Subaru XV Crosstrek Forums banner

81 - 93 of 93 Posts

·
Registered
2017 and 2021 CrossTrek Limited
Joined
·
141 Posts
Yep, I wish the automakers would "push harder" rather than, say, put a bigger engine in the Crosstrek...
Agreed. They could have provided a smaller displacement turbo option. That would have been better all around.
 

·
Prefers non-orange cars
'18 and '19 Crosstrek Limiteds
Joined
·
9,202 Posts
I might agree with you, if the two engines didn't offer essentially the same fuel economy. ;)
On paper, perhaps. We don't get nearly the "advertised" fuel economy here and I can only imagine it would be much much worse with a 2.5l (in cities, where most of these new Crosstreks will be driven). It's interesting that the UK, Europe and other markets manage quite well with a 1.6l... 😸
 

·
Administrator
2021 Crosstrek Limited, Pure Red
Joined
·
3,621 Posts
On paper, perhaps. We don't get nearly the "advertised" fuel economy here and I can only imagine it would be much much worse with a 2.5l (in cities, where most of these new Crosstreks will be driven). It's interesting that the UK, Europe and other markets manage quite well with a 1.6l... 😸
It actually makes perfect real-world sense, since the 2.5 won't need to rev as hard or often as the 2.0 in the same driving conditions. And that operational difference will be most pronounced in urban driving.

Way too early to make a meaningful comparison, of course, but over its first 1,000 miles my 2021 averaged about 2 MPG better than my long-term results with the 2013.

As for the turbo, well ... Subaru could copy some other manufacturers and make an "economy" turbo, but that definitely wouldn't make the performance folks happy. And the turbo options on past/current Subaru models have inevitably resulted in decreased mileage.

Ultimately, of course, the long-term path here involves getting rid of the internal-combustion engine entirely ...
 

·
Prefers non-orange cars
'18 and '19 Crosstrek Limiteds
Joined
·
9,202 Posts
It actually makes perfect real-world sense, since the 2.5 won't need to rev as hard or often as the 2.0 in the same driving conditions. And that operational difference will be most pronounced in urban driving.

Way too early to make a meaningful comparison, of course, but over its first 1,000 miles my 2021 averaged about 2 MPG better than my long-term results with the 2013.

As for the turbo, well ... Subaru could copy some other manufacturers and make an "economy" turbo, but that definitely wouldn't make the performance folks happy. And the turbo options on past/current Subaru models have inevitably resulted in decreased mileage.

Ultimately, of course, the long-term path here involves getting rid of the internal-combustion engine entirely ...
Your driving is probably very different from the average Crosstrek owner in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, and other metropolitan areas where the majority of these cars will be sold. We'll probably never know the stats but I do wonder how the overall fuel economy will fare with consumers tempted to buy the bigger engine with the "same" fuel economy. It also begs the question why they couldn't have improved the fuel economy of the 2.0l rather than put in a bigger engine with "same" fuel economy to appease the US buyers...
 

·
Registered
2017 and 2021 CrossTrek Limited
Joined
·
141 Posts
Your driving is probably very different from the average Crosstrek owner in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, and other metropolitan areas where the majority of these cars will be sold. We'll probably never know the stats but I do wonder how the overall fuel economy will fare with consumers tempted to buy the bigger engine with the "same" fuel economy. It also begs the question why they couldn't have improved the fuel economy of the 2.0l rather than put in a bigger engine with "same" fuel economy to appease the US buyers...
$$$ (Earnings, in particular) is the primary motivator for corporations...
 

·
Administrator
2021 Crosstrek Limited, Pure Red
Joined
·
3,621 Posts
Your driving is probably very different from the average Crosstrek owner in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, and other metropolitan areas where the majority of these cars will be sold. We'll probably never know the stats but I do wonder how the overall fuel economy will fare with consumers tempted to buy the bigger engine with the "same" fuel economy. It also begs the question why they couldn't have improved the fuel economy of the 2.0l rather than put in a bigger engine with "same" fuel economy to appease the US buyers...
I would really love to know how Subaru's sales volume breaks out geographically. I'm pretty confident that on a per capita basis, places like LA and NYC are way less lucrative for Subaru than other, less-congested areas, but only Subaru knows how that's reflected in raw sales numbers. I can say that over my years of being a Mod here, those two urban areas are the source of the largest number of people reporting poor mileage.

In terms of my own experiences, once I put a couple thousand more miles on the car I'll be able to be more specific about what the larger engine has done to my mileage, both in town and on the highway. But based on what I've seen so far, I'll be pretty amazed if I'm taking a mileage hit, either in town or on the highway.
$$$ (Earnings, in particular) is the primary motivator for corporations...
For sure. For the Crosstrek, the engine decisions seem pretty clearly based on Subaru wanting to maintain product differentiation rather than anything else. For the first years, putting the 2.0 in the Crosstrek helped maintain more differentiation between it and the more-expensive Forester. Now that the smaller engine is perhaps being seen as problematic, they're using a new differentiation tactic by only putting the bigger engine into the higher trim levels, despite the fact that manufacturing costs can't be much different, and that it would have actually been simpler for their manufacturing processes to have all Crostreks on the line use the same engine.
 

·
Prefers non-orange cars
'18 and '19 Crosstrek Limiteds
Joined
·
9,202 Posts
Don't have the sales distribution but there are several dealers nearby...
 

·
Registered
Sahuarita, Arizona USA 2019 Crosstrek Limited
Joined
·
1,067 Posts
According to the instrument cluster data, each time it activates on my car it saves at most a couple-hundredths of a gallon of gas ... sometimes just a few thousandths of a gallon.
And I can't help but wonder if the AS/S fuel savings calculator is another "exagometer" like the MPG calculator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phil76

·
Registered
2016 Crosstrek
Joined
·
1,039 Posts
I would assume it calculates savings based on the engine being off instead of idling, and doesn't figure in that it takes more fuel to restart than it does to idle for a couple seconds.
 

·
Registered
2020 Crosstrek Premium
Joined
·
422 Posts
I would assume it calculates savings based on the engine being off instead of idling, and doesn't figure in that it takes more fuel to restart than it does to idle for a couple seconds.
Fuel injected engines have savings by the five second mark, albeit only measured to three decimal places...

I still don't understand what the big deal is about pushing the brake pedal down a little farther to have it start the engine back up.
 
81 - 93 of 93 Posts
Top