Subaru to introduce new boxer engine in 2010

By Brett Davis | September 01st, 2010

Nikkei Sangyo, Japanese business daily, has reported a new engine to be used in the Liberty sedan, Impreza and the Exiga, will be launched by the end of the year.

A spokesman from Fuji Heavy Industries – Subaru’s parent company – has confirmed a new engine will be introduced by the end of the year and that it will be 10 percent more fuel efficient than the existing engine.

No official specifications have been released, although, according to Nikkei Sangyo the new engine will be a four-cylinder boxer sized between 2.0-2.5 litres. Reports say the new engine will be developed with a serious focus on fuel efficiency, using a constantly variable transmission to improve consumption figures.

Although the engine may share similar specifications to the motor used in the current crop, the company hasn’t produced a completely overhauled engine for 20 years. Sources are also saying the new engine could be the one, or at least based on the one, that was exhibited at the 2009 Tokyo Motor Show in the Subaru Hybrid Tourer Concept.

This used a petrol 2.0-litre boxer using direct injection and a turbocharger. Other new technologies to coincide with the release of the new engine will be a stop/start system, along with the CVT gearbox and direct injection.

Subaru has always struggled when it comes to fuel economy due to the constant four-wheel drive system that uses a lot of the engine’s power. Take the Subaru WRX for example. The current model uses an average of 10.4 litres of fuel per 100km whereas the Volkswagon Golf GTI – a common rival to the WRX and in the same price range – uses an average of 7.7L/100km. The WRX is one second quicker to 100km/h though (5.9 seconds versus the Golf’s 6.9 seconds). But it will be great to see Subaru step up to the mark in this area making it an excellent all-round proposition.

There’s no denying Subaru’s four-wheel drive safety though. Almost all of the rivals don’t offer such reassurance. We’ll keep you updated with more information about the new engine as its release approaches.

smokin’R32

“and a minivan only sold in Japan called the Exiga” ahh they’ve been on sale in Australia for almost a year, this sites already done two road tests on it
t39

With Subaru becoming more and more generic in handling, dynamics and presentation (WRX excluded), I doubt that persisting with their own boxer engines will help them keep their differentiation. I’d rather see Subarus adopt an existing efficient engine from Toyota parent, and spend their budget on something like better dynamics, looks and a rear wheel drive option.

Tony Gillard

Just buy a toyota if that’s what you want mate.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1435885244 Yani Hendriawan

matched with a cvt, ugh. it makes the car sound boring to drive. no regenerative braking?

svd

There is no reason why you cannot have regenerative braking with a CVT. CVT transmissions already have engine braking and it would not take much to tap into the ECM to apply regenerative braking system to this instead of the engine braking option.
Re the Boxer engine – The only real disadvantage of the boxer engine apart from sound is that the hot engine oil takes longer to return to the sump as it has a near horizontal path and not a vertical or near vertical path as with most other engine configurations. What this means is that the oil MUST be changed at regular intervals.

Robin Graves

Boxer is a dead duck in cars, its place is in aircraft. A Boxer CVT – what an aural disaster. Bring on the flames – I dont care – I hate the noise of a boxer – sound like a beetle under a wet blanket.

Reckless1

I agree wholeheartedly.

I hate the sound of the Subaru boxer equally as much as I hate the sound of the VW air-cooled boxer. It’s worse when the bling-boys put loud pipes on the WRXs.

Why can the Porsche boxer sound so good and the Subaru so awful?

Hung Low

The extra 2 cylinders in the Porsche might be the clue your looking for!

Reckless1

I could say I’m still clueless, but you can do that Hahahaha

I heard a porsche at the track which was missing on 2 pots and it still sounded great……….

THRUTHnJUSTICE

Yeah a i30 4 speed auto in diesel is such a wonderful sounding and performing vehicle….

NOT!

Able

They want to make their range more fuel efficient? Put a 6-speed manual and 6-speed auto standard across the range (new Liberty, diesels and WRX STI excluded)! Reason I didn’t buy a (last-gen – at the time) Liberty? Only a 5-speed manual! Unacceptable!

With their very awkward styling, awful interiors and not that good value levels of pricing I fail to see why people buy any Subaru. Yes, the new Liberty is mightily conservative (and look how well Corollas sell) but for anyone who has just a little bit of interest in what they’re about to buy, any other medium-sized car (except the Epica) would be a better buy…

Tony Gillard

I agree, subaru are doing their best to ruin themselves and have a done a good job of it over the last couple of years

Kid

Really keen on this development as this will be the engine used in the new FT-86 I would assume.
greenroom

too little too late i reckon.
Alex

If people are that upset about fuel savings (the CHEAPEST part of owning a car) then perhaps a Prius or Focus econetic is more suitable for you…

You think Boxer CVT would be boring…
j

Regarding the fuel consumption vs teh Golf GTI, we\’re comparing a turbo 2.5L vs turbo 2.0L.

Obviously a bigger engine will consume more petrol.
As will a short 5th gear vs a 7th gear in the DSG.

What’s the chances it’s a rebadge of Toyota/Yamaha’s magic being done to the engine head as rumoured in the FT86?

Hung Low

The biggest factor between the fuel consumption of the Gti vs Wrx is one has direct injection with a smaller engine and is FWD, the other is conventional injection and AWD.
Reckless1

get your facts straight – the Golf GTI does not have a 7 speed DSG, it has a 6 speed DSG or 6 speed manual. The upcoming Polo GTI will have a 7 speed DSG, but not a 2.0l engine, it will be a 1.4 twincharge.

j

2.5L vs 2.0L still holds true

5th gear at 3000rpm cruising at highway speeds vs golf’s 6th gear…

Care to tell us what speed the engine is at at 100kmph? I’ve never driven one but I’d guess it’d be around 2500rpm.

And of course the polo would consume even less. The car is lighter and has an even smaller engine.

snerd

Both recent flat-six designs were supposed to be modular, creating a square-ratio engine using all the tech of the six. Why they’ve stuck with the EJ2x for fifteen years, I dunno.
TheTruth

Subaru ONLY are in business today as BigT [tm.F-0] saved them by tipping in $$$$ during the GFC,

Otherwise they would be dead as JuliusCesear [No loss]

http://caradvice OSU811

you Obviously have no clue what you are talking about!!
as the reason Toyota bought (only 10% remember)
is because Subaru is one of the most profitable brands
per unit in the world!!
Also they are one of the few manufacturers that DID still
return a profit and sales growth during the GFC!!
Subaru is doing more for Toyota than the other way around
with making them money and engineering there new boxer engine sports car for them (toyota has long been envious of Subarus boxer engine)

Hung Low

Why would Toyota be jealous about the Subaru Boxer engine when they have their relationship with Yamaha that has fruited some of their best engines during the 80′s and 90′s?
4AGE, IUZFE, 1JZGTE, 3TGTE, 2ZZGE…they got boring after that!
Subaru’s claim to fame is the EJ20!
The 1JZ Supra turbo engine is one of, if not the best six cylinder engine globally at the time and till now, nothing comes close to its inherent strenght and durability apart from Nissans RB26.

Jabba the Hutt

I have to agree on the 4AGE . Infact it started the whole mass twin cam revolution we enjoy today. There were twin cam engines in limited numbers prior but this engine ignited the twin cam mass profuction effort that we now take for granted and what an engine it was. This saw the best Corolla (around 85-86?) that toyota ever did and it went like a rocket for its time. I had the pleasure of driving one of the first cars off the line as I worked for toyota at the time.

Sadly, some of those engines you listed didn’t measure up on the road. The last celica had to be revved above 5,000 rpm to start seeing the best of it. Not good for economy and a slug in city traffic. The GT4 on the other hand was a cracker and it was a slow slide down hill from the next model on. That seems to be the way of toyota. After the 80′s they simply switched on the boring mode.

Personally I wish Subaru had continued on alone.

Hung Low

The 20 valve 4AGE was a corker, I do not know about it bringing on the twin cam revolution as Suzuki had the mighty G13b before it, Nissan had the FJ20, CA18 etc, but the Fiats and Alfas mass production models sported twin cams decades earlier!
The 2ZZGE (Celica) is a great circuit engine (i.e needs to be kept on the boil and so ideally suited to the lighter weigh Lotus!
Talking about the 80′s, I recall the Subarus back then as excellent cars, built on reliability and truly unique at the time!

MrQuick

Yep, spot on, Subaru was one of very few brands that actually grew during the GFC.

Toyota bought a share of Fuji Heavy not to save them during the GFC, they did that for technology sharing and the also wanted to get in on some of the profitability.

TheTruth, you seriously have no clue what you’re talking about.

TheTruth

@^^^^^
<MrQuick = HAS NO IDEA
<September 1, 2010 at 10:53 pm
<Yep, spot on, Subaru was one of very few brands that <actually grew during the GFC.
<Toyota bought a share of Fuji Heavy not to save them <during the GFC, they did that for technology sharing and <the also wanted to get in on some of the profitability.
<TheTruth, you seriously have no clue what you’re talking <about

Oh really, another one shooting from the hip and with NFI

Is that why the CEO of Subaru wrote this:

"Subaru CEO Ikuo Mori recently admitted in an interview that being realistic, he understands that his company would likely run into trouble without Toyota funding"

Thats actually from THIS website and posted on most motoring websites.

And again:

"Subaru CEO Ikuo Mori recently admitted in an interview that being realistic, he understands that his company would likely run into trouble without Toyota funding"

And in plane English without Toyota they would have run out of money and down the chute….

svd

Toyota bought part of Subaru and part of Isuzu when GM had a firesale because GM were in trouble over Delphi liabilities. GM’s Isuzu share were purchased both by Toyota and Mitsubishi. The distributor for Isuzu D-Max utes in Australia is owned by Mitsubishi. Subaru like Mazda are niche market players and appeal to certain types of people. They do not have the manufacturing capacity to be major players as do Toyota, Nissan, Honda and Mitsubishi (Japanese manufacturers). Niche market manufacturers are the first to feel the brunt of financial market slowdowns.
TheTruth

@^^^^^^^
<OSU811 says: [FALSE NONSENSE]
<September 1, 2010 at 10:16 pm
<you Obviously have no clue what you are talking about!!
<as the reason Toyota bought (only 10% remember)
<is because Subaru is one of the most profitable brands
<per unit in the world!!

Oh really?

Is that why the CEO of Subaru wrote this:

"Subaru CEO Ikuo Mori recently admitted in an interview that being realistic, he understands that his company would likely run into trouble without Toyota funding"

Thats actually from THIS website and posted on most motoring websites.

And again:

"Subaru CEO Ikuo Mori recently admitted in an interview that being realistic, he understands that his company would likely run into trouble without Toyota funding"

And in plane English without Toyota they would have run out of money and down the chute….

Hung Low

An up to 10% fuel reduction has been achieved by other manufacturers by the deployment of a CVT transmission alone. The fact that Subaru is claiming this figure with an all new engine with direct injection and CVT is not that special at all!
I once really liked Subaru, but they are now going down the path of Honda and Toyota, relying on past reputations to get them through whilst slowly falling behind. Either way this has to be one of the major developments at Subaru for at least the past 5 years. 4 speed autos, 5 speed manuals, bland styling has all caught up to them.

davie

agreed.

my previous comment is awaiting moderation but you spelt it out very well.

With all their bad styling, cheap interiors, refusal to implement any new technology to their mainstream cars (5 speed autos, 6 speed manuals, even though the were available), they have demonstrated a complete lack of leadership in a cut throat market.

They are living in the past when they actually had a succesful world rallying team and 4 speed autos were considered high-tech.

Companies like VW who actually introduce modern technology on mainstream models (DSG, twin chargers) must be laughing hysterically.

Save it for the track

Funn hen how the Forester for example is selling up a storm, withou discounting, not to mention Subarus have some of the best resale values of any makes, just about being best in every class they sell in.
While I agree that a more modern auto box wouldn’t go astray in them, the 4 speed auto still in use is nowhere near as prehistoric as the past offerings of Holden & Ford.
.
As for boxers being dead? Someones forgetting about Porsche…
.

Hung Low

Porsche would be dead without the Boxer!

marty

..& what magnificent engines they are.
TheTruth

@<^^^^
2 Hung Low says:
September 1, 2010 at 10:53 pm
Porsche would be dead without the Boxer!

lol

where do you dream this s/hit?

best you tell that to all the 10's of thousands of Cayanne owners

Hung Low

Are you serious or just being idiotic?
Has the Cayanne been around for half a decade?
How many motorsport titles did the Cayanne achieve?
Is the Cayanne iconic?
Does the term “Classic boxer six” mean anything to you?

Did your cooked lambs fry ever think that the Cayanne sells on the legacy held by the Porsche badge, that was founded upon the achievements of its sports cars, predominantly the ones with BOXER ENGINES!

Hung Low

edit: half a century not decade!

bangel

I might be in a gti now but i still love the sound of the rex with a well tuned exaust , and my old liberty 3.0r was a very smooth unit .
Nick K

I own a Subaru Liberty R 2ltr auto and it’s urban cycle figures are around 13.5 liters per 100km lightly driven. When I factor in the cost of 98 Ron fuel I may as well be running a Falcon, at least maintenance is cheaper. The cars range of quality issues and it’s tin foil like panels means I’m not buying another one, especially as the current lib is ugly with a hard plastic interior.

Blitzkrieg

wow,that’s extraordinary Nick there must be something wrong,my 2.5l liberty auto uses 9.5l-100km.The Liberty brochure i have at home also states you can run the 2ltr R on a minimum 95 octane petrol.