Autocar and many others (save Danny Cobbs on this site) have said this is possibly the best of the 4 pot Diesels and is smooth and willing.
Clarkson last Sunday( amid muc sniggering at a sheepish May)
"It's a boxer isn't it (giggle)? It's the worst Diesel I have ever driven, it has no torque! Yer have to rev the nuts of it in first, get it into second and then jergergeregerger" (shakes with laughter)
So who is right people?
|
|
Does Clarkson know how to drive a diesel?
|
|
|
|
I don't believe that Clarkson has ever said anything remotely complementary about any diesel, so anything he says can be discounted.
|
|
|
Clarkson last Sunday( amid muc sniggering at a sheepish May) "It's a boxer isn't it (giggle)? It's the worst Diesel I have ever driven it has no torque! Yer have to rev the nuts of it in first
Clarkson usually denounces diesels for not being amenable to being revved hard, so he's being self-contradictory. (Quelle surprise)
But in fairness to him, he's not trying to be objective or analytical; the tools he uses are a teenage boy's sense of hyperbole and ability to shock. Clarkson is a highly-skilled entertainer who uses cars as props to keep an audience entertained by his naughty-boy persona. He does that job exceptionally well and highly lucratively, but anyone who expects his commentaries to constrain themselves to facts (or even to seek consistency) can't have been watching very carefully.
If you want a serious assessment of this (or any other) engine, look elsewhere, and enjoy Clarkson's comedy show for what it is.
|
|
|
|
The Subaru diesel is getting rave reviews in the german motoring press. Not driven one myself so can't pass comment. Now if only Subaru would do a diesel version of their flat 6 engine...
|
I've done 10 000 miles in mine. You do have to be careful with the revs in 1st or it will stall but it certainly doesn't judder or go jergergeregerger, it just stops. The torque at overtaking speeds is brilliant and I love the handling. I am getting 45 mpg around town and over 50 on enthusiastically driven cross-country runs across Scotland.
I would have my name on the list for a flat 6 in a flash.
|
|
The problem with Clarkson is that a lot of people who don't know much about cars and engines assume that he DOES know what he's talking about and so take notice of him.
|
a lot of people who don't know much about cars and engines assume that he DOES know what he's talking about...
The same is true about motoring journalists.
It's odd, when you know a small amount about a particular story, and see how badly wrong it is usually portrayed by the various media, it only serves to make you think that all that they write or say is BS.
|
I have one. Clarkson has a point in that it the Subaru does need a few extra revs than you might expect to use when pulling away but you can still drive it foot off clutch and accelerator to pootle along in slow moving traffic as with any other diesel.
He's blatantly wrong in claiming the engine (150 bhp) has no torque - it has the same as a BMW 320d with 177 bhp and and VAG 170 bhp units. This gives you excellent pick up and go from 1600 revs right through to 4500 (should you so desire) so maybe JC is unused to a diesel engine revving in this way.
JC criticising a car is IMO a good reason to put it on your short list!
|
I have one. Clarkson has a point in that it the Subaru does need a few extra revs than you might expect to use when pulling away
He could also level the same criticism at many Ford TDCi's and a handful of other diesels. They just don't drive or respond in the same way as a petrol engine, but a few minutes familiarisation is all that's needed. I find the concept of a boxer diesel intriguing, personally.
I agree, Clarkson is an entertainer, and TG is evidence of his business acumen, which most of us could significantly improve our financial status with a mere fraction of. He's also undoubtedly a car enthusiast, and a writer of considerable talent. I respect the man a great deal, but he is not even close to being a car expert. There's only one on that show (May) and his knowledge is actually the butt of one of the ongoing jokes on the series.
|
I agree with you to a certain extent: Clarkson can make me laugh but I don't go to him for a good view on cars. I personally find his writing irritates me.On cars it is usually three quarters waffle and BS and then he tries to link the car in at the end. I have his Fabia VRS article and most of it is ridiculous waffle on East European immigrants. I was given his book where he sounds off on everything but gave it to a charity shop! Just not my cup of tea at all. I have May's paperbacks and sometimes he writes good stuff but also waffles about nothing to try to raise a cheap laugh like Clarkson. TG unfotunately has become a kid's show in my opinion, hence the annual.
I admire Clarkson's shrewdness with TG shares but how much of this is down to the individual? Anyone who is lucky enough to break into television (on the entertainment side) is well on his way to a fortune. Once a celebrity you have agents getting your fingers in all sorts of pies. I know for a fact that Clarkson and Hammond are millionaires many times over. Hammond espcially must have a good agent as he is everywhere. I don't know about May, he seems less pushed commercially but I doubt he is struggling. His Myspace profile states he is earning £200,000 + a year (how vulgar I would never disclose my earnings).
As to the Subaru I am going to suck it and see but eading the webite gen on the car I doubt whether it judders as apparently the injection has been set up so if you stall the engine you don't get the brutal jerk you normally would with a Diesel motor.
|
|
I doubt very much that the myspace page is his own, probably created by someone else pretending to be JM!
|
|
|
|
I agree with the above strongly - my interest is replacing a `99 Legacy 2.0 litre petrol. We use it for towing a horse box, sometimes two up. Does this very well, but the question of moving off with the diesel is a worry. The Ford TDCI diesels are a mixture - the 2 litre and 1.8 litre diesels stall very readily - may be why failure of "Dual-Mass" flywheels is so common with those engines. But I was advised the 1.6 litre TDCI was more reliable and so got one - it`s MUCH better and no stalling problem - I could find very little difference re. performance V the 2.0 litre when I tested both - seems the TDCI 2.0 is a waste of time in a Focus.
The above is a bit off subject - but re, Subaru, does anyone know whether the diesel comes (or can be got) with a low range gearbox? This is a most important feature of the older models - if the diesel is without it, and has a gutless engine at low revs, it`s no good to me for either towing - or soft off-road purposes. I`d rather keep the old one.
Maybe Clarkson is right. Subaru would be daft to abandon their traditional "farmer`s wife" market - but are my suspicions correct?
|
|
|
|
|
The only journos I can really say know their engineering absolutely inside out now that Setright (bless him) has passed on are John Simister of Independent and everywhere (he wrote a great book on engines) and Ivor Carroll who has made a much welcome return to What Diesel (the mag he used to edit). I think both are trained engineers.
Edited by Webmaster on 28/11/2008 at 23:34
|
Alas poor Setright, I knew of him: : a man of great knowledge of excellent wisdom.
All today's journalists are buffooons,Setforth cannot waste his precious time reading their childish ravings.
|
So I have read John. If you go onto the Subaru uk webiste people and then onto the Boxer Diesel Microsite you will find a lengthy history of the development of the Boxer Diesel. They mention this DPF in the article and I wondered why the Forrester had a different unit to the Legacy.
Subaru engineers also admit to having had problems getting the torque delivery right on their prototype engines. I have read elsewhere that the engine is more petrol like than other Diesels and this has been mentioned here. Seek out the article though as it is a good read for tech heads. I think it his called Devlopment of the Boxer Diesel or something like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Better to await the Auto version of the boxer diesel due 2010
If we are still allowed to drive
|
|
I'm saving up already - I hope it's an epicyclic, not a DSG type or CVT.
|
I waited for the Legacy Diesel to arrive and was one of the first in the queue to test drive it at my local dealer. I like everything about the car, performance and economy looked fine on paper and the test drive was just to make sure there were no surprises before getting my order in. On paper there's plenty of torque (350Nm) but below 2000rpm it felt really hesitant and, well, dead really. What worried me most was that I had real difficulty getting the car to pull away quickly and cleanly from rest. I tried it over and over on a quiet back road - the only thing that worked was to give it plenty of revs before letting the clutch in, otherwise it would start to move off, die, judder-judder and then pick up. With the traffic these days, I think it is very important to be able to pull out of junctions, roundabouts etc quickly and confidently. I also tow a small caravan and low down torque is important for this too. I discussed this with the dealer, who agreed that it all starts to happen at 2-3000rpm. I felt I couldn't live with this, and didn't buy one.
I remember reading Clarkson's review in the Sunday Times just after my test drive. He put his finger on the same thing that I had found.
|
I bought one last July. The engines change markedly in character with the passing of the miles. Mine has almost 9,000 miles up and is improving all the time. The low rev power delivery improves as the engine frees up as does the fuel economy. It does seem pretty flat when new. My advise to you would be to test drive a demo model with a decent amount of mileage up and see what you think then.
This improvement has been mentioned by several diesel drivers over in the UK Legacy forum.
As far as I know, the Impreza diesel has a low range gearbox - the one in my local dealer's showrooms appeared to have (at a glance anyway).
|
Why are youbuying a diesel?
If you are doing 20K a year fine, if not, stick to petrol.
|
>>Why are youbuying a diesel?
>>If you are doing 20K a year fine, if not, stick to petrol.
noobytoogy - that is what Madvlad is doing - 9,000 miles in around 5 months. I think by last July he meant this July.
I bought one to replace a 3.0 (auto) and the mid range performance is almost as good, certainly far better than the 2.0 petrol. I'm averaging 43.5mpg whereas it was half that with the 3.0. Mine's done 15,000 in 6 months and has improved markedly in terms of mpg (up from 40), smoothness and power
I don't think it is a show stopper having to use a few extra (and that's all it is) revs when pulling away - it took me the drive home from the dealer to figure it out. The car drives off in first on tickover with no stalling and will roll along with slow moving traffic in second gear, foot off the revs just like all the other diesels I have driven.
|
Indeed I meant July just gone.
I agree that it really is only a matter of a few extra revs - I don't notice myself doing it now and I don't overrev when driving other diesels. Many cars need a slight adjustment in driving style to adjust to different biting points on the clutch or different levels of assistance to the steering or brakes so its not a unique car in that regard.
|
|
|
|
