|
Yen to £ issues? Subaru build in the USA - why not buy from the states rather than Japan?
(Apart from the RHD/LHD issue) - a dashboard, door panels and RHD steering gear cannnot be that difficult or expensive to ship from Japan to USA for RHD cars.
Subaru dealers seem to be dying on their feet / having 2/3 other franchises on top of the Subaru range................the Subaru UK dealers must be hurting badly as they have few models on offer and those are OTT for price.
|
Yen to £ issues? Subaru build in the USA - why not buy from the states rather than Japan?
(Apart from the RHD/LHD issue) - a dashboard, door panels and RHD steering gear cannnot be that difficult or expensive to ship from Japan to USA for RHD cars.
Subaru dealers seem to be dying on their feet / having 2/3 other franchises on top of the Subaru range................the Subaru UK dealers must be hurting badly as they have few models on offer and those are OTT for price.
LHD/RHD isn't an issue for US build because Subaru America supply the US Mail who use RHD cars.
The issue with anything US-built is the quality - if you read international forums for models built in the States and elsewhere, it seems to be universal that US-built gets far more different issues that simply never arise with Japa, Korean or European build although we do generate the odd issue!
|
|
|
|
|
The demand for diesel marked the decline for Subaru in Europe. The flat 4 is a very difficult configuration to use for Diesel. That's why they were late coming out with one-and it's not class leading either.
I wonder if converting a Toyota inline 4 diesel engine to horizontal orientation and mounting the gearbox/transfer case underneath the engine might work with the 4X4 running gear?
|
The demand for diesel marked the decline for Subaru in Europe. The flat 4 is a very difficult configuration to use for Diesel. That's why they were late coming out with one-and it's not class leading either.
I wonder if converting a Toyota inline 4 diesel engine to horizontal orientation and mounting the gearbox/transfer case underneath the engine might work with the 4X4 running gear?
Depends how you mean "work" - it would totally destroy Subaru's USP of low-mounted symmetrical driveline.
The boxer engine is Subaru's downfall - they can't share platforms, or many parts with anyone else - change the engine layout and it's just another Toyota!
It's not helped by the driveline that's now quite old - it's well-developed and reliable, much more so than the Jatco box it's originally based on, but it's not fuel-efficient.
I'm glad I had a Subaru for 3 years but I wouldn't have another and the brand should be put out of it's sufferering, sooner rather than later !
Edited by RT on 04/07/2013 at 15:27
|
Depends how you mean "work" - it would totally destroy Subaru's USP of low-mounted symmetrical driveline.
Well the horizontal orientation would differentiate it from the conventionall layout. Larger diesels are offered in vertical orientation for trucks and horizontal orientation for buses.
If the crankshaft centreline is offset from the centreline of the vehicle and the transmission sits underneath/alongside the crankshaft (but in a seperate housing!) then you end up with (I think) a reasonably low centre of gravity and a symmetrical driveline.
Another option would be to use a hybrid petrol engine and make use of the permanent 4X4 system to couple the electric motor to the rear axle.
But we don't need another badge engineered Toyota!
|
|
I doubt if many potential buyers give a fig about teh engine configuration. In fact if Subaru want to sell more cars they will have to appeal to drivers who don't care.
So a total red herring. Their USP is 4wd on everything.. And power and handling.
Except these come with a price in petrols which is unacceptable in Europe.
But the distributor is pants.
|
I doubt if many potential buyers give a fig about teh engine configuration. In fact if Subaru want to sell more cars they will have to appeal to drivers who don't care.
I don't think that's true. BMW drivers will swear blind that RWD and 50:50 weight distribution are the most important features on earth-even if it is only because BMW told them that was true!
Having a USP is important unless you're a budget brand. Look at Dyson; he's made a personal fortune of £3 billion out of selling crap vacuum cleaners that were grossly inferior to the bagged variety. He didn't invent cyclonic separation; he just convinced people that that they needed a hoover without a bag. Other manufacturers knew it was a terrible idea but ended up following suit because customers thought that's what they wanted.
|
|
BMW owners believe what BMW tell them - the ultimnate driving machine - as largely it is true. And they make some very good and very fast cars.
Subaru don't make any really fast cars that are modern..
As for Dyson's vacuums vs conventional.. my experience is directly the opposite. They are very reliable and work better than the alternatives when they were introduced. Yes, other manufacturers have caught up or surpassed them but marketing of a good product triumphs. (See BMW).
Subaru's products are outdated and their markeyting in the UK is lamentable.
|
Their USP is 4wd on everything.. And power and handling.
Handling yes - but not power, not these days - the diesel is only 150bhp and there's only one petrol turbo in the whole range.
To show just how far Subaru have fallen behind, the 2 tonne Hyundai Santa Fe has maximum speed and 0-62 acceleration times within a gnat's whisker of the Outback
Edited by RT on 04/07/2013 at 20:27
|
|
Do they still sell the Justy (same car as the Sirion and Myyi)?
|
|
Subaru's own Justy ran from '84-94.
Since then, they've rebadged various Diahatsu, Suzuki and Toyota models as Justy.
|
|
If Daihatsu had to pull out the EU due to uncompetitive pricing, there is no way Subaru could selll a rebadged version of the Sirion at sensible prices.
Subaru's range looks quite spa*** and bunched together price-wise.
|
|
It's also hurting Subaru that they only build in Japan for the whole world, apart from North America where they also build them to avoid US tariffs - unlike Honda, Nissan and Toyota would build in markets they sell into, even if models travel both ways.
|
|
I considered a Subaru for that very reason.
I bought a Daihatsu for that reason.
Japanese built vehicles are still the best in terms of build quality I have found.
|
|
I have to say I couldn't fault the build quality on the Subaru I had - apart from the Japanese Panasonic battery, knacked after two mild winters.
Having bought a Hyundai, it's easy to see which country's car industry the Koreans seek to emulate, despite their long-standing emnity.
|
|
tinyurl.com/n7w4me2
Subaru on the rise-profits rising to a record 48.5 billion Yen.
They are doing something right.
I hope they do not go down the mass production route and dilute their core philosophy.
We need difference in the industry.
|
|
I think maybe the profit is due to Subaru providing the models that the US customers want. The impression is given that the UK does not figure very highly in their marketing strategy. I have an Outback of the year before Subaru began making bigger vehicles with more bling. In the UK we don't have the roads for that kind of vehicle.
I will be satisfied with the 150 BHP engine as long as it has plenty of torque low down in the rev band. Petrol will suit me fine, I don't like the smell of diesel fuel.
|
|
Profit increase if due to the engineered fall in the yen vs the US dollar (which is strengthening anyway). was 80 yen to USD October 2012 now 96. 20% increase. HUGE impact on profitability.
Vs GBP, 128 vs 149 - 11%.. Hence Subaru price reductions on one model.
Subaru's UK importer.IM Group - made nearly 10% profit on turnover for the last published figures..http://www.worksmart.org.uk/company/company.php?id=03456018&showSubs#Accounts but this includes property .
IM Group are basically milking the market and evidently see no need to poass on any savings due to yen weakness - which would imporve sales of Subaru .
Edited by madf on 11/08/2013 at 18:56
|
|
Among Subaru owners, the UK importer IM Group is often seen as incompetent and ineffective - rather reminiscent of the time when Octav Botnar had the UK import rights for Nissan (then sold as Datsun) but preferred to line his own pocket with profits rather than develop the brand - Nissan eventually regained control and the brand has grown substantially.
In my view, Subaru will never succeed in Europe as it'll never be big enough to justify a European design studio and build models to European tastes - in the past when Subaru were building turbo-engined 4wd niche cars we could accept Japanese quirks but once they tried to move into mainstream the American influence was/is too much for Europeans - remember the ill-fated Tribeca, not that the present Impreza/Forester and Legacy/Outback are particularly attractive to European buyers.
It's very sad that that Subaru invented the crossover in '94, the original Outback version of the Legacy estate - before the Volvo Cross-Country (now XC70) in '97 and Audi Allroad in '99 - but has no real presence, numerically, in the massive boom in soft-roaders.
Edited by RT on 12/08/2013 at 09:48
|
|
The demand for diesel marked the decline for Subaru in Europe. The flat 4 is a very difficult configuration to use for Diesel. That's why they were late coming out with one-and it's not class leading either.
I can only assume that Subaru sales vary wildly around the country.
Here in North Yorkshire I see a lot of Outbacks, and they are by and large diesels. I own one, and 100,000 miles in, I still think it is great. It drives like no other diesel I have ever had, responding more like a petrol engine, and build quality has been absolutely bombproof, not to mention its ability in the snow.
Oddly enough, I wasn't thinking about th AWD so much when I got it, but since then it has snowed significantly every winter, and I have been extremely glad to have it. It works much better than other cars with supposed 4x4 capability.
The price is an issue - my model was around the £20k mark, and at that price it was very competitive. Around the £30k mark, and I think they have priced themselves into a poor value position.
Still, looking forward to the next 200,000 or so miles...
|
|
The Outback sells around 800 /year in the whole of the UK - last time I checked Subaru's total UK annual sales were under 8,000, so you'll never see a lot of any Subaru model although the owners did muster over 1,000 for the Colin McRae tribute.
A 150bhp diesel isn't class leading when many alternatives have 190-200 bhp - there were issues with the clutch on diesel manuals used for towing and the CVT automatic isn't acceptable to many would-be owners.
The diesel Outback fuel consumption is no better than big SUVs 400kg heavier whose aerodynamics resemble a brick - Subaru need to address fuel consumption as a priority.
Edited by RT on 13/08/2013 at 16:26
|
|
How much power does one really need ? I was told many years ago that the power required in day to day driving, even in onerous conditions, is only a fraction of the stated maximum maximum power. Indeed, if the engine is used too frequently at the maximum it will not last very long. The BRs are a very knowledgeable lot, myself excluded, how much power can a car tyre transmit to the ground without slipping ?
|
How much power does one really need ?
Modern cars cruise at motorway speeds on about a quarter power - I have my ScanGauge set to show power output as one of it's 4 displays (calculated of course from the fuel injected) and it typically shows 25-30 bhp even under moderate acceleration.
But a quarter of the Subaru diesel's 150 is less than a quarter of 200.
I think tyres have a torque transfer limit, rather than a power limit - some cars limit torque output in low gears both to protect the transmission and operate within thetyres limits.
|
|
RT, assuming that most cars have two wheel drive, that make 2 x 30 = 60 bhp to the ground. How does that figure for a four wheel drive ?
|
|
The 30 bhp I referred to is the engine output, normally split between the two front wheels - but can be split between the rears in poor traction conditions.
Most 4wd systems can divide maximum power/torque across all 4 tyres, when appropriate - so each wheel only needs to cope with half the power/torque that the equivalent 2wd car needs.
|
|
RT - that will go a long way to explaining the performance in ice and snow. One difficult day SWMBO and I needed to go to the shops and we drove down the avenue to where a delivery van was vainly trying to extricate itself from a patch of ice, perilously close to a car where the lady driver had been boxed in by the van. Both needed to drive up a hill covered with packed snow. I thought that I might be able to squeeze between the car and a garden wall but decided not to risk it and backed up, turned and drove back the way we had come - also up a hill covered with packed snow.
My neighbour enthusiast says that the Subaru will do anything that a Disco will do but without the fuss. I don't think he meant going off-road though.
|
|
I'd go along with the fact that a Subaru Outback will go anywhere that sensible people take their Land Rovers or Range Rovers - Solihull products do have extreme off-road capability but rarely need and even more rarely used.
|
A 150bhp diesel isn't class leading when many alternatives have 190-200 bhp - there were issues with the clutch on diesel manuals used for towing and the CVT automatic isn't acceptable to many would-be owners.
The diesel Outback fuel consumption is no better than big SUVs 400kg heavier whose aerodynamics resemble a brick - Subaru need to address fuel consumption as a priority.
Well, power is relative, and Power:Weight is often more relevant. My old Xantia used to produce 110PS, and I didn't feel it was underpowered. I don't feel that the 150PS of the Outback is underpowered either, especially as the AWD delivers it across all 4 wheels equally.
As to the fuel consumption, can we have examples please, and backed up with the Real MPG figures? According to that, the Outback is doing well, and beating the Audi A4 Allroad 2009, the Volvo XC70, the VW Passat Alltrack 2012, the Mitsubishi Outlander, BMW X3.
I'm currently running at 46-47mpg measured, and 45.6mpg over the full 100,000 miles of the car (which includes some towing). Doesn't seem too bad to me, particularly for AWD.
|
|
Well, lupus, you've got the best of me. My Outback 2.5 petrol at 76,000 miles, is giving about 25mpg, mainly around town, and surprise though it may seem, I'm satisfied with that.
|
|
|
|
|
