vehicles. Still, who’d have thought that Subaru would be coming out with some shock-and-awe? We should get a much better look at these sport compacts soon, and all we can do now is keep our fingers crossed for a Stateside arrival.
Top graphic image: Subaru
Well it should, if we’re to believe this is to be a proper STI. They’re known for their huge spoilers
I almost bought an OG WRX wagon new, but couldn’t really swing it at the time. I would have bought one 10 years ago if the wagon/4-door hatch existed (ended up with a GTI instead) and now, with the kids grown and out of the house, I can’t justify justify a 4th car/2nd toy car (and I’m keeping the Miata). Sorry Subaru, you’re just too late for me.
100% this, if they had continued offering a WRX wagon in the VA generation (’15-’21) I would’ve already bought one. If this drops in the next year and the price isn’t stupid I may be in a place to buy one but I’m also not holding my breath-Subaru hasn’t been impressing me lately and the GR does exist.
As a long time Subaru owner, all I’m wondering is HOW they will fuck it up.
Where are all my OG NASIOC folks at?
i-club!
Now that’s a name I haven’t heard in a long time!
I vaguely remember the great NASIOC vs i-club schism of around 2005 or so (I think). Lots of subbie drama.
Yo! I had a heavily modified 2008 Forester XT and then a 2010 STi SE hatch. Miss that car so much.
Miss my OG bugeye. By far the funnest car I’ve ever owned. 13 awesome years and 240,000 hard miles on it. Jumping on NASIOC was THE way to learn about your car, mods and the community. Miss those days.
I would have loved a hatch WRX with the STI trans about 5 years ago.
Add me to the list of folks who would genuinely consider buying a Subaru hot hatch/wagon (my current dd is a 2005 Legacy GT wagon), but…
But I’m not going to hold my breath, while it wasn’t offered with a stick the Levorg (essentially a WRX wagon) has been available since 2015 in Japan and Australia (maybe elsewhere) in spite of the wagon variants of the WRX selling quite well in the USA so why after two generations of skipping us would they bring a WRX wagon back.
Add that to the fact that compared to a Corolla GR or Honda Civic Type R the current WRX is overpriced for what you’re getting in terms of hardware and development so to compete against those cars given typical Subaru lackluster attention to detail it would need to feel like a good deal relative to what you’re getting.
And lastly I’ll add that while styling is subjective imo Subaru has not been on a roll with styling on their latest crop of cars so even if it comes here wouldn’t surprise me if somehow it winds up being some hideously overworked overclad dumpster fire of gray plastic and random brightly colored accents that is fairly salesproof to all but the most rabid mountain state fan boys.
So a lot that can go wrong, but here’s hoping they get it right, when I was younger a WRX wagon was my affordable dream car would love to feel that way again.
Looks more like an Impreza hatch than a Levorg to me. What’s weird to me is that they’re showing a sedan at all when the sedan Impreza was dropped so they’re either using the old body for the TY85 variant, or actually designed a new sedan just for the WRX. I had been assuming that the new WRX would only be a hatch.
This is part of what I don’t understand about the VB-they’ve killed off the regular Impreza sedan, as far as I can recall the WRX had at least a 50% take rate on the hatch-why did they make their one remaining sedan the WRX? I assume their theory is that there are more buyers for whom a hatch is a deal breaker than buyers who will begrudgingly accept a sedan…? With them pushing autos I could see some corporate mgmt type saying “well this will still keep a sedan in our lineup now that the Legacy and Impreza sedan are gone”
I don’t get it either. They’re a small company, so I’m surprised they’re doing any sedans.
Had a lightly tuned 2005 GT wagon for ten years.The absolute best – handled roads and kids equally well, cops never saw it and was as reliable as a Reliant wasn’t.
It’s pretty great all around car, over two consecutive weekends this spring picked up mulch and a couple saplings one weekend and went rallycrossing with it the next and if we hadn’t had such a trash winter I’d have taken it skiing the month before! I’ve left the engine stock besides a K&N the PO installed, and recently put some Koni adjustables and JDM STi springs on it. At least in the PNW there are still a ton of its more mundane outback cousin still on the road so it is very much a sleeper here.
It’s just feeling a little tired at this point with 200K on it and I’m at that point of how much am I willing to sink into it to “restore it” vs getting into something newer-the problem is there just isn’t much else like it.
The four doors + MT space is getting interesting and i’m here for it. In a few years, if i’m looking to get out of my GLI there should be a few good options from Subaru, the General (Camaro/Buick/Cadillac if rumors are to be believed), Mustang variant, Infiniti/Skyline thing, Type R/ITS, GRolla
Not bad! Also hopefully some choice between FWD/RWD/AWD as well.
They’re rallying the BRZ instead of the WRX because the WRX got too heavy. The next STi should be a BRZ STi if they want to keep the rally pedigree.
That five door hatchback is gonna be a hoot.
STI CrossTrek would be awesome. And fit in with the Safari all the things.
But it will never happen.
Till then, lift kit on a CRCorolla.
It seems like it’d be easier to slap the GR/STi drivetrain into a Crosstrek/Corolla Cross
This is what I had assumed would happen. The GR Corolla has been the STi replacement, all the way down to the trick driver selectable center diff. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Subaru has decided that they don’t have the development money to keep the boxers current and competitive.
I will hold my enthusiasm until they are passed the tablecloth phase.
I don’t need an sti hatch. A regular WRX hatch or even a crosstrek or impreza hatch with the larger NA engine and a manual would grudgingly get me back to the Subaru dealer.
It’s funny that my wife and I are both tired of Subarus, but keep buying them. Even as we’re planning our ideal three car garage, a BRZ/GR86 has a definite spot.
I would consider buying a performance Subaru with a hatch in any form. Wagon, regular hatchback, I don’t care just make it happen and don’t put a damn CVT in it. If we read the tea leaves a bit here it sounds like whatever’s coming is going to have more power. IMHO they wouldn’t waste the money and effort of putting a more robust transmission in the car just for shits and giggles.
I’m thinking (hoping for) 350ish horsepower and the trick differential…and if it’s based on the current Impreza hatch which it almost certainly is it’ll have way more rear legroom than its competitors because somehow Subaru figured out that if you’re going to offer a back seat it should be usable.
My dream would be all of this in a Crosstrek or Forester body, but I’ll take what I can get.
A 6MT Forester XT that sits slightly lower to the ground sounds nice to reduce the top-heavy bodyroll.
But it’s a much larger ‘car’ than it used to be.
Maybe maybe maybe.
Please give me a slightly detuned version without stratospheric pricetag and slightly better reliability.
I had a 2011 Sti hatchback, bought new. It was the perfect car for (younger) me and I loved everything about it. I didn’t mind that it went through power steering racks every 20K or so, until it was out of warranty. Sadly traded it in after paying for a second rack. Still miss it.
I had a ’11 WRX hatch and LOVED it until a pain in the ass hurricane took it from me in 2017. Insurance gave me what it was worth and I would have loved to buy another WRX hatch but they didn’t offer it anymore and I just couldn’t bring myself to buy the sedan. I sat on the insurance check for a year while sending emails to Subaru begging them to bring back the hatch. Eventually I had to buy something so I spent my insurance check on a BRZ. The BRZ was actually a lot of fun in so many ways. Absolutely beautiful to look at in that WRB color. An absolute hoot to drive in the rain with the traction control off. An incredibly satisfying 6-speed gear box even if I only used 1-3-5-6th gears. And every time I took it into Subaru for service I’d ask again about the WRX hatch. The whole 7 years I drove that BRZ I kept saying how much I missed my WRX. I considered getting a GR Corolla but the styling wasn’t exactly my taste and I didn’t wanna deal with Toyota again. I sent another email to Subaru asking them to sell a rebadged GR Corolla but never heard back 😉
So anyways last year I traded the BRZ in on a used Polestar2. It’s AWD, 479HP, and best of all a HATCHBACK! I’ve only had it 8 mos now but I’ve found I don’t continuously mention missing my WRX anymore, it’s sufficiently scratched that itch for me. So now that Subaru is finally teasing maybe possibly bringing back a WRX hatch equivalent…it might be too late. At least too late for them to get my $$$.
This is a fair point.
Subaru really did screw with the timeline where everyone else can do a ‘performance’ AWD EV hatchback and get into the mix whilst they sit on their hands without a hatchback WRX since 2015.
I thought of them as wagons.
We had the unkillable, or at the very least undead after getting hit by two deer, a Landrover, a UPS truck, and an air conditioner in the Brooklyn tornado, Impreza Outback, and I can’t imagine why anyone would want to load cargo through that mail slot of the non-wagon.
You should try to load anything into the trunk of a BRZ. Trying to squeeze a week of groceries in there was pushing it.
We were told here at Subaru that we were getting a hatch “in between the Impreza and Crosstrek” This must be it.
I’ve noticed out emphasis on rally and other motorsports starting to pick up as well. Maybe Subaru finally has enough production space for their more niche offerings
What does that mean?
They’ll put cladding on only half the Impreza, and lift just the rear-end?
Yeah, that’s what we were saying too. Apparently, no body cladding but slightly higher off the ground than the Impreza. I was just thinking that they would bring over the Levorg, but our rep said it definitely isn’t a Levorg.
I hope we can read into this that Subaru will make some kind of effort in the WRC again as well for 2027? One can hope right..
They’re still pretty big in the ARA, maybe Toyota doesn’t want them in the WRC?
There are rumors/bits of evidence that they’re making a new WRC car based on the BRZ soon
They are building a new BRAT?
Fingers crossed.
As someone who used to drive a thirsty turbo Forester, I wish someone could mash together a PHEV with a great manual trans. Cruise downtown in EV mode, then fire up the boxer in the hills.
If Subaru made a Forester with 100+ miles of EV range, a turbo boxer up front, and the 6MT with DCCD, I think I’d be set for life! One can dream though
Or they could just switch from an ‘H’ to an ‘I’ and get more power and fuel economy out of the same displacement.
Anyone that is fine with a CVT probably doesn’t know or care that Subaru uses a boxer engine instead of an inline.
But then they can’t pretend they’re somehow related to Porsche.
The boxer is paramount to their AWD system’s packaging. Audi is unique in its willingness to hang an entire longitudinal inline-4 out in front of the axle, while Subaru uses the shorter Boxer to limit front overhang and mitigate the weight distribution problem inherent to their transmission packaging.
Most of the superior economy of the inline-4 competition comes from the transverse layout and part-time, coupling-based AWD systems. The spider gear bleeds a lot of power, as does the center differential. If you compare an Impreza to an A4 Quattro in fuel economy, you’ll get results proportional to their respective performance levels,
The boxer layout also allows them to sell long-stroke 4-cylinders without the need for balance shafts, which has helped a lot with their reliability ratings since they solved the head gasket issues. Torquey engines naturally sacrifice top-end power, but for most street use cases, it’s nice to have a strong low/mid-range, and enables them to sell naturally aspirated vehicles in segments where turbocharging is expected.
They may be slow cars with mediocre efficiency, but that’s more to do with the large bodies and heavy, lossy longitudinal AWD than with the engines.
I’m a big fan of the low-revving, big-cylinder approach to reliability, and would probably recommend a lot of Subarus to my friends if their interiors and UI didn’t suck pendulous donkey balls.
My only quibble here is that the majority of Subaru boxer engines have been oversquare, even if they have characteristics more like undersquare engines. Increasing stroke in a boxer is difficult because it necessitates widening an engine that’s already difficult to package for width, especially with DOHCs (though even the OHVs that had plenty of room between the frame rails of those much smaller cars were oversquare). Some have even used angled con rods to try to get some extra stroke.
I stopped buying Subarus when they went AWD-only and came back for RWD. The FWDs drove much better than their AWD counterparts, were far more responsive and lighter feeling, got better mileage, with better performance, while still being very capable in poor conditions. My FWD 5MT 2.2 Legacy wagon was a lot closer to the performance of the Legacy turbos than the AWD 2.2s despite the tallest gear ratios they used at the time (in fact, 5th was taller than 6th is in my GR86) and had a lot more of an eager “rally car attitude” than the turbos.
Thanks for the addition/correction, using the term “long-stroke” was definitely a reach on my part, though nowadays even oversquare 2.0L I4’s have a tendency to run balance shafts, let alone the 2.5L units.
I totally get it about the AWD thing, I liked my WRX when I had it, but that and the A4 were lessons in over-preparedness, their AWD systems just kinda overwrote everything else the chassis was doing, making the experience pretty dull unless there was complete snow coverage, and even then it was less fun than a RWD car. I’m a firm believer in 2WD and Winter tires now, but I have gone back to the boxer engine, though it sits behind me now. I’ve still never owned a FWD car, but having driven a few of them at speed, I’d love to get my hands on a flickable hatchback when I start raising some rear-seat passengers.
The boxer has better primary and secondary balance than I4s, so they don’t need balance shafts for smoothness, though people often criticize Subaru engines for not being smooth enough.
I think FWD is underrated because so many FWD cars are built to be mediocre to drive at best. It’s not like you can kick a car sideways very often in the real world unless you live in some unpopulated area or on gravel and DGAF and FWD cars are often low powered, so power oversteer isn’t all that attainable. As a further positive, FWD loses less power in the drivetrain (at least comparing front engines). A well-designed FWD car is adjustable in turns, if not so much by power. I prefer the way my Legacy handled to my GR86 most of the time and I think a big part of it is that it had better F:R balance. The ’86 has much higher limits and, of course, can tighten a line with throttle, not just lift, but I don’t drive on a race track and the roads are infested with CRVs, so low limits within reason are more of a positive. OTOH, my ST was pretty fun (with nannies off—nannies on was terminal understeer), too, but the ’86 is way ahead and I think that’s a good part down to the balance factor where the ST has so much more weight on the front.
I think a big part of why people nowadays thing FWD cars are boring is that modern cars are tuned for terminal understeer, so most younger drivers don’t even realize that handling actually boils down to more than lateral G’s and power slides.
I, too, once thought that understeer was a binary state between grip and understeer, until I played DiRT Rally and fell in love with the Fulvia. Since then, I’ve *almost* bought a Mk7 GTI one time (still regret getting an automatic m235i instead), and at an SCCA autocross I hung out with a group of Honda guys, where I got to ride passenger in a Fit that was sideways the whole time and got to trade cars for a run with an RSX Type S that was an absolute weapon.
Now I’m casually perusing for a potential future baby hauler that might double as a rallycross tool, since they don’t allow soft tops to race on dirt. Might get a GD Fit, Mk4 Golf, or Cooper depending on whether I get to keep the 986 (if it’s leaving, I’d really like to go up a trim to an Abarth, Mazdaspeed or GTI, but I don’t need two cars that run on premium gas).
Exactly! Moderate power FWD can be a lot of fun in the real world. There’s more than one element to make an enjoyable driver.
Just out of curiosity, I’m going to measure the length of my Subaru block vs my Miata. Since the pistons in the boxer are staggered, I have to think the two are going to come in within a few inches of each other.
They do save some complexity with the balance shaft delete, but they also have to run two separate heads and I could jump rope with the timing belt (if I were coordinated enough to jump rope).
In general, I find Mazda and Subaru to be very frustrating. I think Subaru hurts themselves with their boxer devotion and Mazda keeps wasting time and money wankeling off.
I’m torn I really like Mazda and always want to love Subarus and I do appreciate companies trying to do something unique as cars become increasingly homogenous, but also feels like both companies painted themselves into pointless corners with motors that just aren’t special enough to justify the trade-offs. And re the balance shafts, I’ve read that their two piece crank case makes the boxer motor relatively complicated to manufacture and assemble vs a a typical inline 4 so I’m not convinced that not having balance shafts offsets that and justifies the boxer’s existence-I do however agree with him that I I’ve always been impressed by the relative torquiness of Subaru motors, not sure if this is directly due to the boxer configuration or not bc as you point out typically (my ej255 is) they’ve been at least mildly oversquare.
My impression with Subaru is that they’ve kept a shocking amount of legacy (lol) part around because they’ve essentially kept the same drivetrain layout (and maybe even some of the basic dimensions) since the late ’80s. Supposedly their basic rear diff is essentially the same diff as an ’80s GL. They used a nearly unchanged 5mt from the ’90s through 2015 in various cars as well as wheel hubs to name a few. When looking for parts for my LGT I’ve been surprised how many parts it shares with the WRX and how many parts the WRX and BRZ share. So my theory is even if they got rid of the admittedly expensive to make (I believe) boxer 4 that I agree nobody but vape boys cares about they would have a substantial amount of clean sheet engineering to do in terms of drivetrain parts, mounting points and miscellaneous body and subframe engineering.
I’ll also add as a tall guy the boxer layouts has another tradeoff in terms of reduced passenger compartment floor space thanks to size of the trans tunnel vs a transverse engine car. I have hard time getting 100% comfortable with my right foot in both my old ’05 legacy and my wife’s newer and roomier 2015 because of their weird uneven transmission tunnel and my size 13 feet.
The BRZ chassis even dates to the original Legacy. The rear suspension is very different and it’s been improved, but that’s the car’s origin. The other cars use a newer platform designed with greater flexibility in drivetrains to allow for hybrids and EV, so they’re heavier and more compromised.
Crazy I didn’t know that about the BRZ. I think (I’m not 100% on this so don’t quote me lol) Subaru came out with a more global platform for the 5th gen Legacy/Outback that also underpinned the Forester, and maybe even the later Impreza/Crosstrek/WRX. I think this is why the 5th gen legacy /outback are so frumpy, and even the slightly sleeker 6th gen, when compared to the older cars are much taller, perhaps the only way they could find to increase interior room (which is shockingly poor on my 2005 LGT) and keep the longitudinal boxer + awd layout. Not sure when how they staggered the move to the platform you’re bringing up though I would guess/assume it’s used across the line. I think that’s partially why they put the cladding on the weird current gen WRX is to hide how tall it is.
SGP started in 2016 (had to look that up) and the same Wikipedia does say the 2nd gen BRZ has some influence of it, while remaining related to the 1st gen. I’m not sure where the differences are as a lot of parts interchange, but the 2nd gen is reportedly a lot stiffer. FWIW I was able to use the hidden hitch from the 1st gen on my 2nd gen with small modifications mainly involving the plastic body mounts for rear bumper cover.
Everything’s gotten taller. Some of it is allowing more human space, but also people want to sit higher and cars need to see over other taller cars. I’m actually surprised at how high the seat is in the BRZ. Even down all the way, it’s nowhere near the sitting-on-the-floor feel of an old school sports car, which is fine, though, as I need to see around all these other tall damn vehicles.
IIRC, the EJ crank was about 18″ long. Fx would be shorter.
That’s the problem with a lot of companies whose identity was tied to a certain mechanical feature and that feature became either standard or obsolete. I think Subaru has been doing well at positioning itself as a “lifestyle” brand. As much as I hate that kind of marketing drivel, it seems to be working well and I think they could ditch the boxer and not a ton of people would care. The bigger issue would be the symmetrical AWD. Sticking an inline out front would hurt handling, though I’m not sure how much that would matter to most of the current owners, but I think going transverse would have a negative effect on their capability, then people might as well buy a CRV. For a transition to EV, though, I think they’re sitting well. Mazda, IDK, but they seem to be doing well as they are everywhere around here.
At the current weight and height of their vehicles, having an I4 that hangs 3″ further forward and a few inches higher than the H4 is not going to make a difference to their customers.
If most things are going to be hybrid anyway, positioning the battery pack could offset the height and locations of the motor.
Yeah, at this point, their regular customers are mostly slow drivers who wouldn’t notice the handling loss. People bought Audis for far more money for years, after all. It does seem like they have lower hood heights than competitors which is nice for visibility, but they might just look that way, I don’t know if it’s actually true.
Funny thing here is that I saw a 3rd gen Outback blocking a road after going head on into a guardrail yesterday after apparently failing to negotiate a slow turn on a residential street, so maybe some of the customers aren’t driving so slow (or it could have been a medical emergency, IDK).
I think you’ll find the difference to be about 5-6 inches, or a little less than two cylinders’ bores. It doesn’t sound like much, but consider what 6 inches mean in the automotive world:
The wheelbase of a current Accord is just 3.7in longer than a Civic’s.
A Z3 was only 4in longer than a first-gen Miata.
The Lancia Stratos’s wheelbase is shorter than the Dino’s by 4.2in.
These are huge differences in terms of driving dynamics, and with how heavy an engine is, small changes in shape/position make a big difference in how it affects handling.
A car with a lower CG experiences less body roll, squat and dive with the same suspension, which means it can be made to match the competition’s body control with softer springs, sway bars, dampers and a lower roll center, so a pancake-shaped engine can actually enable a more compliant ride if the maker isn’t angling for performance.
I think more than anything, Subaru has a ton of boxer engine experience and R&D that they don’t want to waste, and the advantages (smoothness, torque, low center of gravity) are worth enough to be about equal to an inline engine as a value proposition, and it’s half of their brand identity, forgoing it for an inline 4 would be daft for a brand with such a distinctive image.
What competitors is Subaru out-handling these days?
I’m not saying there are not advantages, I’m saying that those advantages are meaningless in the AWD vehicles Subaru produces today.
Bellhousing to timing cover, the 2.5 in my 09 Outback is 14.5″ or so, and the Miata motor is 15″. I realize that isn’t an apples to apples comparison with the displacement difference, and my measurements are probably not completely accurate since the Outback motor is still in the car (with most of the top plastic stuff removed, so I did have decent access). The Miata engine is a spare on an engine stand, so I did have easy access.
If Subaru is taking advantage of the low CG, it’s to attain just-okay handling with softer suspension.
I’m surprised it’s so long to the timing cover, does the Miata run a timing chain these days? By the way, I’m not particularly impressed with Subarus these days, they have a lot of design and engineering choices I really dislike, it’s just not because of the engines.
Still timing belt.
I could have messed up the measurements. I’m trying to find the dimensions online, but coming up with nothing.
I’ll measure again when I have a chance.
Thanks for doing the science, I wonder what Mazda and Subaru are doing differently from each other to get such similar lengths.
I’m not sure. The subaru engine still has to connect to a regular shape / size bellhousing. There may be an extra inch or so in length so the block can transition to match the bellhousing shape. I feel like it’s accomplished with just some ‘tabs’ on the sides of the Miata engine, so maybe this is an issue caused by the split crank case.
Looking at some photos of the EJ255, the bell housing seems to be roughly flush on the left bank, only having to bridge a gap on the right bank, which is shifted forward, much like the timing belt is flush with the right bank but spaced on the left.
I think the most representative measurement would be from the front of the timing belt cover to the rear of the head on the left side (the longer side measured from the front, easier to measure because on the right side you’d have to measure from the bellhousing to get the full length).
I measured from the back of the timing cover on the right side to the rear of the head, then from the rear of the head to the bellhousing.
The Miata engine is also shrink wrapped. Methodology was not the greatest, and definitely could have introduced some error.
I’d like to see them do two versions of the STI… a traditional manual one and a performance hybrid one as the ‘automatic’ version.
Didn’t they do a release of some limited run of WRX in Japan claiming the CVT as a “performance” transmission or somesuch?
Not sure… but I could see them doing that.
But in my world view, that ‘automatic’ version of the STI would have a Toyota-style ‘eCVT’… something with the durability and simplicity of a manual transmission and that doesn’t require relatively frequent transmission fuel changes to keep it reliable.
They may not be able (or willing) to package the eCVT for Subaru’s longitudinal layout.
What’s the transmission on the Forester or Levorg Hybrid?
All I can see call it as a Lineartronic (just their brandname for all their CVTs – including the “Subaru Performance Transmission” in the Levorg)
I am not sure. I think the big improvement with the eCVT is that it uses a traditional gear for first and switches over to the CVT once the car is rolling. I know Toyota does this but don’t know if other manufacturers do.
The current Forester Hybrid and Crosstrek Hybrid, as well as the prior generation plug-in Hybrid Crosstrek, use a version of the Toyota eCVT system packaged for longitudinal layout and mechanical AWD.
Great. Now I know one more thing about CVTs.
Transmission fluid changes, not transmission fuel changes.
The top version of the WRX is the US was CVT-only at least in the first production year.
I’m firmly convinced Subaru has no idea what they are doing and just go in-between a mainstream brand and when that doesn’t work because they made something too ugly or weird try to get back the market they pissed off and abandoned. They aren’t selling well so they need to find something will sell. Even in smaller full of profit numbers. It’s possible having the manuals bring people in who then decide for whatever reason they need to buy the auto. They always seemed to sell the manuals well enough though if the can shove it in their whole lineup they probably should.
I believe Subaru was winding down their sporty+manual flavored cars these past few years because they accounted for so little of their profits and regulations were making them ever more costly. With the regulation part of the equation almost crossed out now, it seems like recovering some of that spicy image became attainable again for them.
I’m not expecting much from this but I do expect them to push these to the US. We are for sure the ones crying the loudest for manuals, and particularly a manual hatch.
I figured ditching the manual had more to do with complexity. Probably sales too. I still think of probably brought people in. How many guys buy a manual then try to teach their wife who wants nothing to do with it. Or attempt that. They kept the manual with the wrx. Most people buying those new understand that manuals are probably not long for this world in new cars and their next new car will probably be a hybrid or bev. The Subaru cvt is so inefficient the manual has to get better fuel economy. Just like the old days. Us is their biggest market so they better bring what ever they can.
‘Complexity’ as you imply is definitely a part of it. There’s a lot of cost associated with bringing a manual version of a car to market alongside the AT beyond the obvious things, so for sure they’ll only do that when they know the manuals won’t end up rotting on the lot. And CVT is 100% about efficiency. Whether real-world numbers agree or not, Subaru has gone that way across the board because of how bad their fleet averages are compared to every other brand. They’ve busted their butts to squeeze out fractions of an MPG in every car they sell.
They probably can’t use an off-the shelf transmission because of their AWD system.
Subaru transmissions mount longitudinally and have three outputs – two for the front axles and a rear output for the rear diff.
If they could just order a transmission from Aisin and drop it in, they may. But they probably have to pay through the nose for a supplier to develop a specialized manual or develop it in-house. The manual take rate probably doesn’t justify either.
They could have used Audi’s… but they stopped making longitudinal-engined cars with manual gearboxes long time ago…
As long as it bolts up the the fa and the fb should be the same part. They could probably do something with drive shafts to make it work. I don’t know that the take rate justifies it. They did a lot of work on the global platforms to allow for things like that. That’s the story anyway.
It should bolt right in. I think they have to have every engine /trans (/ chassis?) combo EPA certified, so there is some external cost involved in adding the third pedal.
Coming from a manufacturing background, I know there is also a decent amount of internal cost in bills of materials and just adding a new part number for the whole car (and every available variant with the manual).
I guess what won’t be a cost anymore is the cafe penalty that was never really enforced anyway.
I am under the impression that Subaru is one of the few car makers that actually builds their own transmissions in house for this reason. That comes from a forum post I read awhile back that I haven’t bothered trying to verify so take it with a grain of salt…also fwiw at least in the case of the WRX they have well over 50% take rate on manuals so it seems like in the performance cars they do have a market case for it.
As a manual transmission true believer, I would like to believe that the manual transmission equipped Subarus are more fuel efficient than the CVT cars. This is emphatically not the case. When the Impreza and Crosstrek were last sold with a manual trans option in the 2023 model year, the CVT delivered 5 MPG more in city/highway combined fuel economy than the manual trans version. This link is to the US EPA fuel economy comparison between those cars:
Compare Side-by-Side
Oddly, the WRX 6-speed manual delivers 1 MPG better than the WRX with the Subaru Performance Transmission (CVT).
Subaru plays around the base trims tuning and tires to eek out a little better economy. Real world they get about 25 mpg with a cvt no matter what you do. Some people that draft alot can maybe flirt close to 30. The manuals could eek out a bit more of you drove it conservatively. The wrx shows that point. Because it has the same wheels and tires and suspension along with the tune more to performance. You have the rag the shit out of the other ctvs to get them to move losing any effenency that a test cycle might see. But on paper it looks good.
Hired a new Outback 2.5i this WInter. Flogged it up and down the Rockies doing close to 2000miles. Got 29.7mpg average. The latest CVT is fine. Not an issue used the flappy paddles / manual mode to hold gears coming down the mountains which you don’t get on a lot of other cars.
And I drive manuals so I don’t like autos generally but this one is smooth unless you are really mashing the peddle into the floor flogging it up an onramp.
I’ve observed that the EPA numbers for manuals are often underrated in the real world compared to autos (which is especially good considering the lack of development in manuals). My GR86, for instance, gets higher combined mileage than the EPA highway rating on winter blend fuel and conditions. On summer blend, I beat the stated automatic’s highway on a combined cycle and that’s doing highway speeds higher than the BS EPA test. Full time AWD is a fuel-eater, too, but that hits both transmissions. I’m quite familiar with Subarus from the early 80s on and, while I’ve driven plenty, I’ve never owned an AWD one and have no interest in it (the ’86 is arguably my 4th Subaru, the previous of which were all FWD).
The published EPA standard fuel economy numbers have been repeatedly adjusted downward over the years, in response to consumer complaints of an inability to match the published number. I was surprised recently when I looked up my former 2013 Fiat 500 Abarth and found that the EPA fuel economy website shows a lower, “adjusted” number, rather than the fuel economy numbers that were originally printed on the window sticker in 2013. The upshot of this situation is that a conscientious driver can easily beat the published fuel economy number on late model cars.
I’ve long heard from automatic buyers that their cars didn’t match the EPA. I’ve exceeded EPA with manuals since at least ’06, probably earlier, but I didn’t bother with tracking or even the basic math at fill up before then. My ’12 Focus SE was closest to the rating, averaging the EPA highway rating on a combined cycle. I think an issue with manual vs automatic is that the former is far more dependent on the driver and results can vary widely while the latter is more consistent in its results as the computer can compensate for an inefficient driver to a degree and I wonder if that affects EPA test results.
I hear/read about a lot of people exceeding the ratings on more modern hybrids, too. When I had a Corolla hybrid loaner, I was hitting 55 calculated mpg without trying and individual trips were near 70 according to the computer (however much that could be trusted).
I had an early CVT (98 Civic HX) that never hit its EPA numbers in normal use.
But… for a few years I was using that as a commuter to go to Vermont about once a month. I picked a route that kept me mostly off interstates (pretty easy in VT) and I was averaging 41 mpg on those trips. EPA rating is 30/39, 34mpg combined.
At the time I was being reimbursed at $0.60 / mile and the car rarely required maintenance. It worked out well for me until the company realized it would be cheaper to just lease me a car.
My sister had an ’08 CH and it barely got better mileage than my mother’s regular Civic and she had a bit of a lead foot. In exchange, it cost more, had half a trunk, garbage tires, and the stupid battery failed 3 times, IIRC, and it was dangerously slow without it. It was junked with the battery dead. That IMA system was quite underwhelming. Thankfully, hybrids have gotten much better since then.
I haven’t owned a Honda since that Civic.
I had a good deal on that car, but figured I’d give a more local dealer a chance to match it. They did not, and I literally had to physically move the sales manager to exit the cubicle and leave the place.
F*** You, Honda North in Danvers MA. If I ever buy another Honda, it won’t be from you.
The other dealer sold the car at the agreed price and without trying to add garbage onto the transaction.
If anyone knows the name of the sales manager there in 1998, I’d love the information. I have regretted not knocking him out for close to four decades.
WTF, my sister got stiffed by them in the same manner, didn’t buy a second Honda then, nor one since. Not just the dealership, I don’t like that town.
Couldn’t tell you who the sales manager was then, but the first girl I had a crush on in elementary school worked there in the parts and service dept. around then.
My high school was in that town. So was the slightly better mall that now is abandoned to a weird multi-storefront church with armed guards on Sunday.
I would not cry if it burned to the ground. On Sunday.
I’m not at all a fan of Danvers. I also went to HS there, but I hate it for the way they treated my mother because she wasn’t a townie. Town full of stupid pansies who think they’re better than they are.
I didn’t know about the weird church at the LTM. I’ve only gone there on rare occasions to see a movie and I just use that entrance. Seems an odd place for a church—has the mall gotten that cheap to rent or is it one of those cult-like ones that rake in money?
I wonder how hard would it be to start a cult. My neighbor took some ayahuasca, declared himself a shaman a couple years ago, and has what appears to be cult meetings every few weeks. He’s no longer invited to poker games, but maybe it would be useful to have him by so I could get some pointers. Ah, dammit, no, that’s right, I’d have to be, like, charming and shit. Forget it.
That used to be the good mall. That was one of the first food courts in the area (RIP, Sbarro).
I go there every year or two for a movie. Last time I went there was nothing The food court doesn’t even have Dunkin or McDonald’s. Best Buy has the Roxbury curtains down over their mall entrance.
The center corner that had been a major jewelry store is now one Asian woman selling cases for old iPhones. I assume the rent is cheap. I think the church occupies an old anchor store and at least one neighboring storefront. Most other storefronts are boarded up.
Oddly, the North Shore Mall is thriving a mile away and under the same ownership.
Yeah, those are both Simon. My BiL works with them or did or something regarding leasing.
I lived a short distance from it in HS, so I was there fairly often. My sister used to work at one of those jewelry stores at the crossroads way back and a friend of mine worked at the news stand. Best thing about the mall was when I was in the 4th grade, I won a Wrangler jeans branded go-cart from a drawing at the Ann & Hope.
There’s a company that sells Ann & Hope T-shirts. Or Caldor, Lechmere, etc if you prefer.
I hated school shopping so much that if I ever see navy corduroys with an Ann & Hope pricetag, I will immediately hide in the center of a round clothing rack.
That was Fridays when I was young—endless hours of shopping with my mother and younger sisters. Those clothing racks were like a cave. There was some kids’ clothing store that had a tunnel built into the wall and maybe a small slide to occupy the little kids, but I don’t remember the name of it.
I definitely don’t need those shirts. If anything, I’d get one for Almys from Salem, but I barely remember going there.
What’s a CH?
Civic Hybrid.
Thanks
My six speed Forester is rated for 25 combined mpg.
According to the car display, I’ve beaten that over the last 2000 miles or so with 28.5 mpg. I almost never take it on divided highways.
With any of my cars, the computer has usually been off a few mpg (mostly optimistic), so I always average it by tank with math at fill up. I’d like to type that I do it in my head as I would have as a kid, but I’m old and lazy, so I use the phone calculator.
I think a lot of people just drive poorly—more throttle than needed to maintain speed, racing between lights and stop signs, tailgating, etc. They’re not getting anywhere any faster, but I guess they feel more manly or something. Some people need that boost.
I used to print a receipt every fill up and do the math on the receipt. I ended up with gas receipts everywhere so I just trust the computer now.
I drive about 15 miles on 1A to work. It’s two lane, not divided. The thing that prevents me from getting better mpg is the drivers stopping on that road and yielding the right-of way to stopped traffic on side streets / parking lots.
The second thing that ruins my mpg is MBTA commuter rail level crossings. The mess after a train goes through is real.
1A is brutal unless it’s farther up the coast.
My brother used to commute from Salem to Watertown on 1A (for a while he did it in my 98 Civic HX that I sold him). I thought he was nuts.
Then I got a job in the Salem area, and tried different versions of the route. 1A was the most consistent, least stressful and drive times were on-par with 95 -> 128. Every now and then I arrive later than expected but it’s never really been a problem.
The biggest thing with the route is timing since there are a lot of schools along the way.
I’ve always generally avoided it except for off hours when I lived on the North Shore.
I essentially live on that route, but it would take me at least 10 minutes to get to 95. Then I would have to drive to Peabody (several miles past my destination) to come back north on 128. I would rather be tortured with large silicone objects than drive on 128 south of Manchester.
That’s the only thing I don’t miss about the NS. Got rear ended on 128S just after the curve by the Lowell St exit. My Focus SE ended up on top of the hood of a Camry. Drove it off of it and back home. Camry was wrecked. The road stops suddenly there all the f’n time for rarely any apparent reason and, even though I was keeping a distance back because it stops all the f’n time, that dipshit hit me anyway. His survival and my freedom is testament to the efficacy of modern therapy as administered by a competent therapist.
I used to live about two miles from that exit on Lowell St. My wife worked 6 miles away from home. It was taking her 45+ minutes to get home and I would have to have a double martini waiting for her when she arrived and debriefed about al,the idiots that populated her commute..
She still works at the same place. We live 20+ miles further away and she arrives home in a much better mood (zero martinis required).
We’re a legitimate hour further from BOS than we were, but I had decided to stop traveling for work when we moved here (didn’t actually stop traveling for three years), so that’s not really an issue.
For and idea of how bad the traffic was: taxes in that city were CHEAP. I had lived there for 40 years. I had been a police officer in that city. The mayor then (and now) was a childhood / college friend / classmate of mine. I could be retired right now if I stayed. It was not worth it. Not even close.
My wife totaled our FR-S on the ramp from 95s to 128n. Not her fault. A texting 23-year-old crashed into her and sent her spinning off the road.
Many years later we’re both sure we miss a GR86 in our lives.
Maybe if that clueless [bad word] had not hit her, we wouldn’t have realized the greatness of that car.
Also, it would have prevented the purchase of the Forester that made me a Subaru non-fan.
Edit: Nope. Not even giving her that credit. We both wanted that car. Watched all rumors and releases about it’s development and even bought one of the first ones from our local dealer (2013 bought in june / july 2012).
F that [bad word].
My GR86 has been hit twice. One moron in stop-and-go near Boston. Almost hit me, so I changed lanes. Apparently, he did, too, then the guy behind me moved and he hit me. Almost unnoticeable damage. Second time, kid in a Civic Si speeding on 93 in freezing cold, weaving around lost control in front of me, spun across two lanes to the breakdown lane looking like he was going into the guardrail, but must have pinned the throttle as he came flying back out across three lanes in front of me sideways. Hit his rear suspension and door at about 15 mph. $12k in damage, but the car drove fine. Lots of idiots out and there and I swear it’s gotten a lot worse in the last 10 years and especially since covid.
I thought you were still NS. Imho, MV is a subset of NS.
I lived in Salem, Danvers, and Beverly, but I’m in North Andover now, which is Merrimack Valley.
I grew up in Peabody and left for Newbury in 2014. Went to hs in Danvers.
I spent a lot of time in Salem when it was run down before it became a tourist destination. We used to do flatland BMX tricks on the bricks that are packed with tourists today. It was the least busy place in the area, where we were least likely to be hassled (Parker Brothers was still operational). We would have been chased out of a mall parking lot in minutes. That’s crazy considering how things are today.
Same here! My mother had a friend who was engaged to a guy who worked at PB and he’d get us all kinds of minor rejects from the assembly lines. Nice guy. Died young from a heart attack, I believe. Her previous husband burned down the Salem Armory and some church. Not a lot of luck with guys.
Now you’ve got me thinking that there was some place I’d ride my BMX that had a brick wall that curved to the street almost like a 1/4 pipe, but I can’t remember where. I remember if you came into that alley at the right angle and speed, you could ride up on it and be parallel to the street surface for . . . well, probably not as far a distance as it seemed, but it was cool when I was 10. The city’s gotten a lot nicer from when I was a kid.
Sounds familiar, but I’d be going way back. Maybe something in or near Forest River Park?
There was a weird brick fountain of the world behind east india mall that they never bothered filling with water until they installed the witch statue.
MV is a subset of the NS.
If it is, it doesn’t feel it, though I’ve got much better neighbors than I did in Beverly (the cult neighbor is 1/4 mile away, so the immediate neighbors are animals).
I work near Beverly Hospital and live near Newburyport.You are still NS.
Agree with you as a manual driver and sometimes a CVT car driver (new ones are fine BTW). Driving style is so important to your fuel economy. I find with my long term manuals I’m getting at least 60,000miles brake changes and 80,000kms on a set of tyres.
I don’t do so well on tires, but the ceramic brakes my last few cars have had went 100k plus.
I think it might be because this car is a light 1988 AWD Corolla alltrac and mostly highway miles I do rotate the tyres often as I need to replace the whole set at the same time due to the AWD. I drive with a lot of anticipation and a safe amount of distance between me and other cars often rev matching and changing down to slow or speed up It gets about the manufacturers stated economy despite having 310k kilometers on the clock.
Too bad they stopped making the turbo Forester XT, just as turbos were getting popular in that segment.
The last Forester XT used a CVT.
I wanted an XT when I bought my Forester in late 2017. It was only offered in CVT. I ended up in a Forester Premium in f’ing SILVER because that’s the highest trim available with a manual.
Silver? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
You could’ve gotten it in GREEN!!!!!! At least the Premium includes the giant sunroof 😀
It does have a giant sunroof. I wanted brown.
It was eventually going to replace my brown 5-speed outback. The only brown color they had came only with the CVT, l so I chose what was important.
Well considering how ugly the VB wrx is, I have little to no faith.
As a Subbie fan (I’ve had 4-5 including a BRZ and bugeye WRX) I hope for the best. But I’m happy with my 23 GR Corolla.
I keep thinking once I finish paying off my student loans I’m going to sell my elderly ’05 Legacy GT wagon and buy a Corolla GR (if I fit comfortably at 6’5″) seems like the only real replacement if you don’t want to roll the dice on used Audi/VW maintenance.
I’m sure they’ll be JDM only too
How hasn’t Subaru WRXified the Crosstrek yet?
…we haven’t seen the final product yet.
…the Crosstrek has been on sale for 13 years.
I know, I have a ’19. I meant this new thing.
When I “wrx’d” my Crosstrek, I “wrecked” it.
Because ‘ruggedizing’ with contrasting trim highlights sells better.