why subaru why?

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Clipdat

Right. But I'm less wrong than you are.

Nuh-uuuuuhhh

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by venturaII

'You are doing it wrong'. As a contraction, that would be 'you're doing it wrong'.

*Whoosh*

[venturaII]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

*Whoosh*

Yup. Still have no idea.

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by mav1178

Emissions makes sense, period.

Give the amount of cheating VW was caught with (and the fact that it was a WV lab contracted to do real-world testing for EU diesel standards using CARB methods), every automaker moving forward doesn't want to get caught with anything resembling an emissions cheat, even if it was close.

Perhaps CA regulations prevented rest of NA from getting upgrades, but CA regulations also caught the biggest emissions cheat in history. I'm okay with that.

We're going to have to agree to disagree. The switch from a composite intake to aluminum on a car that gets +30 mpg is just not a big deal from an emissions output perspective, and it's a far cry from circumventing emissions testing with ECU trickery. If emissions stopped them from putting the red intake on automatics, why didn't it factor into the tS? The extra emissions due to stickier tires and the drag of a wing are far worse than what would happen with a mildly different intake on an automatic.

[MRCA1ST]

Originally Posted by gtengr

If emissions stopped them from putting the red intake on automatics, why didn't it factor into the tS? The extra emissions due to stickier tires and the drag of a wing are far worse than what would happen with a mildly different intake on an automatic.

Starting to seem like I was right all along

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by gtengr

We're going to have to agree to disagree. The switch from a composite intake to aluminum on a car that gets +30 mpg is just not a big deal from an emissions output perspective, and it's a far cry from circumventing emissions testing with ECU trickery. If emissions stopped them from putting the red intake on automatics, why didn't it factor into the tS? The extra emissions due to stickier tires and the drag of a wing are far worse than what would happen with a mildly different intake on an automatic.

The material of the intake alone doesn't matter there were more changes than just what it was made of. Why else would they make all of the same engine changes as the MT but leave the intake?


Notice that the tS is only available in MT.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by Aluma007

anyone know why the Ts, PP package or the new improved engine (red manifold) are not available in the automatic?

Same reason you don't put racing components on a bike with training wheels.

[funwheeldrive]

It was probably already mentioned earlier, but what was the reason that Europe didn't get the revised engine at all? Wasn't it for emissions reasons?

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by gtengr

If emissions stopped them from putting the red intake on automatics, why didn't it factor into the tS?

https://www.subaru.com/vehicles/brz/...-wrapper-modal

Because it didn't have an AT option.

As for the rest... if it was just intake, fine, but the header was also changed along with ECU tuning.

It's not just a material change on the intake.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

It was probably already mentioned earlier, but what was the reason that Europe didn't get the revised engine at all? Wasn't it for emissions reasons?

Yes and yes.

Originally Posted by mav1178

https://www.subaru.com/vehicles/brz/...-wrapper-modal

Because it didn't have an AT option.

As for the rest... if it was just intake, fine, but the header was also changed along with ECU tuning.

It's not just a material change on the intake.

Yep! The whole intake system was changed.


Not sure why everybody wants to try and find some hidden, weird, mysterious ulterior motive for the changes when emissions and mileage is right there in their face.


Look at the NOX on the auto vs the manual.
The other numbers are lower but what would the new intake system have done to them?

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

The material of the intake alone doesn't matter there were more changes than just what it was made of. Why else would they make all of the same engine changes as the MT but leave the intake?

Notice that the tS is only available in MT.

Yes, there were a couple of mild changes. Still, the emissions of an AT with red intake are not going to be greater than those of the tS.

Originally Posted by mav1178

https://www.subaru.com/vehicles/brz/...-wrapper-modal

Because it didn't have an AT option.

tS emissions would still be greater than an AT with the red intake.

Originally Posted by mav1178

As for the rest... if it was just intake, fine, but the header was also changed along with ECU tuning.

It's not just a material change on the intake.

All cars worldwide including AT's got the new header and ECU (and a few of the other changes).

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by gtengr

All cars worldwide including AT's got the new header and ECU (and a few of the other changes).

This is false though, right? Europe didn't get the new header for either the automatic or manual.

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Not sure why everybody wants to try and find some hidden, weird, mysterious ulterior motive for the changes when emissions and mileage is right there in their face.

Because there are plenty of passenger cars on the road generating more emissions than an AT 86 with the intake would while also meeting Euro 6.

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

This is false though, right? Europe didn't get the new header for either the automatic or manual.

I'm just referencing the Subaru document that describes the 2017 changes. If it's wrong then it's false, but I don't have any other references handy. The page previous to the one I've attached describes the other changes (intake, block, etc.)