Topic: Subaru Could Drop Six-Cylinder Engines

[johngenx]

As much as the H-6 was nice, there's not much future for Subaru with an engine like that.  It won't fit in most of the vehicles they make now, and long term I don't see Subaru moving up in size - they've carved out a very profitable niche in the segments they're in.  The Legacy doesn't need a six (Honda and Toyota offer them, but they're very low volume) but it can use a higher performance option: and the turbo four sounds perfect.

[ThePointblank]

Their hybrid experiment has been a failure.

I would not go so far as to call it a failure just yet. For one, the technology inside the Crosstrek Hybrid was all developed by Subaru with no assistance from others, and due to Subaru's smaller resources, they are pretty limited in what they can do.

It's also their first attempt at a hybrid, and like all first attempts, it does have issues. I would be most interested in seeing what Subaru does with their hybrids as I would imagine they do have access to a number of Toyota's technologies to enhance their hybrid drive trains.

[Solstice2006]

I loved the H6 in our Tribeca but I don't see Subaru coming up with a replacement in the midziser SUV category... so this would make sense.

I thought they are working on 7 seater SUV right now, and they could always use Toyotas V6 if they wanted to...

[blotter]

Towing capacity is different by market.  For example, the Forester in Australia is rated at 1,500 kg with/750 kg without trailer brakes regardless of engine/transmission.  This is a bit of a bone of contention on the Forester forum as it appears the Forester is capable of towing more than it is rated for in NA.  Maybe a perceived liability thing?

As for losing the 6 cylinder, unless they wish to re-do it to make it more efficient, it just seems to make sense and is not a real surprise to me.

The Forester is "rated" for higher capacity in Europe as well.
I can't remember if someone here posted a link and an article I read or if I just found it.  However it was a really interesting article about towing capacities in Europe vs NA (Europe's vehicles all being rated higher)
A lot came down not only law and liability, but also trailer designs, speed limits (when towing) and a few other factors that allow tow ratings to be higher across the board in Europe.

[Noto]

I wonder if Subaru is using Volvo's drive-E as the method of the future...albeit more likely with twin-scroll solely and not going all complex with twin-charging...

I do expect some hybridization from the 2.0T, however.  I love automotive engineering products

[blur911]

i'm likely the only one... but I don't like the news.
sure, drop it from the Legacy... makes sense, but don't take it away from the Outback.
the Outback's H6 is the only vehicle in Subaru's line up with decent towing capacity.
(Forester is only 1,500lbs)

We have an Outback with a 6-cylinder and auto tranny, it puts our jet-skis and a friend's boat in and out of the water effortlessly, then I tried my friend's 4-cylinder Outback with 5-speed and thought I was going to burn out his clutch trying to get his boat out.  1st is just way too tall to get things going.
The difference to me is in the tranny more than the engine.

[OliverD]

What about the V6 in the Accord, Altima, or the Camry.  Yes they aren't that many, but still a few...

And Passat.

[redman]

What about the V6 in the Accord, Altima, or the Camry.  Yes they aren't that many, but still a few...

And Passat.

Honda will most likely produce the V6 for the Acura line and easily trickle a variant to Honda. Nissan has Infiniti and larger vehicles (Pathfinder) that use a V6 and can justify Altima option. Toyota has the Highlander and Lexus div. with a V6 requirement that is easily ported down.  Subaru on the other hand has no other divisions or massive SUV type vehicle that requires a V6, so the V6 may not be feasible.

[Solstice2006]

^ I agree, which is why Mazda probably doesn't make one.  At least Subaru has Toyota as a partner, if they wanted to source the Toyota V6 for a 3rd row SUV.  I assume that would be possible, depending on the platform they use down the road.

[OliverD]

The only other Mazda that would need a V6 is the next gen CX-9 but I suspect we'll see some sort of turbocharged four for that vehicle that could also be used in the 6 and in the new MazdaSpeed 3.

[stargazer68]

Does Mazda's Skyactive tech have enough potential to power their full line with fours?  Perhaps, assuming the engineers keep finding new power from smaller displacements, we may see four cylinder engines becoming the power lines, with three cylinders (a la Fiesta) or even two() driving the majority.  If battery technology, which includes extended range as well as quick-charge systems, makes a real breakthrough, all these ICE speculations may be moot.

[johngenx]

The boxer engine is a double edged sword for Subaru.  On the positive, it does make the driving experience terrific - low CG with great clearance, and it makes Subaru different from most makes.  The downside is that for them to share with Toyota, they're not really able to access Toyota's excellent line of V and I engines.  Personally, I think the Forester/etc should stick to boxers, but if the next Tribeca had three rows of seats and the 3.5L V-6 from the IS350 (with the dual injection system and longitudinal mounting) I sure wouldn't cry "but no boxer?"

[Solstice2006]

^ So is the Forester not capable of using any engines from Toyota.  Not that I want it to.... but just curious.  I wouldn't mind the Outback with the Toyota V6, for some minor towing, if one does not want a 3 row SUV. 

[johngenx]

^ So is the Forester not capable of using any engines from Toyota.  Not that I want it to.... but just curious.  I wouldn't mind the Outback with the Toyota V6, for some minor towing, if one does not want a 3 row SUV.

Using anything other than the boxer in the Forester would kill much of what's awesome about it.  Huge clearance and low center of gravity.  So much of the character is thanks to the engine configuration.

[Solstice2006]

^ So is the Forester not capable of using any engines from Toyota.  Not that I want it to.... but just curious.  I wouldn't mind the Outback with the Toyota V6, for some minor towing, if one does not want a 3 row SUV.

Using anything other than the boxer in the Forester would kill much of what's awesome about it.  Huge clearance and low center of gravity.  So much of the character is thanks to the engine configuration.

I hear you, so the ground clearance would be reduced? 

[johngenx]

If they kept the same clearance they'd increase the height of the center of gravity.

[Trainman]

^ So is the Forester not capable of using any engines from Toyota.  Not that I want it to.... but just curious.  I wouldn't mind the Outback with the Toyota V6, for some minor towing, if one does not want a 3 row SUV.

Using anything other than the boxer in the Forester would kill much of what's awesome about it.  Huge clearance and low center of gravity.  So much of the character is thanks to the engine configuration.

I hear you, so the ground clearance would be reduced?

A good comparison would be my wife's RAV (4 cyl) and my Forester.  The difference in clearance is substantial, with the RAV having 7" and the Forester 8.8, almost as much as my old Pathfinder.  The numbers for the current RAV are 159mm (6.3") and for the Forester 220mm (8.7").  Of interest to note is that unlike the last generation of Forester, the clearance is the same regardless of engine.  In the older one, like mine, the turbo actually had more clearance than the non-turbo due to how the exhaust is routed off the engine.

[initial_D]

The only other Mazda that would need a V6 is the next gen CX-9 but I suspect we'll see some sort of turbocharged four for that vehicle that could also be used in the 6 and in the new MazdaSpeed 3.

^^ That would make a return of the CX-7. The 3.7L V6 in the CX-9 is a Ford unit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Cyclone_engine

[OliverD]

The only other Mazda that would need a V6 is the next gen CX-9 but I suspect we'll see some sort of turbocharged four for that vehicle that could also be used in the 6 and in the new MazdaSpeed 3.

^^ That would make a return of the CX-7. The 3.7L V6 in the CX-9 is a Ford unit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Cyclone_engine

Not sure what you mean. Mazda needs a three row crossover, not another two row model.

[johngenx]

The problem with the Highlander/Pilot segment is the Highlander and Pilot.  They're well established benchmarks that make it hard to gain traction in the market.  GM has sales success and some others too, making it crowded.

BUT - yes, it's a KEY market.  Production costs are not that much more than the CUV class, but higher MSRPs mean better margins.  Healthy margins with good volumes mean a lot of $$ for the bottom line.

If Mazda can get a competitive product, it could make a big financial difference.  But, since they lack larger engines etc, it's going to mean higher development costs.  And what else can they spread those costs over?  They don't have a mini-van, etc.