why subaru why?

[monkeybike]

There's good info here OP.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=123369

Header and intake are the main differences.

[thomasmryan]

multi gear autos, as in 7,8 and 9 speed ladymatics, help with meeting emission/economy standards

[ermax]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Gaslighting? You are questioning your sanity?

How about you try presenting some facts hat counter what I said instead of just saying I don't understand what is written and personal attacks?

Here give this a quick read and get back to me on why you think that emissions/mileage being the issue doesn't make sense.
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-201...2012-21972.pdf

Ah come on.. that's a quick read. I'm already on page 500. Hahaha

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Gaslighting? You are questioning your sanity?

No, I'm fine. I'm pointing out that you twisted my words into something else to get a rise out of me.

Originally Posted by Tcoat

How about you try presenting some facts hat counter what I said instead of just saying I don't understand what is written and personal attacks?

I don't need to present anything. You need to reread this thread and understand that I never disagreed with anything you said about manufacturing. I never quoted you about manufacturing, and I never said anything you said about it was wrong. That's a fact.

I did question whether you knew anything about the emissions regulation that you claimed "makes perfect sense" about why Subaru couldn't put a red manifold on automatics, and it turns out you indeed did not know what you were talking about. I didn't claim to know, just like I freely admitted I'm not intimately familiar with the details of manufacturing logistics. I was just curious about the claim that emissions factored into that decision and wanted to know the answer.

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Here give this a quick read and get back to me on why you think that emissions/mileage being the issue doesn't make sense.
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-201...2012-21972.pdf

Does that document explain which emissions regs prevented Subaru from putting a red manifold on the autos, but allowed them to put one on the 6mt's? You already admitted earlier that you didn't know the specifics, but now you do and they're in a document from 2012? Which is it?

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by gtengr

No, I'm fine. I'm pointing out that you twisted my words into something else to get a rise out of me.



I don't need to present anything. You need to reread this thread and understand that I never disagreed with anything you said about manufacturing. I never quoted you about manufacturing, and I never said anything you said about it was wrong. That's a fact.

I did question whether you knew anything about the emissions regulation that you claimed "makes perfect sense" about why Subaru couldn't put a red manifold on automatics, and it turns out you indeed did not know what you were talking about. I didn't claim to know, just like I freely admitted I'm not intimately familiar with the details of manufacturing logistics. I was just curious about the claim that emissions factored into that decision and wanted to know the answer.



Does that document explain which emissions regs prevented Subaru from putting a red manifold on the autos, but allowed them to put one on the 6mt's? You already admitted earlier that you didn't know the specifics, but now you do and they're in a document from 2012? Which is it?

I replied to your statement that maybe it was a batch order. You somehow took offense to that. I wasn't twisting any of your words nor playing some imaginary mind games but simply trying to clarify a point that you did not seem to get.

I never claimed to know the specifics. Not even once so there is no admitting anything. The fact that the emissions were why the EU models did not get the new intake is well documented by Subaru. It does not take much to transfer that thought over to the California regulations which are the closest thing in North America to those EU standards.
The document outlines the requirements up to 2025 and indicates the fleet requirements. No it is not specific to the red manifold. That documentation is not going to be public.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ermax

Ah come on.. that's a quick read. I'm already on page 500. Hahaha

LOL Ya it is a beut ain't it? And to think that is one document of hundreds on the regulations and requirements.

[ermax]

Originally Posted by gtengr

Does that document explain which emissions regs prevented Subaru from putting a red manifold on the autos, but allowed them to put one on the 6mt's? You already admitted earlier that you didn't know the specifics, but now you do and they're in a document from 2012? Which is it?

I will start with saying I know nothing about the testing process but I can imagine it's incredibly expensive. Perhaps they didn't find it worth the investment for just a 25% market share. Not that it wouldn't pass but just not worth the cost/headache.

[MrSkubi]

Originally Posted by ermax

I will start with saying I know nothing about the testing process but I can imagine it's incredibly expensive. Perhaps they didn't find it worth the investment for just a 25% market share. Not that it wouldn't pass but just not worth the cost/headache.

This. Probably the same deal with EU spec cars considering how low the sales are compared to American sales figures

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by gtengr

No, I'm fine. I'm pointing out that you twisted my words into something else to get a rise out of me.



I don't need to present anything. You need to reread this thread and understand that I never disagreed with anything you said about manufacturing. I never quoted you about manufacturing, and I never said anything you said about it was wrong. That's a fact.

I did question whether you knew anything about the emissions regulation that you claimed "makes perfect sense" about why Subaru couldn't put a red manifold on automatics, and it turns out you indeed did not know what you were talking about. I didn't claim to know, just like I freely admitted I'm not intimately familiar with the details of manufacturing logistics. I was just curious about the claim that emissions factored into that decision and wanted to know the answer.



Does that document explain which emissions regs prevented Subaru from putting a red manifold on the autos, but allowed them to put one on the 6mt's? You already admitted earlier that you didn't know the specifics, but now you do and they're in a document from 2012? Which is it?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL






@Tcoat gurl u playin. u hav dis kid all in a hissy fit.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by ermax

I will start with saying I know nothing about the testing process but I can imagine it's incredibly expensive. Perhaps they didn't find it worth the investment for just a 25% market share. Not that it wouldn't pass but just not worth the cost/headache.

This could most certainly be a factor especially if the Subaru/Toyota engineers already knew that the AT would be close to or exceed the limits. At some point the cost analysis would say it just isn't worth it. Since the AT cars did get all the other improvements there had to be some very strong reason they did not do them all. We will never be privy to that info though.

[trippinbillies40]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

This could most certainly be a factor especially if the Subaru/Toyota engineers already knew that the AT would be close to or exceed the limits. At some point the cost analysis would say it just isn't worth it. Since the AT cars did get all the other improvements there had to be some very strong reason they did not do them all. We will never be privy to that info though.

But you were privy to the info. My comment was quickly dismissed though

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I wasn't twisting any of your words nor playing some imaginary mind games but simply trying to clarify a point that you did not seem to get.

You're full of shit. You conflating my "it doesn't make sense" remark and applying it to your manufacturing post so you could say I don't get it is indeed twisting my words. And again, I didn't even quote you on the manufacturing, you interjected so you could take a dig at me. Stop lying to yourself about that.

Originally Posted by Tcoat

I never claimed to know the specifics. Not even once so there is no admitting anything. The fact that the emissions were why the EU models did not get the new intake is well documented by Subaru. It does not take much to transfer that thought over to the California regulations which are the closest thing in North America to those EU standards.
The document outlines the requirements up to 2025 and indicates the fleet requirements. No it is not specific to the red manifold. That documentation is not going to be public.

Here you go again admitting that you don't actually know the specifics, yet you do know the answer. If you can't substantiate your claim, do the smart thing and move on or admit you're not sure to avoid looking like an idiot.

[gtengr]

Originally Posted by ermax

I will start with saying I know nothing about the testing process but I can imagine it's incredibly expensive. Perhaps they didn't find it worth the investment for just a 25% market share. Not that it wouldn't pass but just not worth the cost/headache.

That could be true, but that would be an accounting decision and different from what my point was. For example, you have to run a catalytic converter because of emissions regulations, there's no decision to be made about that on the manufacturer's part.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by gtengr

You missed the context. Step right up if you want though I can debate this with you idiots all day.

I didn't miss any context. You're getting emotional and I targeted you, and then you just got more emotional by claiming we are all idiots. How can I miss any of the context of your debate if I am not responding to any of your debate???