Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Keep something in mind: 0-60 numbers are achieved by dropping the clutch at full revs, so the engine is in its power band. Fine, but few of us drive that way. Look at passing times (30-50, 50-70) and the Soob is more competitive.
Off the line, AWD has disadvantages: traction is so good you don't get wheelspin to keep the engine's revs up, and the added weight and frictional losses. VW decided not to even offer 4Motion on the 1.8T, so they seem to agree.
I thought the Tiptronic was slow to respond, but you guys disagree. Someone said you can chip that too.
Hey - how said you can't do mods to the 2.5l? Sure you can! I-club members have done it for years (Imprezza RS uses the same engine).
VW's 10 year warranty is not transferable, so unless you're keeping it forever, the warranty is effectively shorter (2 or 3 years, I forget).
The VW gets better mileage, but it burns premium fuel, which hit $1.749 near me. Fuel costs are not an advantage.
Finally, Ronin has awesome chase scenes. Notice how the Quattro always wins? AWD rules!
-juice
I hate paying the extra .30-.45 / gallon (1 to 1.5 cents/mile equals $200+ per year for me) for premium fuel, which is 'highly recommended' on the VW/Audi engines and mandatory if you chip the 1.8t to bump it up to 185hp.
I think the Audi A4 1.8t quattro automatic and the Outback automatic were both a bit slow and unexciting. The tiptronic I found too slow, plus it overrode my gear selection on upshift, deciding that I shouldn't hang out up at redline for even one second, and it downshifts automatically for you when you slow to a stop (convenient, but then why use tiptronic?).
The manual versions of both cars had enough pep to keep me happy. The Outback is geared perfectly for 55-75 passes (3rd gear), and is very quiet and smooth on the highway.
Also, I doubt that you could or WOULD take the A4 for even light offroading, considering its higher cost and 3.5" less ground clearance.
I felt that I would be paying a few thousand for some amenities in the A4 that were nice, but really not useful. And what's with the "Leatherette" seats?! Last time I checked, that stuff was called VINYL. I found zero cars at 3 dealers that had the cloth option, which the salespeople consistently & snootily told me was not as good as "leatherette"
I know the passat & A4 are similar but not the same though, so I'm no expert on the topic at hand...and sorry for being slightly off-topic =(
So bottom line: The Outback is an absolutely excellent all-around car for the money, but if you specifically want high-performance OR want luxury, there are other more expensive cars that can give you that criteria, while sacrificing in other departments.
Dave
Still happy with our Outback.
Trey
Their tests showed you'd save $100 per year in fuel costs with the Outback vs. the Passat.
Still, these were the top 2 wagons, including previously tested models.
-juice
a V6
a little bit tighter suspension (compared to the OB)
more supportive / comfortable seats (IMHO) automatic climate control
a little more 'luxury' feel
The cons of the Paasat:
$$$ - yes it approaches a similarly equipped A4 (but the interior room is no comparison)
Limited Supply, ergo less likely for bargaining. (However, Fitzgerald VW is quoting $400 over invoice for internet purchases on their 3 wagons in stock!!!)
It won't go offroad like the OB
Longer reliablity track record of the boxer engine
George
Your pros/cons seem fair and well thought out.
The Legacy GT is actually closer to the Passat. Previous versions of the GT rated higher than the Outback, probably because of the differences in the suspension.
Consumer Reports also rates the Forester extrememly high, even higher than the Passat (!).
-juice
The GT is the handler, with sporty ride and handling. It's quiet, and has understated monochrome styling. Think of it as an alternative to the Passat 4Motion, Audi Avant Quattros, and Volvo V70 AWD.
The Outback has 60 series tires (taller sidewall) and a raised suspension with more travel, and an extra inch of ground clearance (7.3"). It's also more boldly styled, with two-tone paint and other accents. Ride is a bit more floaty, but still pretty good. Competition includes the Volvo XC and the upcoming Audi Allroad Quattro.
If you're looking for on-pavement performance, the GT is your car. If you kayak or mountain bike a lot, and tend to use light trails to get to those places, the Outback is a better bet.
Both are quicker with the 5 speed manual. The auto is slower, but the engine still makes good torque for passing or towing.
The Boxer 6 is rumored for June and should offer 220hp or so, but only in automatic form at first, and only on high end models. Still, it ought to be quite fast. I expect it'll add another $2k or so to the price, maybe less at invoice.
Soobs sell near invoice, so Outback wagons start near $21k, GT wagons at $22k. Add $800 for automatic, more for other options. The Outback Limited is currently about $25k with auto, so the same car with a B6 ought to fall in the $26-27k range, just slightly above your price range.
I'd recommend you also consider the Passat, but that may take you even further up in price, though you can get a V6 with 4Motion now.
-juice
Leif
Have fun on your test drives and let us know what your impressions are. I personally would have liked to have driven the GT to get a sense of the handling, but after our test drive of the OB, we nixed the Soobies because of other issues (see # 56).
George
I'm curious and would like to test drive one to see how 4Motion feels.
-juice
Leif
I want to buy an AWD WGN, and have narrowed the choices to the Soob and VW 4Motion for various reasons (see #41 above).
Before I get into the drive (and I apologize up front for the length of this post), I want to critique what I consider to be a slightly biased Edmond.com road test of the 2K OB LTD. To their credit (after bashing the AT mated to the 2.5 boxer--a no-brainer IMHO), they did recommend the 5-spd, which is how I'd order it anyway. They also mentioned, albeit in passing, the redesigned engine mounts (liquid-filled and quieter) and rear suspension (LOTS more room in back).
However, when you look at the pic of the interior, it looks like a 7' NBA center was driving the car. The front head rests were FULLY telescoped (why?) and looked like, from the vantage point, they almost go up through the opened sunroofs!
Additionally, their "picayune-ness" noted no compass in a "vehicle supposedly designed to combat the elements and take you down the path traveled infrequently enough that you could get lost." Not true. In fact, there is a compass display at the bottom of the automatically dimming rear view mirror--push the left button, guys, to enable it!
Again, to their credit, they hit upon many of the other attractions--warranty, off-road worthiness, comfort, and the many new safety changes (belts, bags, body).
Finally, the discussion ended on the cost--the bottom line. Their test car, at $28K, enters it into comparison with SUVs and the 4Motion. What they don't say (and maybe they can't) is that Soobs usually sell at or around invoice, which is about $24.6K for the LTD. You can't touch, even come close, any other comparably equipped AWD vehicle (CW pkg, leather, AWD w/ LS diff, etc., etc., etc.) for much less than $32K. (BTW, try to get a VW dealer to budge on the MSRP--except to inflate it!--for the scant-few 4Motions he might have!) That's about a $7K savings right out of the gate. Add fuel economy and maintenance costs savings and sprinkle in Soob's proven reliability (how can you quantify the headaches of trips to the dealer for warranty work) plus the cost of any repairs down the road, and the value is unmatched.
Also, I considered that Soob designs their cars around AWD, not as an add-on.
OK, what was the drive like? I currently own a '91 Passat GL 2.0L stick (pwr everything). About a month ago, I drove the 4Motion. Now, granted, it's a little like the apples-oranges comparison. While the Soob didn't have a V6, it wasn't too far back in the dust when held up to the GLX with the Tiptronic (talk about sluggish!). Rather peppy, I thought, and quiet, too, the boxer. Only wish there had been some snow to play in, as there was when I drove the VW!
Detail inside was comparable. In their review, Edmonds.com described the LTD's interior as "homely styling...and poor build quality." Based upon what they determined to be a production control problems doesn't constitute "poor" in my book. I found the interior styling on par with the 4Motion--somewhat spartan, not glitzy, and very practical. Even the leather seating seemed to be comparable in both comfort and quality. And there certainly was more room in the back.
In summation [:-)], I'd love to be able to justify the price of a 4Motion--until I can order one with a MT, it's not even a thought. Meanwhile, I was quite impressed with the OB LTD, and will likely proceed in this direction.
Thanks for listening!
Barry
Fit and finish: Passat wins here but not by a whole lot. Everything seems 'tighter' and more 'solid' on the Passat. The Soob was very nice (unlike the Edmund's review) but it just didn't have quite the overall quality of the Passat.
Cargo space: Unfortunately, the Soob doesn't work for me...have a BIG rhodesian ridgeback that accompanies me everywhere (and sometimes his buddies to). The Soob is SUPER skimpy on the cargo space (I know...better than before). It was ok when I put the seats down but otherwise not quite as useable for my purposes (i'm sure it is great for others). I need a car that can hold 3 dogs and 4 people.
Styling: I prefer the Soob styling by just a little. The Soob has a nice aggressive outdoorsy look that I think has been much improved for 2000. Previous models looked like they had a basic solid body with a bunch of plastic tacked on for embellishment...the 2000 looks less glued together. The Passat is a little more bland but has a nice refined look with clean lines and good proportions.
Power: I felt that the Passat was superior. Call me crazy but I liked the 1.8T engine with manual transmission...almost as gutsy as the much larger V6 probably due to hitting peak torque at only 1700 rpms. The V6 was a tiny bit more powerful/fast (not worth extra cost IMO) and the dealer didn't have one mated to a manual tranny so the comparison isn't really just. What is very interesting is that I didn't like the drive quality as much in the 4motion wagon. The wagon seemed to always 'drag'...i'm not sure what it was but the thing did not like to coast at all. For some reason the Outback (manual...very hard to find in bay area) did not feel as powerful or fast as any of the Passats. I know the numbers say they are close but the actual drive didn't bear that out.
Handling/Drive Quality: Again, the edge goes to the Passat. This is very subjective I know but the Soob handled more like my '96 4runner than it did a car. I was frankly shocked at the handling of the passat (again, the heavier wagons did not feel as peppy)...the reaction to both the driver and road was outstanding. Ok...the Soob didn't handle like my 4runner but it definitely felt more 'SUV-like' (not a bad thing...I LOVE the ride in the 4runner) while the Passat felt more like a finely tuned coupe.
Errata: Premium gas for Passat....yikes. Sticker price for Passat...yikes. Reliability...a toss up. Safety....pretty close.
Well, I'm glad I don't have a big need for a powerful AWD vehicle because the choice would have been a lot harder for me. I live in a mild climate (Bay Area) but I do go to the mountains a couple times a month on average. However, the 4runner kicks much butt in this regard so having maximal torque and AWD from a wagon is kind of pointless.
I need a commuter car that can hold a lot of cargo (sorry but the Outback is super small) and that is fun to drive (handling, looks, power and drive quality). I never thought I'd be buying a VW but it looks like I'm going to consider a 1.8T, manny tranny. The Outback was a solid car but the Passat was a tremendous pleasure to drive and met my personal requirements a little better.
If I was looking for AWD I'd be very torn between my like for the Passat and the more reasonable price of the Outback. The Passat 4Motion was listed at over 31K....WHOA!!!!!! If I were in the market for the Passat 4motion I would DEFINITELY wait a few months for the supply to increase and allow the sanity of the dealers to return (2K over MSRP...excuse me?!?!?!?!).
Whew.......:)
OT
OT - keep in mind the Soob is lifted and has more ground clearance. The GT is an inch lower and has lower profile tires, so you may have liked it much better.
Its 205/55R16 tires also have a circumference 6.6% smaller, which effectively gives it shorter gearing and slightly quicker acceleration.
Though it sounds like it didn't meet your needs in other ways. You may want to try the Forester, too, if the 3rd and 4th adult aren't 6 feet tall. It's lighter and feels more nimble, and cheaper to boot. The cargo area is much taller and may fit your dogs better too.
Still, the Passat is a sweet ride.
-juice
My only concern is the lack of side impact air bags in the Outback Base Wagon. My wife and I tried sitting in an Outback Limited, but the head room in the back was extremely limited with the moon roof.
Does anyone have any thoughts on safety of the Passat vs the Outback?
Thanks,
John R.
First of all, I noticed the same thing re: lack of headroom in the Outback Limited (and I'm only 5'8").
With respect to your question, the Passat Wagon specifically has not been tested by either NTHSA or IIHS. Only the 2000 Legacy Wagon has been tested by NTHSA -- it got 4 out of 5 stars for both driver and passenger in the Frontal Tests (the side impact results should be out by the end of the month). On the other hand the 2000 Passat Sedan has been tested by both agencies and received 5 stars in the frontal test (with side impact results also due later this month) by NHTSA and the highest rating by IIHS (for midsize cars).
Finally, the merits of a side air bag have been debated elsewhere in Townhall. Suffice it to say if you are a believer in their value, then you're question has been answered !! That was one of the reasons we ended up deciding on the Passat, along with the luxury factor and current availabilty of a V6.
Good luck with your decision. Let us know how things turn out !!
George
Passat offers many of these two. I think both are very safe overall (4 stars is still only a 10-20% chance of injury).
Make sure you factor in active safety, not just passive. In other words, measure how well you think each vehicle can avoid an accident in the first place (AWD/4Motion and ABS are key here).
Are you sure the back seat passengers will be that tall? Aren't they usually kids?
That moonroof opens, so they shouldn't have to feel claustrophobic (to the contrary, they'll love it).
Good luck with your search.
-juice
Just read in Autoweek about a parts crunch. Seems like their parts ordering network is buggy.
-juice
But even with my Escort I never made a significant warranty claim in almost 8 years and 107k miles.
I think nowadays cars are much more reliable.
-juice
Despite making some of the most reliable cars on the road, both share what is basically the worst warranty in the business, 3/36.
Only VW and Lotus offer a shorter bumper-to-bumper warranty, but even then VW offers much longer powertrain coverage.
Hyundai and Isuzu are the best right now. I think it took some serious guts to back up what are essentially unremarkable vehicles for that long.
-juice
My short list was the AWD Forester & the FWD Passat. Both great vehicles, but the VW won based on *my* selection criteria.
So now I have a 2000 VW Passat GLS Wagon 1.8T/5sp which has ASR. During recent snow & ice up here in Canada, on paved roads & driveways it worked flawlessly, providing complete control and confidence.
If you don't drive off-road, then you should include FWD+ASR in your selection process.
When conditions improve and it's drive time, the 1.8T/5spd really moves (0-100kph in under 8 secs) -- now I find excuses to drive :>}
The 2000 Passat GLX models now come with 205/55 x 16 wheels/tires.
AWD is more neutral in handling, where FWD will tend to understeer. Spreading the power to both axles also eliminates torque steer, though that would likely only be an issue with the V6. Finally, you don't have the same tires burdened with all the steering and all the accelerating.
We had a large storm dump 10-12 inches of the white stuff, and there's simply no way a FWD Passat would even be able to pull out of the driveway.
In fact, my neighbors with their european cars with AST+C, ASR, and DSC were asking me to buy them milk!
-juice
Their results echoed that of Consumer Reports.
4. Subaru Legacy Outback Limited - 85 points
3. Ford Taurus SE - 86 points
2. Saturn LW2 - 90 points
1. VW Passat GLS V-6 - 94 points
I haven't seen that article yet, is it in the March issue?
They should have waited for the Boxer 6 Outback, all other competitors had V6 engines. Also, why not test the Legacy GT, which is a much closer competitor (and surely would match their performance-biased tastes better than the Outback)?
The Passat GLS doesn't have 4Motion, only the GLX does. The Saturn and the Ford don't even offer it.
I'd like to see an apples-to-apples comparison, perhaps with the V70 AWD, Passat 4Motion, Audi A4 Avant Quattro, and the Boxer 6 Soob.
-juice
George
look, the 4motion is available in the GLS V6 package now:
http://vw.niello.com/newcars
No one will argue that the OB Limited is the better bargain between the two vehicles -- in fact, my wife and I were looking forward to it very much .... until we sat in one (couldn't get comfortable in one and thought the suspension was a little too floaty for our liking). All I can say is that anyone looking into either of these fine cars should drive both before deciding. They are different in their ride characteristics ( ie handling, acceleration, etc.) and ergonomics. Enough so that some will lean one way or another in terms of preference, while others will not appreciate much in order to justify the $$.
George
Both excellent vehicles yes, but not in the same class at all - nor priced like it.
you're right you get what you pay for.
Lets not even talk about the fact that the 1.8T engine is way overengineered and is easily, cheaply and safely chipped up to 190 hp which makes it extremely quick as wagons go (0-60 in about 8, 1/4 mile in about 15.5 - 16.0). All for the cost of $200.
Will the Soobs new 6banger cost $200 more than the base engine? If you really want to compare apples to oranges with price then you really need to factor in that the Soob V6 is going to add a couple thousand to the car...this puts it in very close proximity to the Passat 4motion GLX. Sure...the Soob will always have better ground clearance but this will always cost them in performance.
Also...the whole issue of price. Yes...within this specific Topic the Outback is cheaper (AWD comparison). However, if AWD isn't of primary importance (and to 99% of people it isn't even though they like to think it is) the cost of the Passat is very comparable to the price of a similarly equipped Soob (might still be a grand or two more - I got my Passat for $20,800...couldn't touch a similar Soob at that price).
Of course, to each their own and AWD definitely has a 'cool' factor. My wife and I have a '96 4runner that we use whenever we go camping in remote areas or to the snow so our need for AWD was way down the list (speaking of snow experience I had one just like Juice but where our cabin neighbor couldn't get his '98 Outback out of the snow while 4runner had zero prob with it). Everyone has a need they are trying to fill and I hope that people coming to these forums aren't misled by things like "Passat super expensive" or "base Passat engine is a dog" or "soob will be same price as now with bigger engine".
Thanks,
OT
-Whose apples to apples comparison got him a bargain on a Passat
the passat base engine ,1.8t,is not a dog but neither is the subaru boxer 4. i've driven an automatic a4 1.8t and my own auto legacy gt, and turbo or not, with the added weight of awd the a4 doesn't leave the subaru in the dust.the engine may be over engineered, but the percentage of vw owners who are going to use upgrade chips is negligible.also, the owner of the a4 quattro indicated he made a mistake in not going for the 2.8 v6 as the 1.8t was overtaxed by the weight of the awd.a 4 is a 4, and will not have the smooth acceleration of a v6, a fact i realize when i alternate between my subaru and my intrigue with its 195hp v6.
the subaru will undoubtedly increase in price by perhaps $2000 when the h6 arrives, but it will still be a bargain.
both the passat and subaru are great cars,and i was ready to buy the passat awd in 1999 when it was first announced.it never came out, i went to subaru, and it's a great car, as is the vw.
in any event enjoy whatever you're driving,be it passat or legacy,they are both terrific automobiles.
"I'd like to see an apples-to-apples comparison, perhaps with the V70 AWD, Passat 4Motion, Audi A4
Avant Quattro, and the Boxer 6 Soob."
This was done about 1.7 years ago in one of the standard US mags (I think R&T)! Though it was a boxer 4 Soob.
JP
I think this is the "comparo" that Morgan was refering to:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/RoadAndTrack/FrameSet/0,1169,_sl_RoadAndTrack_sl_Article_sl_0_cm_1182_cm_835_1_2_cm_00,00.html
While it did review the Soobie GT, V70R AWD and A4 2.8 Avant, the Passat V6 GLS was only a FWD. Furthermore, as stated in the first paragraph of page 2: "The four we've gathered here are not meant to represent a head-to-head comparison, but rather a survey of what we feel are the best of the affordable sports wagons."
Still, it makes for good reading.
George
thank for the article, i recall it now. i'd like to see a rematch when the 220hp h6 comes out this summer. not to take anything away from the other vehicles, as the a4 was my first choice(1.8t quattro), the passat awd with v6 my second in january 1999. the a4 was pricey, the '99 vw awd didn't happen and the volvo was extremly high priced and never a consideration.
my gt limited, though lacking the punch of my intrigue with it's low end torque of the 195hp 3.8l v6,is a delight to drive. i can only surmise that the gt mated to the h6 will be a rocket, especially if subaru comes out with a 5 speed automatic.even with a price increase of $2000-$3000 it will be a bargain, considering the as tested prices for the passat,a4, and volvo ranged from $29,830 to $35,725 to $42,415, with the gt coming in at $24790.
You can bet that C/D will be out with a comparo of these wagons once the h6 Soobies arrive ! Especially given the increasing popularity of wagons, and the "anti-SUV" sentement among "auto-journalists." Plus, just within the past year C/D has done two comparos on wagons alone (one was the on the Luxo-European wagons and the other was on the small wagons.
George
Seems funny to me (as an ex-European) for Road and Track to be writing about sports-wagons where they test the 165hp GT with autobox (when a stick option was available) against 190hp V6s with tiptronic and a 230hp V70 with turbo. Wonder what the result would have been if the GT had been a 5 speed. Maybe much closer, particularly when you factor in the handling and value aspects.
If anything, my 5-speed 98 GT is a little too short geared - ideal for tight and twisty mountain roads as used in the R&T comparison - but it really wants to be relaxing in top gear at anything over about 50-60mph
The February 2000 edition of Car Magazine in the UK tested a non-turbo AWD 2.5 legacy wagon against a non-turbo 5 FWD cylinder passat, both about 155hp, both 5-speed, both about 22k sterling. The review could hardly split the pair, which I think is a fair result (given that awd is seen as a perfomance aid rather than a winter necessity in most of the UK).
Having spent the last 2 days with a 2000 Legacy L sedan loaner, it is obvious that the boxer 4 really needs a manual gearbox, more power, more cylinders, a turbo (or all of the above) to make it come alive. I am looking forward to getting my car back this afternoon.
Maybe the boxer 4 with auto is OK in a lighter body e.g. Impreza, maybe even Forester. However, where I come from, such a suggestion would have you laughed off the street. Imprezas are rally cars. The only Forester that sells any volume has a turbo.
All this makes me a little sad the 5-speed 2000 GT wagon never made it to Canada. The reverse of the Focus debate that has been raging elsewhere on Edmunds.
Roll on the boxer 6, and then let's see what happens:
JP
Cheers.
Randy
As I tried to point out, Road and Track was not really doing a comparo when they tested all 4 wagons --- for some of the very reasons you mentioned plus the price differences. I think the whole point was just to show what the venerable station wagon has envolved into here in the States.
George
I largely agree with your statement, but the article does finish with several verdicts on the 'comparison' (pages 8-9) , so I think we are entitled to comment on these and the content of the report.
I am more interested in using the opportunity to suggest that the boxer 4 Legacy line, particularly in automatic mode, is getting a bit tired. Perhaps the normally aspirated boxer 4 has been taken as far as it will go. I tested lots of 96-98 outbacks with auto, and it was not until I found the manual GT that I felt really good about signing the cheque.
It is possible that Subaru will soon have only one engine across the line up, with the new impreza moving up to the 2.5l, and I guess likely delays and teething trouble in the introduction of the turbo WRX and the H6. The problem that the GT now has is that it is not different enough from the rest of the Legacy range. It needs more than just sports suspension and an upscale interior to deserve the GT name. The crazy thing is that a twin-turbo 280hp 2.0 GT sedan and wagon currently exist in other markets. So, the basic chassis can obviously handle the increased power. How difficult would it be for SoA (& Canada) to bring this one in now to give them a true performance flagship to go head-to-head with Audi, BMW, VW, Volvo and the rest.
By the way, I was crazy about Audi and the later Passats while in the UK (high depreciation delivers cheap late model used cars) . In Canada, even used, they were outside my price bracket, so I stopped thinking about them (unless I can persuade my buddy to go with the A4 quattro). For an identical price, I think most people (me included, I think) would take an A4 quattro or a V6/turbo passat with awd over a boxer 4 legacy. However, the GT is in my garage while the A4 quattro (S4 version with twin-turbos of course) is a magazine photo taped to my office wall.
Cheers, JP
It's also a 5 speed. So even with the less torquey (but higher revving) Phase I engine, it's plenty quick.
0-60 has been measured at 8.8-9.5 seconds, but like I said, that's hardly the point of AWD. You can't spin the tires at take off, so it's slow off the line. 30-50 and 50-70 passing are better, relatively speaking.
BTW, while Passat sedan and wagon are very highly rated by Consumer Reports (both #1 in their class), the Forester's overall score was actually significantly higher (also #1 in its class).
Clearly, we're talking about the creme de la creme.
-juice
You do raise a good point about the aging (yet reliable boxer 4 engine). As North American's we are definitely deprived of the various engine options afforded to the European and Asian market. You mentioned the 280 hp twin turbo GT, how about this as the Audi entrant into the "ultimate" comparo !
http://www.audiworld.com/model/rs4.html
George
Your RS4 has to be close to perfection. I want one. However I'm worried about three things:
1. My licence
2. My Old English Sheepdog pinned (probably permanently) to the tailgate when I floor the gas
3. When they bring it here, they'll give it an autobox and cupholders, remove the turbos and raise it another 12" off the ground.
All the best
JP