That engine though. Where will it sit among the great 4cyl NA's?

[pallen]

Originally Posted by alex87f

Its engine would be loved, and there would be none on the road, because it would have been priced in the high 30's and very few people would have bought it.

I think it would have sold ok, but you are right, it would not be as popular as what we have seen. It very possibly would have not sold well enough for us to be seeing a second gen coming in 2022.

But the critics would have loved it.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by alex87f

-if you compare the torque curve to, say, an S2000, even at the lowest point of the dip, the 86 still has more torque. Granted, having more torque than an S2000 is hardly an achievement, but it help put in perspective something that might be exaggerated

IMO the entire non-VTEC rev range of the S2000, up to 6000rpm, is one big torque dip! It never bothered me though, as I was always sub-VTEC for "normal" driving on the street and didn't care, and always >6000rpm and in VTEC at the track, and occasionally on the street when needed/wanted acceleration.

Same with 1st-gen FT86 powerband. There's a dip, but for the way I drive on the street and at the track, it just doesn't bother me. Increased displacement n.a. was always my preference for the new '22, and it looks like they've done a great job of keeping it rev-happy while practically eliminating the "dip" that annoyed so many peeps, and giving an average +20% more torque throughout the rev range. I look forward to driving it

[alex87f]

So do I. But in the meantime, I have a test drive of the new 4wd Yaris GR scheduled in a little over a week

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by alex87f

So do I. But in the meantime, I have a test drive of the new 4wd Yaris GR scheduled in a little over a week

Lucky you.

They aren't doing any test drives where I am, no showroom stock anywhere in Australia.

All sold out into mid next year, no indication yet of more stock.

[Baldeagle]

Originally Posted by alex87f

Its engine would be loved, and there would be none on the road, because it would have been priced in the high 30's and very few people would have bought it.

I think the torque dip is "misunderstood" for two reasons:
-it's half a dip, but the other half is there's a torque "spike" around 3000 rpm that makes the dip feel more pronounced
-if you compare the torque curve to, say, an S2000, even at the lowest point of the dip, the 86 still has more torque. Granted, having more torque than an S2000 is hardly an achievement, but it help put in perspective something that might be exaggerated

Yes. It's the shape, not the size that matters here. In daily driving we probably use between 30 to 50 lbs-ft. of torque to accelerate, far less than what is available at 100% throttle, even at the lowest point in the torque dip. Therefore it is not a lack of torque anywhere on the 2.0's curve that creates a problem. As you stated, the problem at 4,000 rpm is that acceleration feels dull relative to how it feels at 3 and 5 thousand rpm, given a steady throttle.

This raises a potential concern. If the 2.0 requires 40% throttle to generate that 30-50 lbs-ft. of torque for daily driving, the 2.4 may require only 30-35% throttle for the same rate of light acceleration. But if the 2.4's torque dip drops by the same percent, it may still have the same relative dullness at the dip, given a fixed throttle position. Let's hope Subaru put that extra displacement to better work smoothing the torque at curve.

[albert]

Originally Posted by Baldeagle

This raises a potential concern. If the 2.0 requires 40% throttle to generate that 30-50 lbs-ft. of torque for daily driving, the 2.4 may require only 30-35% throttle for the same rate of light acceleration. But if the 2.4's torque dip drops by the same percent, it may still have the same relative dullness at the dip, given a fixed throttle position. Let's hope Subaru put that extra displacement to better work smoothing the torque at curve.

This reminds me... when I started using the app and can see the throttle response, my '13 BRZ has this vague initial throttle response, the 0-20/30%. But after that, it's spot on. Also, once the car pass 4K+ RPM, the response becomes fast/accurate.

Part of its 'econo-box' nature?

[alex87f]

Originally Posted by Baldeagle

Yes. It's the shape, not the size that matters here. In daily driving we probably use between 30 to 50 lbs-ft. of torque to accelerate, far less than what is available at 100% throttle, even at the lowest point in the torque dip. Therefore it is not a lack of torque anywhere on the 2.0's curve that creates a problem. As you stated, the problem at 4,000 rpm is that acceleration feels dull relative to how it feels at 3 and 5 thousand rpm, given a steady throttle.

This raises a potential concern. If the 2.0 requires 40% throttle to generate that 30-50 lbs-ft. of torque for daily driving, the 2.4 may require only 30-35% throttle for the same rate of light acceleration. But if the 2.4's torque dip drops by the same percent, it may still have the same relative dullness at the dip, given a fixed throttle position. Let's hope Subaru put that extra displacement to better work smoothing the torque at curve.

Well the torque curve we've seen on the integrated display of the '22 car shows no sign of a dip. We'll have to see dyno runs to confirm this, but it's a good sign it might be gone.

[Sport-Tech]

Originally Posted by alex87f

Well the torque curve we've seen on the integrated display of the '22 car shows no sign of a dip. We'll have to see dyno runs to confirm this, but it's a good sign it might be gone.

It’s hard to see any possible rationale Subaru could have for lying about this - they’d have to know the auto media would go into a feeding frenzy if they did, it’s just not worth the damage to their image. They obviously came to that conclusion with the current car, given the striking dip in the torque curve on its IP.

[Blighty]

Originally Posted by albert

This reminds me... when I started using the app and can see the throttle response, my '13 BRZ has this vague initial throttle response, the 0-20/30%. But after that, it's spot on. Also, once the car pass 4K+ RPM, the response becomes fast/accurate.

Part of its 'econo-box' nature?

There is a reason I recall being told why throttle response was poor from idle. Can't for the life of me remember. Probably to do with emissions.

Fortunately once you get off idle, response is typically sharp as per any NA.

[mrg666]

Are those manual transmission fanatics, the same people who cannot figure out that the way out of torque dip is just a downshift away? Low rpm torque is their most wanted feature, next to manual transmission

[new2subaru]

Originally Posted by mrg666

Are those manual transmission fanatics, the same people who cannot figure out that the way out of torque dip is just a downshift away? Low rpm torque is their most wanted feature, next to manual transmission

Eh, leave em alone. They're still trying to figure out how to shift as little as possible at their local track

[albert]

Originally Posted by mrg666

Are those manual transmission fanatics, the same people who cannot figure out that the way out of torque dip is just a downshift away? Low rpm torque is their most wanted feature, next to manual transmission

Originally Posted by new2subaru

Eh, leave em alone. They're still trying to figure out how to shift as little as possible at their local track

😁😁😁

And I think it sounds pretty good above 5K RPM.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by mrg666

Are those manual transmission fanatics, the same people who cannot figure out that the way out of torque dip is just a downshift away? Low rpm torque is their most wanted feature, next to manual transmission

Hahaha even though this was a completely unnecessary jab at MT owners and I drive a MT, this cracked me up. But yeah the torque dip seems to confuse even car enthusiasts. When I let people drive my car, I find it helps if you just explain it like Honda’s vtec. The “vtec crossover” is basically 4800 rpm. Keep it above there and you’ll be fine.

[pallen]

I would think the torque dip would be more of an issue for autos since they tend to be more aggressive about getting you into a higher gear for better gas mileage.