[rqjoe]

AscentForums.com - The Largest Subaru Ascent Forum, Community And Owner's Club!


So we all have heard about the new 2.4 (DIT) engine for the new Ascent by now.
Anyone want to conjecture about it going in the STIs?
I say it will beginning with the 2020 model year.
I also say it will have a 350HP rating:
1.2 X 268 + .1 x 268 = 348.4
That is: 20% more than the 2.0FA from displacement jump plus an additional 10% from tuning for the STI.

??????????

 

[ProZach626]

Interesting theory.

 

[zax]

If it were, it would be a dumb move by Subaru.

 

[XJman]

Highly doubt it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[zax]

I could see Subaru doing this, TBH. If so, it's a major disappointment. No innovation whatsoever. More displacement, more power. Not unique.

 

[SD_GR]

I can see them doing it also because they've made the same mistake in the past -- more displacement, more power, welcome to the year 1920 etc. Then they'll make a bunch of commercials, some about savage rallymen taking the entire Col de Turini sideways, and others about a couple of yuppies sending their daughter off the liberal arts college. They'll sell boatloads of cars -- just not to me.

 

[XJman]

I could see Subaru doing this, TBH. If so, it's a major disappointment. No innovation whatsoever. More displacement, more power. Not unique.

It will be the same engine as much as the ej207 ej257 are the same engine. I really don't see them going with anything higher than 2l

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[zax]

I really don't see them going with anything higher than 2l

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

I disagree. Just look at the forums and you'll see the type of people that will buy this car in the future. More displacement more power. It worked for Subaru in the past, why not now?

Disappointing.

 

[XJman]

People think they are rally cars. They are far more likely to buy the same engine in their favorite race cars. Since wrc requires smaller liter and many road cars have stuck with 2.0 I'm going to stick with that being the goal.

Just like everyone who buys a WRX buys a real rally car, everyone with the same displacement engine in their favorite race car owns that exact vehicle.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[rqjoe]

I see them doing it because:
- they went with a global body platform; why not engines. It is what they do.
- they put the 2liter DIT in the XT before the WRX; why not put the 2.4 in the Ascent before the STI.
- I also think they they will see it as the money making thing to do. e.g. Tesla is unique and innovative but
they have yet to make money.
- Oh, and I think they will tout it as a "smaller" STI engine with more power (2.4 vs. 2.5). They are not going larger, but in fact smaller than the current engine :thumbup:

I would be surprised if they did not do it.

 

[XJman]

I just can't see it. I won't say you are out of your mind, but I just can't fathom why they would say yes to that.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[zax]

Oh, and I think they will tout it as a "smaller" STI engine with more power (2.4 vs. 2.5). They are not going larger, but in fact smaller than the current engine :thumbup:

If this WERE the narrative Subaru global chose, it would be very embarrassing. Losing 50cc of displacement is NOT downsizing.

If the STI is outfitted with anything larger than a 2.0L, Subaru officially offers nothing interesting.

 

[SD_GR]

I see them doing it because:
- they went with a global body platform; why not engines. It is what they do.

Engine capacity is rarely free.

In many systems, if you own -- for example -- a 1,4L vehicle, then you must have funds for purchasing, maintaining, and fueling such a large engine; certainly you have more funds than someone that merely owns a 0.9L vehicle. Therefore your income taxes ought to reflect these facts, and if they don't, then something is off with your statements.

So in much of the developed world a 1,8L engine is something one finds in a large, full-size family car for the relatively affluent (like the BMW 318, for example) and most people have something less than 1,3L. A 2,5L is for smugglers, arms dealers, other criminals etc.

That's why people that ostensibly operated legally bought a Ferrari 208 with a massive 2,0L V-8, whereas only those with black money bought the 308 in that car's own domestic market.

It's also why engines that are borderline idiotic and certainly criminal, like the Wankel, were maintained well past the point that anyone rational ought to have tolerated them on this planet -- a Wankel might displace 1,4L rather than 2,0L; moreover, its fueling costs were negligible because it seldom, if ever, ran at all. It provided tax advantages.

A truly global engine, therefore, must be rationally sized and a huge displacement isn't compatible with true "global" powerplants.

 

[cwo1984]

I could see a twin turbo 2.0L DOHC motor in the next WRX and a twin clutch tranny


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[zax]

Two turbochargers on a 4cyl doesn't make sense.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[cwo1984]

They did a twin turbo on the EJ20 on the legacy out in Japan. I can't see why not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JaguarXF]

I could see a twin turbo 2.0L DOHC motor in the next WRX and a twin clutch tranny


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Many manufacturers are moving away from the DSG type of transmission, in favor of a standard automatic. The new autos are smoother to drive and have made great advances in providing a performance alternative.

 

[SD_GR]

They did a twin turbo on the EJ20 on the legacy out in Japan. I can't see why not.

The only advantage, if one can interpret it as such, to making a massive mistake is that one then has the opportunity to learn from it.

The twin turbo EJ20 isn't something about which they ought to be reminiscing fondly. Luckily the motors are now largely extinct, at least in the EU and US, so with any luck they are now the stuff of landfills.

 

[zax]

They did a twin turbo on the EJ20 on the legacy out in Japan. I can't see why not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sequential turbocharging like on the EJ20 has been largely replaced by twinscroll turbos. This is both cheaper and easier to package. Parallel turbocharging does not belong on a 4cyl because consecutive pressure pulses will be separated by 360 degree rotations of the crankshaft and will not build up enough manifold pressure to spin a turbocharger of reasonable size.

So yes... Dual turbo setups do not belong on a 4cyl

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[zax]

This is what really gets me... Everyone seems to think a dual turbocharger setup will be automatically better than a single. America right? Two has to be better than one. Smh.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk