When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Why dispute the word of engineers? They know if they can adequately fit in the needed AWD hardware with a V6 and automatic. This is not a Subaru Symmetrical AWD layout that is ingeniously simple by AWD standards.
Its just an excuse because they really don't want to make an AWD ES, they have resisted it for years, The cheap and easy way out is to use the 4 and AWD like was fine for the Camry and Avalon. Not every excuse people give is accurate. If they really wanted to make an excellent V6 AWD ES they could.
And actually I'm sure from a packaging perspective its very similar to the Subaru system. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you have no idea what the size of any of the Subaru components are.
Why dispute the word of engineers? They know if they can adequately fit in the needed AWD hardware with a V6 and automatic. This is not a Subaru Symmetrical AWD layout that is ingeniously simple by AWD standards.
I doubt it because the minivan is AWD with the 3.5 and it's the same platform as the ES and Camry. They also literally gave an AWD system with the 2.5 4cyl so all they would need to do is make a new transmission for the 6 and they are just lazy and refuse to do so.
The Subaru system is one of the physically latgest front to to back AWD systems and takes up a massive amount of space and forces the engine further out front than an Audi.....plus it's the 2nd most complex in terms of specialized part used. It's not simple at all vs a bolt on PTO box on the output side of a FWD trans or a transfer case bolted onto the rear of a RWD trans feeding an axle that runs through the oil pan. Only the Audi system uses more specialized parts and they do it WAY better
Last edited by Striker223; Aug 26, 2023 at 03:36 PM.
Toyota sales way more Lexus RX models at a higher starting price. Also made in North America. I think that’s why there is no full-size awd ES as they would be losing a lot of money, if people didn’t up for the RX model
And actually I'm sure from a packaging perspective its very similar to the Subaru system. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you have no idea what the size of any of the Subaru components are.
Sorry, but that limb would crack. I had an Outback for almost six years.....and my brother, before his Kias, had an Impreza for nine years. Totally different AWD set-up from the car-based Toyota system with transverse-engines. The Subie system (although there are several different versions of the Symmetrical Subaru system) is based on a flat-boxer-engine and a rear-facing output shaft, not a transverse engine with the transmission off to one side.
This diagram (which I have also previously posted in other threads) graphically shows the different systems pretty well.
Did you read what Striker said? Like I said you have no idea the size of the AWD components. He does.
Even from your diagram, the Subaru system is much larger than the transverse FWD system.
Yes, I did read what Striker said....but that does not change the fact that the Subie Symmetrical AWD system is arguably the most successful car-based AWD ever done. And that is because it is simple mechanically and works well.
Either way, the topic of our discussion (Camry V6 and AWD) would not be possible with a layout like Subaru's, because the Subaru layout designed for boxer-engines with a rear-facing output shaft. Toyota, however, DID use the Subaru engine and layout for the RWD 86 sports-coupe....minus the two front drive-shafts, of course.
You’re changing the topic. Nobody is saying anything about the capability of Subarus AWD system, you said it was the smallest system and that’s not correct. In fact it’s larger than the system that would be used in an AWD ES.
TNGA is irrelevant, they haven't fundamentally changed the setup since 2007. Put them in the air and even go measure stuff, undersides are the same it's the windshield area (pillars) and rear that have changed a lot with minor firewall area changes. Platforms like that are for production side integration/cost savings via standard and have VERY little effect on end products, look into the cars that use MLB/MLB-E and please tell me what those cars have in common....
Last edited by Striker223; Aug 27, 2023 at 04:32 AM.
Sorry, but that limb would crack. I had an Outback for almost six years.....and my brother, before his Kias, had an Impreza for nine years. Totally different AWD set-up from the car-based Toyota system with transverse-engines. The Subie system (although there are several different versions of the Symmetrical Subaru system) is based on a flat-boxer-engine and a rear-facing output shaft, not a transverse engine with the transmission off to one side.
This diagram (which I have also previously posted in other threads) graphically shows the different systems pretty well.
Bro you need to go under a subie, the axle shafts are BEHIND a diff housing BEHIND the bellhousing, the engine is NOWHERE near the front axles like that in your diagram. That's how AUDI does it not Subie, Subie has the engine PAST the front of the tires entirely and even in your own picture look how much smaller the FWD based system is! It's practically only the size of the engine ONLY for the Subie lol!
Yes, I did read what Striker said....but that does not change the fact that the Subie Symmetrical AWD system is arguably the most successful car-based AWD ever done. And that is because it is simple mechanically and works well.
Either way, the topic of our discussion (Camry V6 and AWD) would not be possible with a layout like Subaru's, because the Subaru layout designed for boxer-engines with a rear-facing output shaft. Toyota, however, DID use the Subaru engine and layout for the RWD 86 sports-coupe....minus the two front drive-shafts, of course.
Nah. Audi is the undisputed king of AWD systems. It's not close, not at all. Subie has used the same stagnant system for 20+ years whereas Audi is on Quattro 6 and developed ONE OFF gearsets just for their special cars that nothing else on earth uses simply to ensure the system is unrivaled. Look up the Audi crown drive system and even pictures of their transmissions and remote driven TQ converters that allow the engines to be mounted "impossibly" far back without having to run a driveshaft though the oil pan.
You’re changing the topic. Nobody is saying anything about the capability of Subarus AWD system, you said it was the smallest system and that’s not correct. In fact it’s larger than the system that would be used in an AWD ES.
Way larger......it's longer than the system in my A8s by far. Even the smaller WRX system is still very long, the newer CVT systems are HUGE and very unusually tall due to the stacked shaft setup. Are they easy to work on and simple? Yeah! However they are not space efficient vs a FWD PTO style system nor can they withstand the power output levers of RWD based systems like the 800+ LB/FT that Audi ZF8 can for example.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/334934546406 (note the driveshaft passing THROUGH the bellhousing and the TQ converter still being sat behind it and the combined casting for diff/trans/T-case to save on size/weight and increase rigidity while still being fundamentally a RWD trans based configuration)
Another fact to consider is that the diff being on the passenger side vs symmetrical is a GOOD thing since it helps cross balance when you sit on the left side to drive the car and provides an area for lines/harnesses to be run on the other side as well as easier time working on the diff in the event of an error/failure. If I loose a diff in my Touareg or Audi I can replace the diff/replace the gears/bearing in car but you loose a diff in a Subie you just bought a transmission. All that said I will still pick them over a FWD based system since everything still points the correct way and so much easier to work on.
Last edited by Striker223; Aug 27, 2023 at 04:53 AM.
Bro you need to go under a subie, the axle shafts are BEHIND a diff housing BEHIND the bellhousing, the engine is NOWHERE near the front axles like that in your diagram. That's how AUDI does it not Subie, Subie has the engine PAST the front of the tires entirely and even in your own picture look how much smaller the FWD based system is! It's practically only the size of the engine ONLY for the Subie lol!
That wasn't what I was getting at, though. Yes, the Subie flat-boxer engines are ahead of the front axle, which may affect overhang some (which, IMO, is a non-issue) but it is a simple, effective, no-nonsense system that has worked well for many years. That's why Subaru keeps the basic layout, although they have made some changes over the years, such as the substitution of electronic torque-distribution for the old mechanical rear limited-slip differential.
TNGA is irrelevant, they haven't fundamentally changed the setup since 2007. Put them in the air and even go measure stuff, undersides are the same it's the windshield area (pillars) and rear that have changed a lot with minor firewall area changes. Platforms like that are for production side integration/cost savings via standard and have VERY little effect on end products, look into the cars that use MLB/MLB-E and please tell me what those cars have in common....
Its an entirely different platform…those overall size measurements of the models may be similar, but the platform is all new and I’m sure there is an issue fitting the V6 and the AWD in the same sedan application, but I’m also sure that can be solved with some adjustment for the AWD car, they just don’t see a financial reason to make those adjustments.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
That wasn't what I was getting at, though. Yes, the Subie flat-boxer engines are ahead of the front axle, which may affect overhang some (which, IMO, is a non-issue) but it is a simple, effective, no-nonsense system that has worked well for many years. That's why Subaru keeps the basic layout, although they have made some changes over the years, such as the substitution of electronic torque-distribution for the old mechanical rear limited-slip differential.
Oh please, you’re backpedaling. You absolutely meant that the system was smaller because that’s what we were talking about, getting it to fit.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
They know if they can adequately fit in the needed AWD hardware with a V6 and automatic. This is not a Subaru Symmetrical AWD layout that is ingeniously simple by AWD standards.
Your implication was clearly that if their AWD layout was the same as Subarus it would be easier to fit.
You just had it wrong, that’s okay it happens to all of us.
