Subaru decided to show a little leg last week, teasing an image of the upcoming 2018 Crosstrek. Despite expecting it to have roughly the same sex appeal as a ham sandwich, the glimpse hints at some unexpected curves and the possibility of an intentionally attractive design.
The next-generation Crosstrek makes use of the Subaru Global Platform currently sitting under the bodywork of Subaru’s redesigned Impreza, which will eventually become the basis for the brand’s entire fleet. The new architecture is designed to achieve “the world’s highest levels of collision safety” via high-strength steels and a 70- to 100-percent boost in stiffness. It also incorporates Subie staples like all-wheel drive and a boxer engine — likely a 152 horsepower 2.0-liter four coupled to a CVT.
When the crossover was launched in North America 2012, Subaru named it the XV Crosstrek. The automaker removed the “XV” portion of the name in 2015, saving it for everywhere but the United States. In the teaser photo, the crossover appears to possess the VX Concept’s taillight design and a more swept back roofline. Based on the creases in the rear bodywork, it also appears more muscular and sporting than the 2016 concept vehicle did in Geneva.
Subaru sold 95,677 Crosstreks in the U.S. in 2016 and sales have been creeping skyward ever since the compact CUV’s debut. It’s also the company’s fourth best-seller. The updated model is a golden opportunity for Subaru to capitalize on a hot segment and grow the brand while showing up Jeep’s Renegade and Mini’s Cooper Countryman.
The new Crosstrek will make its official debut at the Geneva International Motor Show in March before stopping by the New York Auto Show in April.
[Images: Subaru]
Oh, “sleeker” is never a good thing. That just means less headroom and likely ground clearance. Euphemized CAFE still tastes bitter.
Looks like a lifted 2017 Impreza hatchback to me:
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/03/2017-subaru-impreza-straight-outta-indiana/
http://www.carscoops.com/2016/03/moment-of-truth-2017-subaru-impreza.html
(carscoops has a great side view for comparison).
All I see is that long shnozz.
What was that type of Muppet that communicated by mashing its nose to honk?
Still looks a lot like a current generation Subaru Crosstrek to me. I think in a poorly lit parking garage at 200 yards I’d still think: “Yup, that’s a Subaru.”
“likely a 152 horsepower 2.0-liter inline-four coupled to a CVT”
Title correction suggested: “Subaru’s Rebooted Crosstrek Could *Look* Sleeker and Sexier than Expected.”
I do like the styling of the incoming Impreza, but more motor would be nice and after just seeing a third friend’s subaru implode due to failed head gaskets the brand is leaving a bit of a bad taste in my mouth right now.
“2.0-liter inline-four coupled to a CVT”
At least they finally got rid of that boxer engine, amirite?
Headgaskets were on an EJ? FA? FB?
Maybe if they keep HP output low, it will prevent implosion before warranty period is over. Ha! Maybe keep oil in the sump?
My buddy is about to purchase a WRX for WELL BELOW risidual, the woodruff key failed. This is the first time in 20+ years of working on cars that I have ever heard of a woodruff key shearing.
One was a 2004 Impreza with ~50K miles on it. One was a 2001 Outback. The final was a 1998 Forester–old, but a creampuff with ~100K original miles. So it looks like 2.5 EJ on all 3.
The non-turbo 2.5L engines starting in the late 90s seem to have all had headgasket issues eventually, though I don’t hear so much about them after 2007. I know of three people that had this problem with Imprezas and a Forester.
Indeed, HG on the EJ 2.5 are almost routine, like a timing belt service for example. Sorry about your friend’s Subies! I would handle everything maintenance or otherwise while the engine is out. Timing belt, water pump, idlers, headgaskets, valve cover gaskets, spark plugs, clutch disc and pp, etc etc.
I test drove the current Crosstrek and was highly underwhelmed with the amount of power available. Traveling up an on ramp to merge onto the highway was a pride swallowing seige. I’m sure the actual 0-60 is OK, but the car felt really slow to the butt dyno.
I love the form factor of the thing, but Subaru really needs to put a better engine under the hood. Weak sauce engine really detracts from the otherwise strong appeal.
Butt dyno didn’t lie. 0-60 is over 10 seconds, which is 4spd automatic Yaris territory. I’m guessing this is the situation in which a CVT would be really unappealing–very little power resulting in long spells of high-rpm engine drone when getting up to speed.
And get rid of that crappy VCT
The only situation where I don’t like my Crosstrek is exactly what you described: merging on an uphill ramp with the CVT screaming and no response at all from the engine. Aside from that terror-inducing scenario it’s fine 99.95% of the time.
It reminded me of driving my old ’84 Vanagon Westfalia. I’m sure the Cross is probably twice as quick as a Vanagon, but the sensation was the same. Pedal floored, engine noise, speedo needle barely moving clockwise, teeth clenched and eyes bulging.
I agree, and the reason I compared the 4spd Yaris is that we once owned one of those and it too was fine most of the time. It had plenty of power for most situations and even getting over moderate mountain passes at +5mph really wasn’t any undue drama.
It was the darn uphill freeway onramps and the expressway stoplights that were unpleasant. Winding the engine painfully slowly through the harsh upper rev range because of the broad, widely spaced ratios, only to barely keep up with everyone in 300hp pickups and 250hp minivans that weren’t even trying. Only to do it again at the next light. brrrrrrrraaaaaaAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRR! -shift- brrrrrrraaaaaaaaAAAAAARRRRR!
Why would you buy, with cash money, a CVT anything? Is it a company car, this underpowered, overweight, AWD abomination?
This may sound like an odd complaint, but the ergonomics of the current Crosstrek’s parking brake would mean a no-sale for me (besides the boxer engine).
A few seconds of test-sitting told me I could never live with that brake handle pressing into my thigh:
http://www.cars101.com/subaru/crosstrek/crosstrek16-interior7.jpg
It’s positioned incredibly poorly, so hopefully Crosstrek 2.0 fixes that.
I’d guess that the Crosstrek’s parking brake handle will be similar to the current ’17 Impreza’s.
http://st.automobilemag.com/uploads/sites/11/2016/03/2017-Subaru-Impreza-Sport-interior.jpg
“Butt dyno didn’t lie. 0-60 is over 10 seconds”
Ooooh – I’ll have to race my co-worker (who has an orange ’14) with my Volt – I think I’ll take him.
It will look exactly like the 2017 Impreza 5 door with higher ground clearance and some body cladding. The body is the same.
That’s what I was thinking. We’ve already seen the new Impreza and this will be basically the same body. So not sexy.
Yes, the nose went from squared to long and swoopy, which I don’t really like.
IMHO, Subaru design hit a high point around 2007 with clean, attractive lines for the Impreza, Legacy, and Forester (and their variants). In comparison, Subaru models of the last 5 years look cheap and overwrought.
And what’s the deal with Subaru drivetrains? They have a great AWD system on their hands, but they doggedly insist on pairing it with a weak, inefficient boxer engine and an annoying CVT. Subaru desperately needs a hybrid or EV solution, and probably a better IC solution while they’re at it.
In 2007 Subaru sold around 200,000 cars in the US, this year they sold around 650,000. People like the new design . :(
Living in the Pacific Northwest where Subarus are everywhere, I don’t think their popularity has much to do with looks. The typical Subaru buyer tends not to know much about cars in general; they just like the AWD, practicality, and brand image.
Same story in the Northeast. I know a couple of people that own recent Foresters. They are not car people and bought them due to utility and the AWD capability, which is just added weight about 8-9 months out of the year.
They don’t use that “great” AWD system with the CVT. In the current generation, you only get VC with the manual. The CVT transmission uses the same multi-disc clutch type that is used in RAV4 or CR-V, and computer braking wheels independently.
Wife and stepson are part of the Subaru faithful. We had a Crosstrek as a rental as my wife’s Forester was having major surgery at the dealer. There were things we liked, it wasn’t awful but to all of us, it was stunningly cheap. Shiny hard plastics everywhere, button blanks, cheap switch gear, tinny doors.
The transmission was outright weird, lifting off the throttle it felt almost hybrid like at lower speed – it didn’t just roll so to speak, but bogged down like you had downshifted.
I was bummed – I may be of the opinion a Subaru will never grace our driveway again – but I believe even more happy wife, happy life.
I get that the Crosstrek is a “tweener” between the B and C segments, but it as a decidedly B-segment interior that none of us felt would hold up and as it is my wife’s Forester interior (2006) is falling apart.
(we’ve already been down the path that this is an exaggeration, and I’ve already shared receipts and pictures here – so lets just nip that in the bud now)
Crosstrek is firmly a C segment car, it has the same interior as the Impreza, Forester and WRX. It has about the same amount of cheap plastic as all the pre 07 Subarus had.
That same interior is holding up really well after 44,000 miles in my WRX. Of course it has the usual Subaru rattles.
Ugh.
Crosstrek is classified as a Tweener. Impreza is the C-segment.
It’s the same silly argument that the Chevy Spark is a B-segment car. It isn’t – it is an A segment car and a Tweener. The Sonic is the B-segment offering from Chevy.
I argued here with Mr. Cain that the Crosstrek does not belong in the B-segment and got schooled by the guy who does it for a living on why it is.
I’m just passing it along.
Wife’s ’06 Forester has 108K miles and the interior is coming apart. It’s feckin awful.
But Crosstrek is the same size, same car as the Impreza, how can it be B segment. I’m looking forward to Tim chiming in here to explain it.
How do you reboot an existing model (a successful one at that)?
Subaru has magical, pixie dust marketing, and decidely so-so products.
BLAH.
MEH.
BOO.
#SupremelyOverrated
The folks who have ’em love ’em, but unless we’re talking about a WRX, I never got it.
Yes, but Subaru symmetrical AWD will save you. “Love” “They lived”
The product may be over-rated, but as a business they’re geniuses.
With a Subaru, I can also take a totally off-road short cut to the wedding, camp out on top of a remote, 8,000 foot elevation mountain ridge with crunchy friends, let my dogs drive my car, and give my well-worn, 20 year old vehicle (probably with 970,000 miles on it) to my 17-18 year old daughter who is leaving home for college, knowing that she’ll survive without a scratch even if the Subaru is hit in a front end, offset collision at 80mph with a Bradley Fighting Vehicle.
Lol, good one. I see that commercial and I wonder, “just how bad did that crate burn that girl’s parents (head gaskets, etc.,) before it was passed on, to continue doing the same?”
LMAO nice. DW, I really need to stop reading your comments when I’m at work.
I agree, Subarus are “supremely overrated” but their marketing is genius. “AWD? Love? That means safe!” Normal people are so scared of driving that they’ll purposely go out of their way to buy a Subie because the commercials cram IIHS Top Safety Pick into your ear canals every chance they get.
Why is everyone treating this car (even the outgoing generation) as a special/different car, when it all it is a lifted Impreza hatchback. It has different suspension and lower bumper covers and that’s it.
Hell, if you selectively lit my ex and had a professional photographer take the picture, she might come out “sleek and sexy” too.
…then again, that one might require photoshop…
I’m glad Subaru has apparently decided to keep that powerful 2.0 normally aspirated engine. If there’s anything a Subaru doesn’t need, it’s more power. /s
If you want to drive a truly underpowered Subaru, try a 360. I had one for a while back in the day. You’d find out there were hills you never knew were hills before, and you could have drag races with VW microbuses – and lose.
Boxer engine – lower cg. Higher ride height – raise cg
Pick one….
Or, in Subarutheoryland, a lower cg engine allows you to lift the ride height while still keeping cg lower….
Of course, in reality, with all the heavy safety caging and ever lighter engine blocks in today’s cars, the main reason Subarus have a lower cg, is that their buyers tend to be less overweight than average.
Possible endings for the article’s headline:
“… But Only Because Expectations Have Been Set So Terribly Low”
or maybe
“… But It Won’t”
Can’t wait to get stuck behind a dozen of these on my commute home!
I’ll admit the styling looks better from what I’ve seen. The body lines look attractive from the side and it certainly is “sleeker” (although, I could do without the orange wheels). I’m still not convinced, however. The bad interiors and anemic drivetrain has already been discussed here and that’s all you really need to know that you probably shouldn’t buy one.