Subaru Levorg

[teomingern]

'07 impreza .. thing has changed so much since. Its kinda irrelevant to Levorg which is rather different segment target. If I am driving a Yaris, doesn't mean i can take that experience to comment on Mark X since both are Toyota, rite?

But yeah I got your point that FC matters and AWD is a choice.

 

Not all AWD car owners are speedster and step full throttle during heavy rain

I was comparing the '07 Impreza to its competitors in its time. The same will apply now. It certainly has improved significantly in terms of fuel consumption. But the other marques have also improved. Of course I understand that the Levorg really doesn't have any direct competitors in its price range, but I think it is fair to say that given a rival brand's 1.6 L turbocharged engine but without AWD, you're going to ask why the Levorg's fuel consumption isn't as good.

 

I drove the current generation Impreza in Hokkaido for about 14 days. Fuel consumption was about 13-15 km/L. Leisurely driving style. That's for long distance driving with very few stops on wide smooth highways (1-200+ km each run) and hardly any traffic so most of the time I was cruising constantly at around 100 kmh. Fuel consumption is certainly not impressive since previous generation Toyota Corolla Altis, and even the Hyundai Avante easily clocked 15 km/L on Malaysia's north south highway with much much heavier traffic which usually required more overtaking meaning more acceleration and braking. That's what the AWD does to fuel consumption. The fuel consumption of the Altis and the Avante which were my friends' cars were done on a drive up Cameron Highlands (about 700+ km), non-stop and compared to my Impreza. The best I got was 13+ km/L, while the Avante easily clocked 15 or even 16 km/L and surprisingly Altis was a bit behind at 14.5 km/L.

 

I'm not dissing the AWD, but just giving on perspective on what owning one means. And for many buyers, fuel consumption is a significant factor in their consideration. So do take note that you may not get the fuel consumption that other cars easily achieve but this is traded off for better grip in the wet and better cornering which if you are the type of driver who doesn't push the car, it won't any difference. But if your style is to push the car, your fuel consumption will be abysmal. With the current generation CVT, it helps a bit with the fuel consumption if you drive gently but if you don't, it will add to your fuel consumption since you tend to rev the engine harder to pick up speed quickly.

[jg2000]

Yes true about FC not as good as some other cars.

But for Levorg drivers, most of them I would think are WRX admirers who r jumping at the chance of owning a cheaper smaller-engine version of WRX and one that is more acceptable for family use.

Hence, most r familiar with FC of Subaru cars and come in with eyes open.

Some may even be expecting worse FC based on older versions of Subaru cars and would be pleasently surprised with the actual FC of the Levorg.

But anyway good to highlight to any newbies not aware and buying without researching on the real world FC - esp. if that criteria is important to them.

 

I was comparing the '07 Impreza to its competitors in its time. The same will apply now. It certainly has improved significantly in terms of fuel consumption. But the other marques have also improved. Of course I understand that the Levorg really doesn't have any direct competitors in its price range, but I think it is fair to say that given a rival brand's 1.6 L turbocharged engine but without AWD, you're going to ask why the Levorg's fuel consumption isn't as good.

 

I drove the current generation Impreza in Hokkaido for about 14 days. Fuel consumption was about 13-15 km/L. Leisurely driving style. That's for long distance driving with very few stops on wide smooth highways (1-200+ km each run) and hardly any traffic so most of the time I was cruising constantly at around 100 kmh. Fuel consumption is certainly not impressive since previous generation Toyota Corolla Altis, and even the Hyundai Avante easily clocked 15 km/L on Malaysia's north south highway with much much heavier traffic which usually required more overtaking meaning more acceleration and braking. That's what the AWD does to fuel consumption. The fuel consumption of the Altis and the Avante which were my friends' cars were done on a drive up Cameron Highlands (about 700+ km), non-stop and compared to my Impreza. The best I got was 13+ km/L, while the Avante easily clocked 15 or even 16 km/L and surprisingly Altis was a bit behind at 14.5 km/L.

 

I'm not dissing the AWD, but just giving on perspective on what owning one means. And for many buyers, fuel consumption is a significant factor in their consideration. So do take note that you may not get the fuel consumption that other cars easily achieve but this is traded off for better grip in the wet and better cornering which if you are the type of driver who doesn't push the car, it won't any difference. But if your style is to push the car, your fuel consumption will be abysmal. With the current generation CVT, it helps a bit with the fuel consumption if you drive gently but if you don't, it will add to your fuel consumption since you tend to rev the engine harder to pick up speed quickly.

Edited June 18, 2016 by jg2000

[teomingern]

Good points jpg2000.

[wheelogist]

today's buyer are educated and informed. from the specs of every model and make, the FC is clearly stated.

 

levorg 13.5km/litre

altis 15.4km/L

elantra 14.7km/L

 

why would one then expects the fc of levorg to be equal or better than the other 2? quite dumb for one to expect that.

[teomingern]

today's buyer are educated and informed. from the specs of every model and make, the FC is clearly stated.

 

levorg 13.5km/litre

altis 15.4km/L

elantra 14.7km/L

 

why would one then expects the fc of levorg to be equal or better than the other 2? quite dumb for one to expect that.

The stated fuel consumption isn't something realistically achievable on a daily basis. That is true for all cars. But for cars with AWD, namely, that reality is pretty far away from the claimed fuel consumption. If you spend time reading long term reviews where they keep the car for 40,000 km to test the car (try Car & Reader), you will know that Subarus aren't anywhere close to the claimed fuel consumption, while Toyota and Hyundai are usually in the ballpark with Toyota often much better than Hyundai. Hyundai used to be very far away from their claimed fuel consumption but after getting a whopping fine in the US for over-declaring fuel consumption, they've made changes and their cars are much much closer to the claimed fuel consumption figures. Many of the Continental brands can be quite far off as well.

 

The issue isn't so much of just a direct comparison but really that the difference is so much greater than the stated figures. Most people will look at the claimed figures and say, oh AWD so a bit less fuel efficient but since it's just 1.5 km/L less then it's ok. But in reality, it may be miles apart... my example when I drove up to Cameron Highlands in a good example... our cars were quite new then, less than two years old. The difference was almost 3 km/L. When we were at the pumps, I always topped up almost 10 L more. My tank would be a bit more than 1/4 full while theirs would be about 1/2 full. It's pretty significant. The difference was even bigger back in Singapore. I was barely clocking 10 km/L. For some bad weeks, I could only clock 370 km for 40 L of fuel and I was driving a manual and my friends were on automatics. My dad's 2.0 L Magentis automatic had better mileage than my car even... crazy but true...

[Civicblade]

The 2016 legacy 2.5i is rated at 7.3l/100km (13.7km/l) in Australia under Australian Design Rules specification (a standardized test route that simulates a mix of highway and city driving).

 

I am getting ~7.9l/100km (12.6km/l) for the first 400+km and I am still running in the engine which means that I don't use cruise control and always try to rev the engine to 3000+rpm.

 

Based on my past experience with brand new cars, the car usually achieve peak engine power and economy at anywhere between 15000-20000km and will maintain that efficiency until after 120000km when the rotating parts (not the engine if it is well serviced) gets worn and friction sets in (drive train, wheel bearings etc).

 

In this regard I have confidence that the legacy 2.5i will return fuel economy figures close to 7.3l/100km if the daily drive is similar to the test route.

 

In contrast, the Hyundai Sonata (2.4 in line four naturally aspirated) returns 8.3l/100km (12km/l) official and the Toyota Camry 2.5 returns 7.8l/100km (12.8km/l). Both car has similar sized petrol engine and kerb weight but the legacy has better official fuel consumption.

 

This is due largely to the use of CVT in the Legacy vs conventional 6 speed auto in the Sonata/Optima and Camry.

 

I am also very certain that if Subaru makes a FWD Legacy, the fuel economy will be even better.. but Subaru is not going FWD. Their symmetrical AWD and boxer engine is their specialty and these two features are what sells their cars.

[teomingern]

Nice write-up.

[Muser]

The 2016 legacy 2.5i is rated at 7.3l/100km (13.7km/l) in Australia under Australian Design Rules specification (a standardized test route that simulates a mix of highway and city driving).

 

I am getting ~7.9l/100km (12.6km/l) for the first 400+km and I am still running in the engine which means that I don't use cruise control and always try to rev the engine to 3000+rpm.

 

Based on my past experience with brand new cars, the car usually achieve peak engine power and economy at anywhere between 15000-20000km and will maintain that efficiency until after 120000km when the rotating parts (not the engine if it is well serviced) gets worn and friction sets in (drive train, wheel bearings etc).

 

In this regard I have confidence that the legacy 2.5i will return fuel economy figures close to 7.3l/100km if the daily drive is similar to the test route.

 

In contrast, the Hyundai Sonata (2.4 in line four naturally aspirated) returns 8.3l/100km (12km/l) official and the Toyota Camry 2.5 returns 7.8l/100km (12.8km/l). Both car has similar sized petrol engine and kerb weight but the legacy has better official fuel consumption.

 

This is due largely to the use of CVT in the Legacy vs conventional 6 speed auto in the Sonata/Optima and Camry.

 

I am also very certain that if Subaru makes a FWD Legacy, the fuel economy will be even better.. but Subaru is not going FWD. Their symmetrical AWD and boxer engine is their specialty and these two features are what sells their cars.

 

Very nice post. I'd praise it if I could.

 

Thanks for sharing your actual fuel consumption, along with Australia's official figures for various models. It's interesting to note that Australia's FC estimates for the Legacy are more optimistic than Singapore's, which does make sense if consider the ratio of city-to-highway driving: www.subaru.asia/sg/en/vehicles/legacy/15my/?pg=technology&id=engine.

 

Singapore FC estimates also differs for the other models you mentioned. For example, if I remember right, K5 FC here is supposed to be 7.8l/100km while the Sonata's is 7.9l/100km, officially. Apologies if my memory's crap.

[K20VTEC]

I have ever lost grip on my rear wheels in my old car before once on PIE due to really really heavy rain and there were just huge POOLS of water everywhere.

 

The rain water was so much that those big trailer on lane 3 just drove through one puddle and all its rear wheels started splashing water over my entire car to the extent that my entire windscreen view was blanked out by water. It took 2 swipes of wiper at fastest speed setting before I got back my vision of the road.  

 

Soon after it was a slight left bend in the road and I proceeded to turn. At that moment, I felt my steering feel lighter and rear end coming out. I eased off the throttle gently and did a slight counter steer and thankfully I regained control. My speed was around 80km/h and after that I continued on my journey at around 60km/h. 

 

Right after that, I just felt that if I had AWD traction, probably I would fare better and I would have more confidence on the road especially in the wet. 

 

I do not own a subaru / AWD car now. However, my point here is, even if you have an AWD car, it doesn't mean that you will never ever lose traction. If you go stupidly fast for the road conditions, you will still get into trouble whether you are 2wd or AWD. However, at the same lower speeds, you may be better than AWD. 

 

Couple of years back, I encountered being stopped at the gantry waiting for one more available lot for the gantry to open. When the gantry opened and as it was raining, the carpark floor was wet, my tyres were wet, the moment I stepped on the accelerator on a slippery upslope, my front wheels spun and spun till it gained traction and started moving up. In that situation, if you had awd, you will move off no problem. 

 

Just my 2 cents. Drive safe everyone. 

 

Cheers.

[Civicblade]

 

 

I do not own a subaru / AWD car now. However, my point here is, even if you have an AWD car, it doesn't mean that you will never ever lose traction. If you go stupidly fast for the road conditions, you will still get into trouble whether you are 2wd or AWD. However, at the same lower speeds, you may be better than AWD. 

 

 

Well said. 

 

If you have 4 wheels on a car, why not make use of all 4 to provide traction. There are 4 brake calipers and brake discs on the car (one for each wheel) so it makes more sense to drive the car with all 4 wheels. 

 

The problem with full time AWD is the past is that having AWD usually means a fuel economy penalty and to a lesser extent a price penalty. In the world of very competitive automotive market (totally free market in the USA), these two penalties may be enough to sway a potential car buyer away from AWD. This is especially in mild weather climate where AWD doesn't really provide real world perceptible differences vs a FWD/RWD or a part time 4WD car.

 

With Subaru getting good fuel economy from mid-size sedans like Legacy and SUV like Foresters and very competitive pricing. Having a AWD car now makes alot of sense because you are not making any significant sacrifice to fuel economy and purchase price. It may be the best time to get a mainstream AWD car from Subaru right now and I hope other manufacturers jump in and provide full time AWD or at least put 4WD into more sedans. 

[mrhan1982]

Well said.

 

If you have 4 wheels on a car, why not make use of all 4 to provide traction. There are 4 brake calipers and brake discs on the car (one for each wheel) so it makes more sense to drive the car with all 4 wheels.

 

The problem with full time AWD is the past is that having AWD usually means a fuel economy penalty and to a lesser extent a price penalty. In the world of very competitive automotive market (totally free market in the USA), these two penalties may be enough to sway a potential car buyer away from AWD. This is especially in mild weather climate where AWD doesn't really provide real world perceptible differences vs a FWD/RWD or a part time 4WD car.

 

With Subaru getting good fuel economy from mid-size sedans like Legacy and SUV like Foresters and very competitive pricing. Having a AWD car now makes alot of sense because you are not making any significant sacrifice to fuel economy and purchase price. It may be the best time to get a mainstream AWD car from Subaru right now and I hope other manufacturers jump in and provide full time AWD or at least put 4WD into more sedans.

I totally agree with what u said about Subaru's awd and I'm very much appreciated that I've bought a fxt that came with it. Else I dun think it's possible for me to drive a rather tall mid size SUV like a sedan. In fact, a lot of times, it out performs a lot of the average sedans (fwd especially) under dry weather conditions. Especially during wet weather conditions, I realised that most vehicles will intentionally slow down a lot but i can still drive at my normal speeds and still feel very confident in motion (ops, that's the tagline haa). The traction provided by the awd for an SUV is amazing wether at Low speeds or high speeds. It makes the ride very assuring for the driver. I used to drive a Mazda CX-5, and now I seriously dun understand what's the big hoo haa about its great handling??? As a fwd crossover, it certainly doesn't provide the same level of traction at all speeds and weather conditions.

 

Will I buy another SUV with full time awd in the future? Definitely yes!

[jg2000]

I totally agree with what u said about Subaru's awd and I'm very much appreciated that I've bought a fxt that came with it. Else I dun think it's possible for me to drive a rather tall mid size SUV like a sedan. In fact, a lot of times, it out performs a lot of the average sedans (fwd especially) under dry weather conditions. Especially during wet weather conditions, I realised that most vehicles will intentionally slow down a lot but i can still drive at my normal speeds and still feel very confident in motion (ops, that's the tagline haa). The traction provided by the awd for an SUV is amazing wether at Low speeds or high speeds. It makes the ride very assuring for the driver. I used to drive a Mazda CX-5, and now I seriously dun understand what's the big hoo haa about its great handling??? As a fwd crossover, it certainly doesn't provide the same level of traction at all speeds and weather conditions.

 

Will I buy another SUV with full time awd in the future? Definitely yes!

 

Yes, I like my AWD in wet weather but need to remember that while the wet weather performance will be much better than most other cars and have higher limits before it loses traction, there are still be a point beyond which it will still lose traction.

Luckily there is another safety layer after that where the VDC kicks in to try to save the car and its occupants.

So, while we enjoy are ride, I don't think should over-push the car beyond its limits.

Still have to remember to drive safely - which in an AWD, safe driving is still faster than other cars.

 

 

[teeha]

Anybody have complains about the cvt? Im driving a civic with 5AT and kinda worried about CVT performance. And may i know which showroom have levorg for test drive and which showroom SE to avoid?

Edited June 24, 2016 by teeha

[BenTong]

Anybody have complains about the cvt? Im driving a civic with 5AT and kinda worried about CVT performance. And may i know which showroom have levorg for test drive and which showroom SE to avoid?

Just go and enjoy est drive.. Here not easy to find owners complain about CVT. Only two showrooms for Subaru. As for SEs avoid those selling civics..

[jg2000]

Anybody have complains about the cvt? Im driving a civic with 5AT and kinda worried about CVT performance. And may i know which showroom have levorg for test drive and which showroom SE to avoid?

 

CVT behaves differently from 5AT.

May take some time to get used to its different behaviour.

Once you get used to it, you will like it.

F1 banned the CVT because it gave unfair advantage to the team using it - it lets the engine stay continuously in the optimal power-torque rev range even when downshifting or upshifting.

 

[teomingern]

That's why it is more efficient I guess... just that the rubber band feeling is still not completely eliminated.

[teeha]

cool cool. looking at the bad experience some people here have with the subaru sales team makes me afraid to head down haha. which one of the two showroom are preferred by you guys?

[Wyfitms]

First time I ever hear a customer is 'blacklisted' from buying a car.....

Lol only in Singapore

 

Where dealer don't allow u to buy their 130k car