digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at gas2.org

Subaru STI: Does Diesel Mean Power and Fuel Economy?

gas2.org — It's not a huge step, but it seems that even the fastest, most powerful cars are trying to be a little more fuel efficient (especially if that doesn't mean sacrificing power).

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • retr0grade, on 03/06/2008, -8/+31I'm not sure how I feel about the way the new STI looks. If you didn't see the hood scoop, you could mistake it for a riced-out Mazda 3...
    • ChromaVita, on 03/06/2008, -13/+4The Mazda 3 looks much better than this car.
    • gegroff, on 03/06/2008, -0/+11From a biased point of view (huge Subaru fanboy), it takes a while to get used to the newer styling of Subarus. I didn't like the 2006-2007 styles at first but after a while they kinda grew on me.
      • daggah, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3As a Subaru fanboy myself, I don't like the '08 base sedan or wagon (Impreza/WRX) look. I think the flared fenders of the STi really make everything flow so much better though. There's definitely things I would change about the STi wagon, but overall I like it.
      • BeatPunchbeef, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Im with ya on the fanboy part, I have an 03 WRX myself. But Subie missed the boat on this design, actually, they pretty much faceplanted at the dock. Its a Civic/RX8/Mazda 3, completely devoid of what makes a WRC champ car a head turner on the street. Pandering to a broader market seriously hit them hard on their bottom line. They are rumored to be refacing them in '10 because of the sub-par sales. How many new Impreza/WRX/STis have you seen on the street? Not to clown your statement, but the whole Alfa-Subaru-Romeo look was piss poor too. < 2005 models is where its at.
        • dext3r, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2RX-8/Mazda3? Are you blind? How do those cars look even remotely similar?
      • GreatSunJester, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2I do not own one (kid does though) but my preference is definitely biased toward the bug-eye 02, 03 models. They had personality.
        • didgital, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1That's what I have and proud of it. They've erased any personality that made them cool. WTF were they thinking?
    • fyngyrz, on 03/06/2008, -8/+3It doesn't matter if it means power and fuel economy anyway, because in consumer terms, what it means is abother car that smells REALLY bad when you're behind it in another vehicle or anywhere near as a pedestrian. Diesel technology is actually cleaner, because the stank particulates are more easily "digested" by environmental factors, but I'll be darned if I'll drive something that smells like an old ashtray when it runs. Electric cars FTW, as far as I'm concerned.
      • omelette, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4While that may have been the case back in '82 if you'd been behind my old Volvo 240, I think you need to give diesel another chance. I haven't recognized a vehicle by smell for a number of years and I certainly don't see too many cars with their ass-ends covered in soot like mine was back in the day.
        • popfrogs, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1"and I certainly don't see too many cars with their ass-ends covered in soot like mine was back in the day"
          I work with a lady that has an 06 Jetta TDi and there's soot on it. Not to mention it sounds like a damned tractor at idle.
    • DrDabbles, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4I love my 04 STI. Wouldn't trade it for the new one, or the previous generation grill either.

      But, quite a bit or R&D has been going into performance diesel engines...as Audi has proven over the previous year. Efficient, powerful engines means more power with less fuel wasted. And the torque on the low end with a diesel is just unbelievable.

      Also keep in mind that diesel invented his engine to run on fossil, vegetable, and animal-based oils. At the time, fossil fuels didn't seem to have a strong future. Now, we can re-use fryer oils and things of that nature to not only cut down on fuel costs, but perhaps even complete two-thirds of the recycling triangle.
    • dwm1225, on 03/06/2008, -1/+5You REALLY need to catch up on diesel technology. Gone are the days of black smoke and stink. These newer diesel engines not only run quieter than a lot of your gas engines they also emit less "stink" than the gas engines as well. I truly wish we as America would embrace diesel like other countries have.
      • Antwan718, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2I embrace Diesel every day, though the downside of it is thers only one offered varitety of it legal for highway use where i live creating the demand for diesel to push the price up to 3.83 as apposed to the 3 variations of unleaded offered.
    • Valisk61, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3"I'm not sure how I feel about the way the new STI looks"

      It's as visually offensive as every other Scooby ever made. If there's one constant in the universe, it's that you don't buy a Subaru for the looks.
      • daggah, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2The appreciation for the way a Subaru looks is really an acquired taste, I'll agree (as a Subaru fan), but you gotta love the way the GC body style looked (example: 2 door 2001 2.5RS)
        • daggah, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1(And yes, I'm familiar with the fact that technically a 2-door 2.5RS is a GM8. :)
    • brufleth, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1The new Subaru hatch looks like a mazda3 and a ford focus had a baby. That's why I ran out and got an 07 before they were all gone.
      • incongruity, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1If you do a side by side comparison of a MazdaSpeed3 and the new WRX 5 door, it's hard not to see major styling similarities... yet, somehow, the Mazda does it better... and I'm a Subaru guy!
  • compulsive1, on 03/06/2008, -6/+22Too bad that the savings in fuel consumption are offset by much higher taxes on diesel fuel - at least where I live- Pennsylvania, USA.
    Last I looked regular gas goes for $3.15 and the same gas station has diesel for $4.24!
    Plus I bet the diesel engine model will carry a price premium to begin with. Double whammy makes this a non starter for me.
    • scoottie, on 03/06/2008, -0/+12Thats because here in the USA people have been brainwashed into thinking diesel cant be good
      • compulsive1, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2No, there are extra taxes on diesel that are supposed to affect big commercial vehicles. Small private diesel car owners end up paying what was not meant to be a burden on them to begin with.
        • scoottie, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Well it really doesn't make a difference since in places like California you pay 25% of the cost for each gallon in taxes on unleaded.
      • popfrogs, on 03/06/2008, -3/+2That's because diesel is worse (for people). Quoted from Edmund's, "according to the EPA, of the respiratory system cancers caused by polluted air, diesel fumes caused 71 percent of the problems. Diesel engines emit less carbon dioxide than gasoline engines, which some contend is the primary cause of the greenhouse effect. However, they expel considerably more nitrogen oxide, which is known to cause acid rain."

        Acid rain + respiratory cancers...for the win?
        • namezod, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4advances such as ULSD and cleaner more efficient diesel engines negate the disadvantages you stated. You are the typical brainwashed american scoottie is talking about
        • scoottie, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Actually diesel is on par with gas engines. as a gas engine gets "older" it emits more and more nitogen oxide and depending on the engine it can equal out somewhere between 30k and 50k miles. And with people driving a lot more these days that 50K can be reached in 2 years.

          Diesel engines emit more PM10 particles, but gas cars emit more PM1 particles. The PM1 particles are smaller than 1 micron are also more likely to penetrate into our lungs because of their size.

          BlueTEC by Mercedez
          http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/01/mercedes_t ...

          And also like is said the USA (and EPA) have brainwashed people
    • heartcoldfusion, on 03/06/2008, -1/+11Yeah, but you'll probably end up saving money in fuel economy. A good turbo diesel can get close to 50 mpg highway. They also last a lot longer than gasoline engines, and are cheaper and easier to maintain, which will again, save you money.
      • salxman12, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4diesel engines rock and i love them way more than gas but although they break less and last longer they cost way more to fix diesel mechanics around here are a little under twice as much per hour
      • compulsive1, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2That Subaru is listed as getting 35mph (hopefully mixed city/hwy). My Toyota Solara gets 27 mph mixed- that's only 23% fuel savings but the premium for diesel is more than 23%. That's on top of the extra couple thousand dollars for the privilege of driving a diesel. Like I said, it's a non starter economically.
        • Lonyo, on 03/07/2008, -0/+0Good job comparing two different cars.
          Compare a diesel Subaru STI to a petrol one, rather than a diesel STI to a Toyota.
    • rolf, on 03/06/2008, -0/+7Then that station is a rip-off, gas prices in PA are around $3.80 currently.

      http://www.pennsylvaniagasprices.com/index.aspx?fu ...

      And since diesel can be up to 40% more efficient in mpg and the motors last longer -- it actually saves money.
      • rolf, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Meant diesel is around $3.80 currently.
    • DrDabbles, on 03/06/2008, -0/+6My '04 STI gets around 20MPG combined driving...mostly highway though. In the city, it's not uncommon to see 15MPG on a good day. Considering the fact that it's not uncommon to see diesel cars getting 30-40MPG and even up to 50MPG with the same HP produced...it isn't a non-starter. You're using far less fuel (1/2 to 2/3rds) and only paying an extra 1/3 or less.

      Also of note, the WRX does not run on regular. It's a minimum octane requirement of 91. Most of us run 93. So, comparing diesel to regular here is not appropriate at all.
      • ja9ae, on 03/07/2008, -0/+191? You can't get fuel below 95 in the UK, if you've got any type of performance vehicle, most will blink warning lights at you if you don't use 98!
        Deisel is the way to go, like an idiot I switched from diesel to petrol, both cars have the same peak power output by my avarage economy has dropped from 51 to 42. Going straight back to the oily suff again next time. The servicing costs on the petrol car are higher too as it has more components to change. All the deisel ever needed was new filters.
        Also you can get some outrageous deisel cars in the EU, audi's line on V8 bi-turbo deisels are excellent.
        • gwinerreniwg, on 03/08/2008, -0/+1Octane ratings are not the same UK to US. We use a different scale for measuring octane here - RON vs. MON. 91 octane in US == about 95 UK if I recall correctly.
  • johlorax, on 03/06/2008, -3/+35Time for the U.S. to embrace diesel, no?
    • Amazetbm, on 03/06/2008, -2/+14Yeah, it is. Hybrids are a sick joke and the U.S. consumer is the punchline.
    • swiftheart, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1An article in the Feb 2008 issue of Car and Driver (Csere's column) highlights that the US has a refinery problem in regards to diesel--our refining plants are set up to maximize the production of gasoline and the diesel that comes out on the side is already accounted for. The Europeans, on the other hand, have maximized their refineries for the production of diesel (in fact, they produce too much gasoline as an unwanted side effect and send some here.)
      The result is that more diesel consumption will just increase the price of diesel and will likely make it more uncompetitive with gasoline (which has already happened over the past decade or so.) And it would take years to change refineries to the different process to maximize diesel output.
      • Zamyatin, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Yeah, you're right for a time... but refineries could change their production focus over time, and could potentially decrease the initial cost of diesel... there's way more diesel in a barrel of crude, after all...

        However, I'm interested in this comment about high taxes on diesel in PA... Why is that? Is it the trucking industry they're trying to pull revenue from?
    • webwatch, on 03/07/2008, -0/+0I own a 99 Subaru myself and applaud Subaru's decision. It is time to take a second look at Diesels in the US. The availability of low-Sulphur diesel fuel and newer exhaust technology like the BlueTec in Mercedes means that diesel cars will not have soot or smell. Also the bigger Torque and great fuel economy makes it a less expensive alternative to the Hybrids.
      In my opinion Diesel mild hybrids will beat the Gas full Hybrids hands down. For a little more details - http://www.thinkdiesel.net.
    • JupiterSSJ4, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1not at $3.90 a gallon when regular gas is 3.05
      • Amazetbm, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1Diesels get 30% better mileage than their gasoline counterparts. You're actually saving a little bit in the long run.
  • baloot, on 03/06/2008, -14/+1digg this... i also had autos related blog. visit here: http://balootisme.blogspot.com
    thanks mate...
  • ninjaberry, on 03/06/2008, -20/+2Call me when the 0-60 is under 5 seconds.
  • Katana, on 03/06/2008, -18/+3It's ugly and they called it STI (sexual transmitted infection), though STD (disease) since it's a diesel, wouldn't be good either i suppose,
    • granolajoe, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4No, I think STD would be really awesome
    • Zebceponaf, on 03/06/2008, -1/+7Go back to your hole in the ground.
  • Brinskee, on 03/06/2008, -13/+14Buried. What the hell does this have to do with an STI? Not even mentioned...
    • Slovenian6474, on 03/06/2008, -4/+2I think it has to do more with Subaru themselves since they annouced a European release of a diesel outback and legacy with a possible U.S. release down the road. A diesel in the STI would probably be a bad move that Subaru would not do in the U.S. market.
    • zephyr42, on 03/06/2008, -4/+6The longhand for the STi is Subaru WRX STi, which the article does mention the WRX.
      • icedevil6, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2it mentions the STI in the last paragraph, pictures it and it's in the title.
      • GeorgeStone2, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4But there is also a Subaru WRX.
        Without the addition of the STi.
        • incongruity, on 03/06/2008, -2/+2And the STi is 305 HP, compared to the 180 HP diesel engine they're predicting could be made -- that is to say, the diesel is missing 41% of the power of the STi -- and yet they're saying that diesel produces 40% less CO2 emissions? So, if you compare power to CO2 emissions, the regular STi scores better -- the diesel produces more C02 per HP, by their numbers. Why is this news worthy? Get closer to comparing apples to apples here and talk about the 180 HP diesel vs. the 224 HP base WRX, rather than mixing the numbers for the STi and the WRX like the article did. Of course, 180 HP is nowhere near 224 HP in the same car...hopefully the torque numbers are closer, but sitll, it isn't t likely to be close.
          • Antwan718, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1Diesel's are efficent in the way that they produce Torque, horsepower isnt really all that important in a diesel motor. Since they peak their Torque at a lower RPM than a gas motor then less fuel is needed to get the car rolling, thats where efficency comes into play.
      • Brinskee, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3The Diesel engine has nothing to do whatsoever with the STI in this article. Stupid. Lame. They added the 'STi' name to get attention. I've had a WRX wagon. It ain't no STi.
      • davidrools, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Subaru naming scheme: Impreza -> Impreza WRX -> Impreza WRX STi
        just to make it plain.
  • PavDiddy, on 03/06/2008, -13/+4I'm all about Bentleys and Hummers .. who gives a ***** about fuel economy!
  • inurb, on 03/06/2008, -1/+42Diesel = More torque and fuel economy
    Turbo diesel = even more torque and power plus greater fuel economy.
    Diesel hybrid = insane fuel economy
    Turbo diesel hybrid = I just ***** my pants
    It's a win win.
    • zephyr42, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2I think it's BMW that's been racing diesel cars for a year or 2. and winning I might add, the added fuel economy of the cars with the same amount of power (or more) but can go so much farther on a tank of fuel.
      • omelette, on 03/06/2008, -0/+6The Audi diesel has been all but sweeping the Le Mans circuit since it hit the pavement.
      • DoubleTap84, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Seat is the e in the World Touring Car Championship right now with a Diesel doing very well against the BMW overlords. Albeit at a few thousand meters over sea level where the turbo gives them a huge advantage...
      • TaintDeli, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2I think you're thinking of Audi. They've been dominating all of the major endurance races (24 Hours of Le Mans, 12 Hours at Sebring, Petite Le Mans).

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_R10
    • nentis, on 03/06/2008, -8/+0Non-turbo diesels haven't been made since the mid-80's. The only way to get power out of a diesel is to turbo it. I wouldn't expect any new car to not have a turbo.
      • salxman12, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4umm... your crazy?? please go search "non turbo diesel" in Google and look at the years of the vehicles
      • DrDabbles, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1While nentis may be wrong, the fact does remain that the more air you can compress into the cylinder of a diesel engine, the more power you produce. More so than in a turbo gasoline engine.
      • Antwan718, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1They have SuperCharger Diesels Too, and those are just insane
    • Gamer4Lyfe, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1I saw a video on TV that demonstrated some racing cars that were powered by diesel and obtained 140+ mpg while travelling at average speeds of 150mph...if that's the case then it is clear to me that diesel is certainly something that should be looked into as far as future vehicular engineering is concerned, particularly since diesel's can run on anything from diesel fuel to peanut oil or vegetable oil. There is too much possibility to ignore it.
    • talonstriker, on 03/06/2008, -6/+1I think diesel ***** up the environment...?
      • Zamyatin, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2talon -

        They smell more yeah. But I think the thing is that what they put out that makes them stink is still easier for the environment to process... fewer carbons, more particulates. Check wikipedia on this, I remember reading something there.
    • TaintDeli, on 03/06/2008, -5/+1Diesel hybrid will probably never work. Diesels will not respond well to the constant on/off nature of the hybrid engine. Man, it would suck to have to wait for the engine to prime and the glow plugs to heat up at every stoplight!
      • Fixion, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Diesels don't need glow plugs or priming once the engine is hot. Assuming that you don't sit at a light for more than 10 minutes, it will start right up.

        I believe VW is planning a diesel hybrid Golf for 2010.
  • phybere, on 03/06/2008, -18/+1More fuel efficient, yes.

    Better for the environment? Probably not.

    There's a lot of sulfur, etc, in diesel so it's not nearly as clean for the environment.
    • skippyatuw, on 03/06/2008, -0/+11Wow, somebody missed the new diesel full boat
    • ePuck, on 03/06/2008, -9/+0Stop spreading lies. Diesel is horrible! Diesel jeans though.. that's a different story.
    • nentis, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3Sulfur was heavily reduced in 2007, and non-blended biofuels eliminate sulfur while providing more lubrication for injection parts. My diesel has been sulfur free since 2003.
    • BionicPimp, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1there are low sulfur diesel fuels out there...but the big win is that bio-diesel has almost no sulfur in it. The best place to sequester carbon is in your fuel.
    • DoubleTap84, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1cough BIODIESEL cough
    • DrDabbles, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Biodiesel has no sulfur, which is good. However, that doesn't solve the carbon problem. But, at double the MPG of a gasoline engine...a diesel is doing far better than a normal car. Also of note is that far less energy goes into refining diesel versus gasoline. So, you save much carbon there as well.

      I still say fuel cell FTW. Nothing beats the torque curve of an electric motor.
      • fgsfds, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1Fuel cell vehicles are currently at less than 5% total system efficiency.
        Battery and ultra-capacitor vehicles are currently at about 65% total system efficiency.
        Do you see the problem here?
    • scoottie, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1http://www.clean-diesel.org/
  • gramophone, on 03/06/2008, -6/+0Could they have picked a worse acronym?
    • ePuck, on 03/06/2008, -2/+0You're right. This just in new Subaru STD!
  • itsgotyou, on 03/06/2008, -2/+11diesel power blows your mind drastically; fantastically.
    • aspec, on 03/06/2008, -6/+1I bet you work for a newspaper, don't you? Maybe marketing?
      • nbcaffeine, on 03/06/2008, -0/+6or he listens to prodigy, who have a song entitled "Diesel Power"
    • afex, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1it has to be, automatically, check it out you better work it out, change to another route

      (is that even right? i haven't heard that song in forever...)
  • Ansible, on 03/06/2008, -1/+16The only thing this article has to do with the STI is having the picture. the engine is going into the regular impreza. They just wanted the picture because the STI attracts more attention to this blogspam.
    • incongruity, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4They compare the CO2 emissions from the 180 HP diesel to the emissions from the STi and claim the diesel to be 40% less -- amusing that it's also 41% lower powered than the 305 HP STi...
      • audioclass, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Diesel engines are a different type of power. Horsepower is directly related to torque at a certain RPM. Diesel engines do not revolve as quickly as gasoline motors. You are looking at a max rpm of maybe 2500 vs 6500(or whatever the STi has). Because of the formula used to resolve horsepower ratings, lower RPMs give it a lower horsepower rating, when in fact the actual power of the motor(torque) will be much higher than what the STi currently has. What you feel when you step on the gas is torque. Horsepower simply relates to how long the motor can hold that torque rating up to a certain RPM. Since the motors rev slow on a Diesel, it simply means that the differentials will use much lower gearing.
        • incongruity, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Wow. You utterly smear physical concepts there torque and HP are different things, yes, but HP is HP -- it's measured the same way, regardless of the auto engine and that's at the crank output. Note, of course, that's different still that the HP that makes it to the road because of drivetrain friction. HP is one measure of engine performance -- torque is more often a more useful one and one that people note more in driving, but your post does a fine job of really obfuscating the difference. Note, also, that if they'd given torque specs for the 180 HP diesel version, I would have made that comparison as well. Blame the original authors for not posting specs -- but don't do what you did above and bastardize the concept of power. Torque != power and it's not "a different type of power" sheesh.
        • Antwan718, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1My truck redlines @ 3200 RPM peak torque of 555 Ft. Lb is @ 1400 RPM
  • mattnyc99, on 03/06/2008, -1/+5THE CASE FOR DIESEL: http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_car ...
  • ChrisWickenscom, on 03/06/2008, -10/+2My 07 Altima has 175hp and gets 47mpg...
    I dont get the hype here.
    • antechinus, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5Does it really? I bet not, you don't get the phsyics. The 175hp figure is for the engine running at maximum RPM (i.e at the redline) at wide open throttle against a load, at which point it would not be getting anything near 47MPG - more like 8MPG. ( Power is the engine's torque * RPM).
    • TaintDeli, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1According to Edmunds it is 32-34 highway for the 2.5, and 42 mpg city for the hybrid (but the hybrid has 158 hp)...
  • RuckusNutz, on 03/06/2008, -10/+7WTF?? They are talking about a 148 hp engine. Then they say something about tuning to 180 hp. Then they throw STI in the sentence. I thought the STI had around 300hp. Nothing with 180 hp is going to be labled as an STI. this ***** article is retarded and lame. In retrospect if this motor makes the same torque as a 300hp gasser, we may have something worthy of the STI branding. But no self respecting ricer is going to drive a diesel that redlines at 3200 rpm. IMO of course
    • bcm79, on 03/06/2008, -0/+6"self respecting ricer"

      Oh, I laughed.
    • jrowny, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3easily tunable to 180hp... that means just software. A bigger turbo, nozzles, and you'll probably get 220hp out of it easy. What do you get with a diesel making 220whp? WELL over 300ft.lbs of torque.
    • rotten777, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5You need to pay attention to torque and not horsepower. Turbo diesel engines are loaded with torque.
    • antechinus, on 03/07/2008, -0/+2There is nothing wrong with an engine with a red line at 3200RPM if it has a ***** load of torque. Mated with the correct transmission it could provide ear pinning acceleration.
  • punchinelli, on 03/06/2008, -5/+7I'm really saddened to see the latest Evo and STi be slower than their previous generations. the Evo X is apparently slower than the IX - same with the latest STi. I don't know if this has anything to do with the fuel economy issue or what, but either way, it's depressing. Yeah yeah, the new Evo can "turn much sharper" and boast "better lap times" because of its revolutionary suspension and all this mumbo jumbo, but 0-60 in 4.4 seconds was something you could just flat out brag about. "My car can turn much, much sharper than yours - and much more stable as well!" just sounds pathetic.
    • tgui, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2You need to factor in the fact both manufacturers are working with completely different platforms from their previous iterations. I say give em a couple years and both the EVO and STi will be holding their own and surpassing the older models.

      Then again, why not have a relatively sane release to the public, and let the gear heads tweak them as they see fit.

      Ohhh, and because I'm proud, I own an 04 STi. Sways, endlinks, springs, exhaust and methanol injection make her tons of fun. Best part of the EVO and STi are their tweakiness (not a word, I know) :) :)
    • PhantomRogue, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1They were made slower because people are scared of the fuel economy. They could keep jamming more HP, Torque and turbo enhancements into the Car, but you would most likely lose on fuel economy. So they decided... a touch slower or brag about being a more fuel efficient car than its previous generation... They went with the safe tactic. (Note: I wish they went the otherway since people dont buy Evo's and STi's because they want to be fuel friendly).
    • InsaneOni, on 03/06/2008, -2/+4I'm sorry, but 0-60 times are meaningless. Who cares how fast these cars are on a drag strip, They're designed to perform on the track. That's like saying a Ferrari 360 is slow for posting mid 13 sec quarter mile times (which my old Honda CRX could do, yes it was swapped). Track racing is the pinnacle of automotive performance, if it wasn't, maybe you'd see Ferrari actually sponsoring something else.

      Those of us who actually know how to drive want better handling not 0-60 times.
      • punchinelli, on 03/07/2008, -0/+2You are the exact type of person I am talking about - saying "those of us who actually know how to drive want better handling not 0-60 times" just sounds pathetic.

        There are plenty of us out there that know how to drive but want a faster 0-60 time. Stop being a car snob. Some of us don't worship the track every weekend and want our thrills in every-day driving - and most of the time, it's beating Cobras and white-trash Z28s at a stop light, not "out cornering them"

        "Oh man, you had me on the take off, and um you had me up to 40 MPH, and you had me up until 60 and 80, but man get us to the track and you are in biiiiig trouble mister!!!!!!" Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. All I'm saying is that before, Subaru and Mitsubishi had cars that would stomp asses into the ground on a drag strip AND a road course - now they are shifting to a road course-exclusive mindset - and I don't like it.
    • DrDabbles, on 03/06/2008, -2/+4Tell that to a rally or non-oval track racer. In fact, my STi can wail on several cars that cost more than double what I paid on a track or road course. While some (you, I suspect) feel that going real fast in a straight line for a quarter of a mile is cool, these cars are the platforms for the manufacturer's race cars. Turning, stopping, AND go'ing are all important together...and when you finely balance those characteristics, you get a winning car.
    • brufleth, on 03/07/2008, -0/+3The new Impreza platform was designed to have more mass appeal. Too many people bawked at the rather unusual look of the previous generation Impreza so they made it more subdued. It has a smoother ride, it is wider, etc etc. I've wanted a WRX for a while and was very interested in the 08 restyling until I actually saw it and then when I saw the stats on it I went and got one of the last 07 hatch WRX around. The 08 WRX lost a second off the 0-60 and it looks much more boring.
    • Ansible, on 03/08/2008, -2/+1What I liked best about the previous EVO was the handling. That's something that's pretty tough to do - make a car really feel balanced. Motor horsepower is a lot easier to improve, and the EVO motor is very responsive to tuning.
  • gegroff, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Sweet!!! That means that I'll be able to get my hands on a Turbo Diesel Boxer to put in my 2000 RS. I was hoping they were going to bring these to the US.
    • Kancer978, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1You won't see this in the US until maybe 2012
      • gegroff, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1I can wait. I can put another 100-150 thousand miles on my current engine. Of course that might not matter if I have to sell myself on the streets to pay for enough gas to get home.
  • Fixion, on 03/06/2008, -2/+1It's about time!

    Now we just need diesel-electric hybrids.
  • AlanCayce, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4I love my Subaru. I have a 93 legacy hatchback, I've put over 185k miles on it, and never had a problem. Regular scheduled maintenance, and on time oil changes. And when my wagon eventually dies (Hopping for another 50k), I will happily buy another. Even happier if its a diesel.
  • roguewriter, on 03/06/2008, -4/+3In 1983 my best friend had a diesel VW Rabbit that got just over 50 mpg. Glad to know we've improved things so much in 25 years.
    • tgui, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Because that Rabbit had clean emissions, structural integrity, airbags, AC, etc......
  • FF939606, on 03/06/2008, -6/+1Could not agree more with this ! www.raceweapons.com is planning to be a big part of sales with the TURBO diesel Sti model if it happens
    Diesel = More torque and fuel economy
    Turbo diesel = even more torque and power plus greater fuel economy.
    Diesel hybrid = insane fuel economy
    Turbo diesel hybrid = I just ***** my pants
    It's a win win.
  • bnuk013, on 03/06/2008, -5/+0Yes, in an AWD car of that size a well tuned diesel might get 45-50 mpg.
    Yes, a well tuned 4cyl. turbo diesel could get you 180hp.

    But you will not get both of those things out of the same motor.
    • puter, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2hp does not matter nearly as much as torque
      • DrDabbles, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4Be very careful with that statement. I've seen gun fights start this way. :-P
  • dizilbdog, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2This is good because with diesel you can then hook it up to run bio diesel, and make your own fuel if you want sometimes. I really think American's have to look again at diesel cars, they are not like they use to be. They aren't just for trucks or school buses.
  • jrowny, on 03/06/2008, -0/+7The VW TDI has been easily achieving 160bhp by upgrading software/nozzles and 180-200bhp with upgraded turbos/bolt ons for many years! All while maintaining better gas mileage than most hybrids. Hybrids loose their fuel efficiency at highway speeds but a diesel is efficient all the way around (city and highway). In Europe, a VW Lupo TDI can get well over 70mpg. VWoA should bring diesel rabbits and lupos to the USA.
  • davidrools, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1This is the only diesel I want
    http://autospeed.com/cms/A_2823/article.html
  • Ryan0617, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Can someone explain to me why we need cars that can do 180mph when we will never drive at that speed? Or why we need to be driving 4x4 in the city centre? I had a friend of a friend say that she needs a 4x4 because she has a bad back! Change the damn seat no the car. I also had someone say they needed a 4x4 because they have a large family, 3kids. You can fit 3 kids in a standard car. Some people will go at anything to justify the need for one.
    • DrDash, on 03/06/2008, -0/+24x4, I dunno. As for top speed, its a measure of a cars performance. A car that can do 140 can easily do less. A car that can do 90 is working hard at 75. Basically it a side result of making the car capable at lower speeds, and trust me the Impreza line (WRX, STi) is not BUILT for top speed but is a result of their good performance.
    • DrDabbles, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2I drive my STi at around 130-140MPH. On a track. I just happen to also use it as my daily driver because I love it that much. Build me an electric car that goes 0-60 in 4.6 seconds, has a 300 mile range, and is all-wheel-drive, and I'll talk about it. Until then, battery technology does not recharge fast enough and has not been developed enough to make it worth my while. It's just that simple.
    • mgromer, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3I use my 4x4 a lot in the winter here in Utah and I've used it downtown in the city center. 4x4 in the snow makes life a lot easier. The people you talk to that say they need 4x4 are probably just talking about needing SUVs. Yeah, you can fit the kids in a Civic or Accord, but you can't fit the dog and all the camping supplies in it.
      • Kido1986, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Yeah, over in Europe SUVs are referred to as 4x4s so he meant SUV. Station Wagons (Estates if you will) are nearly as versitle and much more economical, and they handle better. People insist on SUVs to feel better about their small penis/breasts.
        • BigATB, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1I have an SUV to get to work, I'm an EMT and if someone calls 911 in the middle of a snowstorm I need to get to the ambulance, people tell me i could do it in a subaru or an audi AWD sedan but here in Vermont we measure our snow in feet and a car like that would be swallowed whole :)
  • katorga, on 03/06/2008, -2/+2AWD is a huge boon to safety on rainy streets. I have no idea why a 180mph car is needed in the US, but acceleration is always nice for defensive drivers. Diesel is the way to go, especially combined with bio-fuels. The original diesel engine was designed to run on peanut oil, but moved to waste product of gasoline production due to the availability.
    • bani, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1awd helps you go, it does not help you stop or turn.

      awd does virtually nothing for safety.

      for safety, DSC + TC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AWD
  • orvtech, on 03/06/2008, -1/+7so.... NASIOC FTW !
  • talonstriker, on 03/06/2008, -6/+1pollute the environ ftw!
    Last time i checked, it was more polluting than petroleum.
    • rotten777, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3Check again homeboy.
    • altcountryman, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4Maybe that's because the last time you checked was 1977?
  • aserer511, on 03/06/2008, -4/+1won't happen. who wants ab entry level sport sedan that redlines at 5k?
  • evodevo1, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3Guys, remember diesel fuel itself has more energy per unit of volume than gas and that in turn has more energy than ethanol. You are going to get more miles to the gallon just by the mere fact that it packs more energy in every gallon.
  • kd1s, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2The problem is that here in the U.S. diesel is now more expensive than gasoline. This strikes me as somewhat odd because in the cracking and refining process, diesel aka #2 fuel oil is much easier to separate than gasoline which is collected further up the column and requires more processing.
    In RI right now gasoline goes $3.05 a gallon, diesel is $3.42 a gallon and home heating oil is $3.51 a gallon. The difference between the last two is 9 cents but in reality, it's more since the diesel fuel carries 48 cents worth of taxes on it that the home heating oil doesn't.
    So if we back out taxes we get:
    Gasoline: $3.05 which is $2.57 per gallon
    Diesel: $3.42 which is $2.94 per gallon
    Home Heating oil: $3.51 a gallon.
    Tell me who is getting screwed here?
  • Dezelon, on 03/06/2008, -3/+1hey bro NICE VAN!
  • beersnob, on 03/06/2008, -1/+0A little math....Using current prices, diesel is $3.70/gallon in TX and gas is $3.05. Assume the diesel Impreza gets 45 mpg and the gas gets 25 mpg. Assume the diesel engine will be a $3000 premium over the gas engine. With these numbers, it will take 36,000 miles of driving to recoup the extra engine cost and the higher fuel prices. Now, if more diesels start arriving in the US, the demand for diesel will increase while the supply is going to remain about constant (our refineries have a pretty fixed ratio of gasoline/diesel produced per barrel of oil). So the price of diesel is going to increase more than the price of gasoline. I don't see a huge advantage here.
  • KompressorV12, on 03/06/2008, -2/+1I don't give a *****, the first images of the 08 impreza came out on april fools, i thought it was a joke for a good week after... I can't see subaru keeping these ugly looking pieces of ***** bodies for another year... but one can hope... at least they are faster and have better interiors than the previous imprezas, not even close enough of a reason for me to purchase one with how awful the exteriors look
    • brufleth, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1The 08 impreza lost a second off its 0-60. They have also never been beauty queens. They're an aquired taste. I don't like the newer more Prius/Mazda3/Focus look though.
  • yourpalOZ, on 03/07/2008, -5/+0WHAT WERE THEY THIKING? That boxer Diesel motor will blow up before it has 50k on the clock. What the heck does Subaru know about Diesel engines. Thier gas engine sounds like a diesel so this one should be louder.This one will be just like the 1980s motor GM made. I do expect if it survives it will be a good one in 5 years.
  • petermoffat, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1I drive a BMW 320diesel, and it get 17km/l on the highway, around 13 combined. 330Nm and awesome fuel economy make me a happy boy:) Also, the 330d has 500Nm, that's as much as an M5, so stop whining about performance!
  • kansai22, on 03/07/2008, -1/+1STI fastest most powerful lies. Its a great car but lets not make things up here.
  • GreenMatters08, on 03/08/2008, -1/+0GREEN MATTERS: We are the change we’ve been waiting for!

    PURPOSE: The “Green Matters” event is a grassroots organized one-day mass donation with the sole purpose of bringing the ENVIRONMENT into the forefront of the 2008 Presidential race.

    HOW IT WORKS: The “mainstream media” has proven in this election cycle that they will cover how much money the Presidential candidates can, or have raised. Therefore, a massive donation organized around environmental issues, by individuals concerned with the state of the planet, and on a nationally celebrated day of environmental awareness (Earth Day) will penetrate the national dialogue, once again moving the environment to the forefront of Presidential politics.

    WHO BENEFITS: Everyone benefits when our environmental problems are discussed on a national stage, therefore anyone concerned about the future of our planet is encouraged to participate in this event regardless of race, age, gender, or political affiliation. However, this event has been organized by independent grassroots supporters of Barack Obama and all donations benefit the Obama campaign. As President, Barack Obama will reduce carbon emissions, encourage developments in clean energy, support next generation biofuels, work to gain oil independence, improve energy efficiency in buildings and restore U.S. leadership on climate change.

    By making the Green Matters pledge, you will receive an e-mail reminder the day of donation, Earth Day – April 22nd, 2008.

    You are the change the Earth’s been waiting for…make the pledge now at www.envirobama.com/greenmatters and on Earth Day 2008 tell the world that Green Matters!

    Visit www.envirobama.com for in-depth discussion about Barack Obama’s environmental record and policy proposals.
  • Deathrideshorse, on 03/12/2008, -1/+0Petition:
    We, the undersigned, call on the Governments of the world to use some common sense when distributing Energy subsidies.

    Why must the taxpayer subsidise the largest cause of man-made Global Warming(Fossil Fuel electricity generation) whilst alternative energy solutions such as Solar Thermal are forced to struggle?

    Why must the consumer be asked to pay extra for "Green" Energy when his/her taxes are subsidising the very antithesis?

    We, the undersigned, are not impressed with such hypocrisy.

    http://www.gopetition.com/online/17583.html
  • lolo2007, on 05/19/2008, -0/+0AWD is a huge boon to safety on rainy streets. I have no idea why a 180mph car is needed in the US, but acceleration is always nice for defensive drivers. Diesel is the way to go, especially combined with bio-fuels. The original diesel engine was designed to run on peanut oil, but moved to waste product of gasoline production due to the availability.

    http://girls.paramegsoft.com/category/2/2
    http://girls.paramegsoft.com/category/7/7
    http://girls.paramegsoft.com/category/1/1
    http://dir.paramegsoft.com/
  • ypoimla, on 05/20/2008, -0/+0Too bad that the savings in fuel consumption are offset by much higher taxes on diesel fuel - at least where I live- Pennsylvania, USA.
    Last I looked regular gas goes for $3.15 and the same gas station has diesel for $4.24!
    http://tablets-rx.com
  • method55, on 09/18/2008, -0/+0Subaru is releasing two more diesel vehicles to their european lineup:

    http://wrxfanatics.com/blog/2008/09/fhi-bringing-t ...
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.