Subaru Crosstrek PHEV

LeftieBiker said:

if they need to simulate shifts why not just do them?

Click to expand...

They do it only to please people like you. There is no practical reason to do it.

Click to expand...

Other than NVH. Here's an example from the current RAV4 hybrid:

Working with a continuously variable transmission, the engine provides more than enough kick to get up to speed in a semi-quick fashion. The CVT hallmark of annoyingly loud engine drone under hard acceleration remains, but the way that the drivetrain switches between gas, electric or a combination of the two for propulsion is impressively seamless.

Click to expand...

Or here:

It rides well and is generally quiet save for some occasional buzzing from the engine when flooring it

Click to expand...

And here:

Aside from the mushiness of its standard continuously variable automatic transmission versus the conventional model's eight-speed automatic, it's almost impossible to tell you're driving a hybrid.

Click to expand...

This is one of the better modern CVTs. Seeing as how I'm often doing steep climbs and/or passing on two lane roads in the mountains, I can do without the droning and over-revving. Even with my crappy hearing eliminating much of the droning, I can still feel the engine revving unnecessarily. I've been driving Subaru boxer engines for the past 31 years and the engines themselves aren't the smoothest/quietest in the world, never mind the effect of a CVT.

So, maybe in another generation or two CVTs will eliminate the negatives that have long been associated with them. They are getting better, but they still aren't there yet. Subaru's been using them extensively, and (to my sorrow) eliminating sticks from their lineup, including the Forester. I think only the Impreza/Crosstrek still offers one. As I intend my next car to be a ZEV, giving up a stick will be the price I'll have to pay, so I'll need to be able to control regen to keep myself engaged.

Holding the engine at the most efficient speed for the amount of power requested is the whole point of a CVT. If you floor it, it will spin the engine up to the maximum power speed. For the Subaru 2.5, that's 5700-5800 RPM. If you don't want the engine to spin up that fast, don't push so hard on the gas.

I used to drive a manual Outback, but now I have the CVT. Top gear in the manual had the engine over 3000 RPM constantly at highway speed. The CVT brings that closer to 2000 RPM under light loads. The manual had an annoying flat spot between second and third - while pulling a trailer up a steep hill, I'd hit the redline in second, but then start slowing down after shifting to third. The CVT pegs the engine at 5700 RPM while pulling steep hills, so I get all 174 hp regardless of speed and I can always go as fast as the available power will allow. The only real drawback is starting from a stop, where it becomes obvious that it is a slushbox, and the lowest available ratio isn't quite low enough, as I have to get to 35 km/h before the engine gets into the 4000s and really starts to pull. Even that isn't such a big deal now that I have a Leaf as a city car and the Outback is mostly driven on long highway trips.

Holding the engine at the most efficient speed for the amount of power requested is the whole point of a CVT. If you floor it, it will spin the engine up to the maximum power speed. For the Subaru 2.5, that's 5700-5800 RPM. If you don't want the engine to spin up that fast, don't push so hard on the gas.

Click to expand...

Egg-cisely. We are used to setups that waste some gas and behave a certain way doing it. A CVT with more than one mode can let you choose if you want efficiency or familiarity.

Titanium48 said:

Holding the engine at the most efficient speed for the amount of power requested is the whole point of a CVT. If you floor it, it will spin the engine up to the maximum power speed. For the Subaru 2.5, that's 5700-5800 RPM. If you don't want the engine to spin up that fast, don't push so hard on the gas.

I used to drive a manual Outback, but now I have the CVT.

Click to expand...

What years/generations? 5 or 6 speed stick? I don't tow so that's not an issue for me, and have never felt the lack of the right gear you describe in my Subarus (but have in other cars), nor do I need to push the engine over about 3,500 or at most 4,000 for climbing, given the flattish torque curve of a boxer (the SOHC EJ251 engine in my Forester's torque peak is at 4,400, max. power's at 5,600). My 2003 (1st year of the 2nd Gen) Forester has a 5-speed, and it's fine. It has essentially the same powertrain as the 1st gen. Forester, but IIRR a couple of the lower gear ratios were shortened slightly owing to the newer gen's heavier weight, to give it the same off-the line accel.

Here's an article by someone at Jalopnik who obviously share's my feelings re manuals and automatics:

Perhaps The Future Of Subaru’s Manual Transmission Isn’t So Bleak After All

Click to expand...

https://jalopnik.com/perhaps-the-future-of-subaru-s-manual-transmission-isn-1823645963

Of course, this refers to Subaru's performance-oriented cars (BRZ, WRX, STI) rather than their utility-oriented cars.

Before my Leaf I would never have a bought or leased a new car with an automatic. Now I'd have to be affluent enough to buy two cars to get one with a manual, but because I don't like ICEs anymore...

GRA said:

What years/generations? 5 or 6 speed stick? I don't tow so that's not an issue for me, and have never felt the lack of the right gear you describe in my Subarus (but have in other cars), nor do I need to push the engine over about 3,500 or at most 4,000 for climbing, given the flattish torque curve of a boxer (the SOHC EJ251 engine in my Forester's torque peak is at 4,400, max. power's at 5,600). My 2003 (1st year of the 2nd Gen) Forester has a 5-speed, and it's fine. It has essentially the same powertrain as the 1st gen. Forester, but IIRR a couple of the lower gear ratios were shortened slightly owing to the newer gen's heavier weight, to give it the same off-the line accel.

Click to expand...

I had a 2005 (gen 3) 5-speed, now have a 2014 (gen 4) CVT. I test drove a 2015 6-speed before buying the CVT, the extra gear brought the top gear RPM down a little bit, but mostly just squished the 4th, 5th and 6th ratios closer together and didn't fix the 2nd to 3rd gap. I also found first gear a bit too tall for pulling up boat launches in the '05, and the '14 had a similar 1st gear ratio. The CVT is pretty slow in that situation too, but at least you don't need to worry about burning the clutch when you have the engine revved to 2000 RPM to get the torque you need.

I can see how you would never have run into these issues if you don't tow things. When not towing, the '05 had plenty of power to pull the steepest hills in 3rd, and the only time I recall the CVT pushing the engine above 4200 RPM with cruise control engaged was when climbing an 8% grade at 120 km/h.

Before the CVT, I used to only drive manual transmissions because I couldn't stand the slow, inefficient, unresponsive slushboxes that only had 3 or 4 gears. The CVT fixes those problems at higher speeds, but is still "slushy" at slow speeds. Electric motors take things up another level with maximum torque instantly available from a standing start. Driving stick was fun and I don't know why the old crappy automatic transmissions were so popular, but that era has passed (at least for me anyways). I'll be looking for a PHEV that completely decouples the ICE at low speeds when it is time to replace the Outback, or a BEV if 200 kWh of batteries are affordable and 200+ kW chargers are everywhere by then.

I picked a used 6sp 2010 Turbo Legacy GT not long time ago, that's my car for the next 5 years, unlike Teslas, these are a rare sight in my neck of the woods

I don't feel the Crosstrek PHEV will appeal to Subaru crowd, being too expensive with compromized cargo is basically a non starter.

They are trying to expand the "Subaru crowd" rather than give it more of the same. They must lose a lot of sales to Toyota.

Don't know if this vehicle is a good strategy for such an expansion. But sure, something is better than nothing.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1138730_subaru-crosstrek-hybrid-phev-is-at-the-end-of-its-extension-cord
"The Subaru Crosstrek Hybrid plug-in hybrid has reached the end of its charging cord. Subaru confirmed to Green Car Reports that there is no plan for a Crosstrek Hybrid in its new generation, which made its debut Thursday at the 2023 Chicago Auto Show. "

If it had an EV range double if not triple, I might very well have purchased one but with it's small battery it was really only practical for someone who barely drove or just made short trips, followed by the occasional long trip.
Heck, I'm even wishing our Rav4 Prime had a 50% longer range(60-mile) to let us drive it most days without gas. The way it is, its pretty rare to not have to fire up the ICE on my wife's daily commutes and with it's rather slow L2 recharge rate(3.3k) if we want to take it out in the early evening again it's generally running gas before we get back home as it hasn't had enough time to gain back charge after coming home empty
I'm going to guess we are purchasing about as much gas now as we did with our '07 Prius which didn't have any EV range but got better MPG but no doubt the Rav4 is more comfortable and deluxe and safer to boot, If the Prius prime had had a better EV range that would have probably been a better bet but she really does like like the Rav4 and better snow clearance and AWD for the ice and snow, so I don't know. The Crosstrek PHEV would have probably been big enough for our needs but again EV range way too weak. If Subaru replaces it I'd hope they make a better effort.