Isnt one of the main focuses from d4s, Fuel efficiency and improving low end torque figures for this engine? C&D has as much speculation and bs as subarus total claim of engineering.
In the next month of "final count down" were gonna see the greatest and most laughable claims and speculations than ever before.
Hardest time to wait is when something is so close! ie. If you really have to piss the worst part is that 2 seconds befor reaching the can!

LOL that's why most of the time, I usually do reply quote style :thumbsup:

To improve the fuel efficiency part is understandable... why they need to improve the low end tq? Subaru's boxer engine is well known for good low end tq.

Absolutely right. I'm confident with my 5200-5400 rpm guess for the torque peak if it does 170 lb-ft.

Edit... Remember that the BEAMS 3SGE managed 159 lb-ft from a 2.0L about a decade ago.

The left cylinder bank of the 911 GT3 RS 4.0 (ok, that would be a 3 cylinder).

I'm starting to get curious as to if we see different tunes for the auto and manual motors, like the Altezza (also a spiritual AE86 successor) and the RX-8...

Only if the auto trans is a POS. The Altezza auto trans was too weak to take the full torque of the BEAMS 3SGE, and the torque converter in the RX8's auto trans couldn't be spun to the full rpm of the Renesis 13B.

i sure hope not. the auto version of sporty cars always gets screwed. mazda's skyactiv auto shows how it ought to be done. shrink the torque converter and have it lock up most of the time...

I meant it in terms of more is better not that it is poor to begin with but rather to get the most out of whats available, additional torque being an awesome by product!:happyanim:

Probably because it's a 2.0 liter and not a 2.5l?

I hope not. Japanese(Nissan has stopped doing this though) automakers have a way of giving the automatic guys the shitty ass engines and I am very worried about this.:iono:

I hope both auto and manual get 200hp and the same torque, pretty much the same engine is what I mean.

This may have been said already, but 210*5252/6500=170, so we know it makes 170lb/ft at least from 4000 to 6500. I'm sure it falls flat on its face after that though. Maybe I will do some math later but I think shifting at 6500 should keep you right in the power band with a close ratio 6 speed, so it should be plenty torquey when driven properly. Of course this still all depends on the weight. 170lb/ft in a 2800 car would be pretty lame I think.

Nice ninja edit. :D

What bugs me is they have DI and Yamaha tuning and it's still basically producing decade-old SR20VE power numbers.

:(

I have 140 lbft@5k in a 2800 lb car right now so I think 30 more ft lbs@-1k sounds good to me if it's true which I think not.

I hope they aren't implying it won't have a sunroof option. I want a sunroof.