"Daryl Walford" <dwalford@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:Wb2dnahZ-oSfAGXanZ2dnUVZ_sSlnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Klompmeester wrote:
>> "Jason James" <at@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:47f7f408$0$65783$c30e37c6@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> I always thought that one of the reasons VW-beetles had so much
low-down
>>> torque, was because of the long intake plumbing (carby in the between
>>> and
>>> raised having to get charge to the opposed heads) , giving a degree of
>>> natural intake boost as the charge flowed towards the heads over
>>> incredibley
>>> long pipes.
>>> The down side of such a set-up is the limitations of high-end revs not
>>> being
>>> able to get the needed volume of A/F. The old VW beetle was not a
ground
>>> breaking hi-end performer.
>>>
>>> Now we have the Suby, which the earlier motors were pretty tame, but
>>> then
>>> came the turbo models. Is it true to say, that these engines need more
>>> boost
>>> to get the 160 odd kws, compared to an inline engine?
>>>
>>
>> The current Subaru 2.0L N/A lacks bottom end torque and you have to rev
>> the balls off it to get it to go.
>
> After having owned for 25,000klms I wouldn't say that, sure you need
> plenty of revs if you want max performance but it will pull away
smoothly
> from low revs in a high gear and its happy enough at 60kph in 5th not
that
> I usually drive it like that.
> I can understand you comment if the examples you have driven have done
> very few klms because there is a noticeable improvement with more than
> 10,000klms on the odo.
I borrowed a friends Impreza after 20,000km, the same one I drove when new
and although there was a vast improvement, the lack of torque down low was
disappointing. That, and I found it uncomfortable because there wasn't
much
leg room on the sides where the centre dash is.
I'm not saying it's a bad car, but I wouldn't buy one myself.
>>
>> That's a bit unfortunate because with all wheel drive bottom end torque
>> is highly desirable.
>
> Why?
>
Torque gets things moving.
|
