Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

All-New 2010 Legacy/Outback



  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,657
    I thought it was okay. Nothing to write home about, but certainly very reasonable. Probably similar to competing brands.

  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 679

    Have you driven a new automatic Forester lately? If so, how did the CVT initial accel compare?

  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,657
    No, not lately. The last Forester I drove was maybe 6 moths ago, a dealer loaner while my car was in for service.

    Best advice is to go drive a Forester and an Outback, back-to-back, then compare.

  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 679
    I took a careful look at the new Forester and Outback today and decided that the Forester's appearance wins hands down over the Outback, but the real price difference may be minimal. Add the protective wheel arch cladding, side strips, and other accessories and the Forester is not a bargain. However, if one wants a minimally equipped version, the pricing is ok.

    I wonder how many people will notice the lack of folding mirrors on the Outback....until they have expensive body damage on a narrow street.

    The light beige cloth upholstery on one Outback I sat in is a throwback to crumby interiors of old. And I thought the potato-sack grade on my 97 was bad. Perhaps there will be a color change for the next model year.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,657
    Found the following over at NASIOC. It's a comparison of the Forester and Outback.

    As someone who is extensively cross shopping the Forester and Outback, I can tell you that the Outback outshines the Forester in many ways especially when you are looking at the higher end trim (and still has many advantages even in lower trim).

    Outback has (standard or available on Limited):
    • Quieter ride
    • Better fuel economy both in H4 vs. H4, and H6 vs. turbo
    • Fully automatic day/night headlights
    • More comfortable seats / seating position
    • Telescoping steering wheel on all models (Forester: XT only)
    • Lit vanity mirrors
    • Sun visor extenders
    • Steering wheel shift paddles
    • Spring-loaded sizers in center cup holders
    • Soft touch trim on door sills
    • Better padded armrest
    • Auto-up driver's window
    • Electric parking brake, FWIW
    • Dual zone climate control vs. hyperactive single zone auto climate
    • Ability to shut off center vents
    • Just short enough to put bikes on top or wash without needing a stepladder
    • Self-storing cross bars (for less wind noise and drag)
    • Rear camera in nav
    • Voice activated nav, with steering wheel controls
    • Steering wheel controls for Bluetooth
    • USB port for MP3
    • Cargo cover and cross bars included
    • Trip computer shows miles to empty
    • Door ajar indicator shows which door is ajar
    • ~15-20% more cargo space

    Forester has:
    • Giant moonroof
    • Folding side mirrors
    • Arguably better exterior looks

    Yes, I realize that some of these bullets may seem like very minor, inexpensive details. But as they say, the "devil's in the details". Or, "the whole is more than the sum of the parts."

    For me, I'm moving on up from a Forester to an Outback


    I might also add that the new Outback manual, which is a 6-speed (Forester manual is a 5-speed), also has a digital gear indicator to help remind the driver as to what gear they're in; something that I welcome with close-ratio gearboxes. The Outback's NAVI screen is 8" whereas the Forester's NAVI screen is 7."

    So, while the Forester may look better, I think the Outback is the better car, and worth the extra money.

  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 679
    The only Outback advantages that I find at all persuasive are quieter ride and bluetooth. The pushbutton parking brake is a negative. I think at time to buy I will even look at a VW shift transmission plus quattro. It's great for city tight parking spaces and if only kept for the warranty period not costly to own. :D And my Subaru dealer with the good service department also sells and services VW. I traded in a 2002 VW W8 wagon for my 3.0R in 2005.

    The improved fuel economy with CVT is probably important to many buyers, but at 3,500 miles per year for me, even10 mpg would not be a problem. My second car is Chicago's Brown Line elevated with 75 feet from my back gate to the station entrance. :D
  • nwbearnwbear Posts: 14
    I noticed that the mirrors didn't fold and I'm not happy about it. Considering repairing one of those mirrors damaged would probably cost more than $500, it is something I find inexcusable, especially in a 4WD vehicle that for me at least, will probably seen some minor off road use while camping.

    I really like the Outback as a whole, but as I continue to consider it the obvious cost cutting on the vehicle is really starting to bother me. Taken alone these items aren't terribly important, but when I consider them together they are. I'd prefer a cloth interior but the crappy fabric on the Outback as well as the fact that the cloth seats are noticeably less comfortable would push me to the leather interior. The non-folding mirrors substantially increase the ownership costs of the car because expensive repairs are very likely at some point if I own the vehicle for 5 or more years. The hard dash isn't important to me on its own, but added to the other bits of cheapness evident it becomes a problem.

    These things taken together have made me hesitate on the purchase of an Outback and continue to look at other brands. I'm willing to pay a bit more for obvious quality and at this point may end up doing just that.
  • cptpltcptplt Posts: 1,075
    >The pushbutton parking brake is a negative. I think at time to buy I will even look at a VW R32..

    aren't there states you can't do a road test for your driving licence without a parking brake the examiner can yank on?? or has that law gone out the window? I'm pretty sure its still in effect in MA.

    >I wonder how many people will notice the lack of folding mirrors on the Outback....until they have expensive body damage on a narrow street.

    I had a 98 legacy which didn't have folding mirrors, I was quite concerned at the time but after 10 years I still hadn't hit anything yet which caused anything other than a scrape in the paint. Though the 98 is a few inches narrower than the new one.
  • I'm glad I'm not the only one unwilling to buy into those 'cloth' seats. It almost seems Subaru is trying to force you to buy the Limited - but then no manual transmission option. Unfortunately this is not a Subaru thing but an industry-wide trend (i.e., manuals offered, if at all, only on the stripped, entry-level models).
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Posts: 1,747
    Are the Outside mirrors breakaway designs?
    Not as good as folding mirrors, but at least those would prevent severe door damage when they smack into obstacles.
  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 679
    Are the Outside mirrors breakaway designs?

    I'm under the impression they are required to be so by law. Usually there are shear pins. But that still means several hundred dollars for a bumped mirror that should have been folded when parked on a narrow street. I traverse one local street daily where there are mirror parts routinely found and many cars are parked with their street-side mirrors folded in.

    Perhaps most 2010 Outback purchasers will be suburban, small town and country-dwellers who don't care. Those of us in central cities will have to choose other models: Forester, RAV4,, various Hondas, VWs and Audis.
  • nwbearnwbear Posts: 14
    Perhaps I'm wrong, but don't replacement mirrors still have to be custom painted to match the vehicle? I broke a mirror on a Honda ten years ago and if I remember correctly replacing the plastic housing cost several hundred dollars just for parts. Since it was unpainted black plastic, having it painted was and additional $100+. The total a decade ago was nearly $400 not including installation and I ended leaving it broken because the repair was nearly a tenth of the value of the car.

    Even without body damage replacing a mirror should easily be $500+ these days.
  • I just spent $170 or so replacing a non folding mirror on my wife's '05 Toyota Matrix -- she clipped it in a garage and cracked it.... it came painted in the correct color and I installed it myself in an hour or less.
  • I can only assume that the cost of replacing a broken mirror would be higher if you also had ordered the Cold Weather Package since the outside mirrors are then heated.
  • jccinohjccinoh Posts: 9
    We currently own a 2009 Outback (love it) and (lease) at 2007 Chevy Impala. The lease on the Impala is up in about 6 months so we have started shopping around to get some ideas. We bought the Outback about 7 months ago and it was our first ever Subaru...and we love it! The solid feel, quiet ride and of course the AWD is great. Anyway, my wife and I are now heading back to Subaru to perhaps purchase another and become a 2-subie family. Prior to purchasing the Outback we also test drove a Forrester. I was wondering if anyone has ever owned both an Outback and Forrester and could give me some input as to which they preferred to drive? Any real difference in quality? Any experiance would be appreciated!
  • saedavesaedave Chicago, ILPosts: 679
    A notable difference is place of manufacture: Forester = Japan; Outback = Lafayette Indiana assembly with about one half of the components from Japan or other foreign origin.

    If I remember correctly, Consumer Reports' historical reliability ratings favor the Forester over the Outback or Legacy. With neither heco en Mexico, both are a good bet.

    The Forester has the same passenger compartment room as the new Outback, but less cargo capacity and is shorter to park. A fully accesorized Forester is not much cheaper than a similar Outback. A stripped Forester is still a nice car at a very good price. The Forester has a less isolated ride than the Outback.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,657
    The Forester may be a bit more fun to drive, but the Outback will be quieter and a bit more comfortable. The new 2010 Outback actually gets better EPA ratings for the H4 model than the Forester H4.

  • gmginsfogmginsfo San Diego, CAPosts: 113
    Test drove a 2010 Outback and a 2010 Forester last weekend and really was impressed with CVT, which showed 2K RPM at 70 MPH. Too bad the Forester lacks it - or even the 5 speed AT or the H-6. But, the '10 Forester was much peppier than my '03 Forester.

    But I digress: what are the differences between the '09 and '10 Foresters? Same engine, tranny, output, etc. Anything else? I ask because I really LOVE the HUGE sunroof on Foresters and don't want to give that up for the Outback, as nice as it is. Talk to me!
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,657
    As to the '10 Forester? Minor stuff. New instruments with white needles, Bluetooth now part of the NAVI and the mic incorporated in the ceiling by the reading lamps, the X Premium comes with a standard power driver's seat, AWD badge added on rear hatch below Subaru name, there's a new color (sort of a dark orange); that's about it.

  • avery1avery1 Posts: 372
    I have a '99 Lexus RX300. It has terrible AWD. I am ready for a new car and am considering the new Outback and the new Equinox. (By the way I couldn't consider the Outback before the recent upsizing.) Any thoughts?
Sign In or Register to comment.