Howdy, Stranger!

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





Subaru Legacy/Outback

1342343345347348383

Comments

  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,447
    Could very well be some water. If you have a low tank on a cold night there can be condensation inside the fuel tank. This is one reason to keep a full tank when it is cold. One of best ways to remedy is to run a few tanks with ethanol. The alcohol soaks up the water.
  • So I went to the dealer today to drop off the car. I asked them to look into the car running hot, and also the fact that I got less than 20mpg on my first tank of gas despite perfect tire pressure and very conservative shifting.

    While there, I finally got a copy of the 30k service they did to prepare teh car for sale. I compared it to the Subaru maintenance interval recommendations. Everything matched, except my dealer does not replace brake fluid. I showed them the print out of what Subaru calls for, and they said that every dealer gets to create their own 30k mile service package, and this dealer does not include brake fluid change in the package.

    Strike anyone else as weird?!?

    Chuck
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,901
    It seems that the vast majority of dealerships have their own service schedule. It's up to you as the owner to ensure they are doing what the manufacturer recommends.
  • hoxhox Posts: 24
    I'd love some feedback on these two cars from those who own them as I am shopping and very impressed with the new engine, love the sunroof. I only wish they leased better!
  • rob_mrob_m Somewhere North of BostonPosts: 807
    Strike anyone else as weird?!?

    Yes, as my dealer seems to load up on every service, citing 'following an extreme conditions maintenance plan', and 'doing this will make your car last longer'.

    FWIW, brake fluid change costs about $20, and I would highly recommend it at 30k. Rob M.
  • I have been driving a 2002 WRX wagon for almost 4 years. I needed something taller, tougher and more comfortable.

    Hence.....following exhaustive research of many months and weeks, the 2005 Outback is it.

    So yesterday, finally, I test drove the XT (limited). Never mind what I consider to be a wonderful interior and (for once for a Subaru) 1/2 decent looks.

    It's about drivability/performance.

    BTW....after driving manual trans. most of my life, the demo happened to be an automatic (sport shift, etc....whatever). Bottom line - forget the pain-in-the-*@# manual...the auto was just fine and fun. Acceleration, although not quite as good as the WRX, was great. Some reviews speak of persistent turbo lag. I thought lag was not an issue at all. The car handled wonderfully on snowy roads (it had fresh Bridgestone WS-50's).

    The only knock is (I have read this somewhere as well.) the floaty/bouncy suspension. If only it could be a bit stiffer.

    Then today I was all pumped to demo the 3.0 VDC.

    2 things: 1) after fooling around in an icy parking lot inducing skids, I found I did not like the VDC. Instead of being able to go from understeer to oversteer by adding a bit of gas, the VDC seemed to just want to slow me down and keep me plowing straight off on a tangent. I really think now that if you have a few reflexes and good tires, and like to DRIVE (underline 'drive'), there is no need (for VDC). On top of everything I dislike the mandatory taupe leather and the wood trim.

    Oh yeah.....did I mention the 3.0 engine? It is GUTLESS in comparison with the 2.5 turbo. I had read many 'expert' reviewers saying that "performance was more or less the same with both engines, the six cylinder being a bit smoother".............BALONEY

    So all that remains to do is try and get an OK deal on the 2.5XT(Ltd)...hopefully I'll get that done in a few days.
  • lark6lark6 Posts: 2,565
    If you like everything else about the car, especially the drivetain, maybe you should consider a Legacy GT wagon. Its suspension is lower and, IIRC, stiffer than the Outback's. I can't speak from experience however; though I have driven an '05 GT wagon I haven't driven an '05 Outback.

    Good luck,
    Ed
  • katwaykatway Posts: 19
    Disagree with analysis of 3.0 H-6 boxer engine. This engine is terrific. Everyone that rides in my 3.0R is incredibly impressed by the power and refinement of the engine. It is exceptionally smooth and provides a sense of luxury. It's so quiet, people can't even tell it's running. Yet, when I take off, people are surprised by all the power and the smooth shifting... it doesn't even feel like your going that fast when your passing everyone on the road.

    In addition, the VDC has come in very handy during ice and snowstorms. I've managed iced up ramps with Jeeps, Explorers, and other AWD/4x4 vehicles sliding off to the side. The 3.0R didn't even slip a bit. Most upscale cars are adding this feature as a standard because it has proven to get the job done.

    If you prefer the XT, that is understandable... everyone has their own preferences and I certainly wouldn't knock the vehicle.

    From my experience, most of the expert reviews on the 3.0R engine have been right on target.

    Personally, I'm looking forward to the Tribeca platform that will share this engine. Subaru has done a terrific job with it.
  • Ed

    It would without question be the legacy GT (wagon)...i have not driven it, but i find it very attractive to look at and i'm sure it's a pleasure to drive. Trouble is our roads here in Quebec are about what you'd find if you ventured a little off the beaten track in a place like Costa Rica. (they pour all our huge tax $ into healthcare i guess)

    Good thing about Costa Rica however is all they have is big honkin' potholes. Here we have the potholes plus cracks plus bumps, etc, etc.

    I live in the country 90 miles east of Montreal and travel 50/50 dirt roads/'paved' roads. Again, the state of the roads is so bad I need something to (a) soften the ride, (b) hold up to the pounding a little better and (c) get out of and into my frequently unplowed driveway.

    There really is, for me, no choice other than the XT.

    I'll be making a deal somewhere on Monday.

    I have one main issue to iron out 1st. My (small town) local dealer can't match the Montreal dealer's price.....there's a $1300 difference, and perhaps more if the Montreal dealer improves on my local dealer's trade-in offer for the WRX. (i'll find out on friday)

    I could easily find a reason to go to Montreal a few times a year for maintenance.

    OTOH, I do like the dealership here at home. They have serviced my WRX very well the past 3 years. They have all kinds of free shuttles, courtesy cars.....they aim to please.

    As for any out there whose back i may have caused to mildly get up regarding my trashing of the 3.0 engine, my apologies. The words I chose were a reflection of how unexpectedly different I found the 3.0 to be vis-a-vis the 2.5T.
  • lark6lark6 Posts: 2,565
    I understand your rationale perfectly. It was one of the reasons I chose a Forester XT over a Legacy GT. Our roads in eastern Pennsylvania, while probably less rural than the ones you travel, are pretty beaten up, full of cracks, frost heaves, potholes and loose gravel. Having the longer-travel suspension makes them easier to handle on a daily basis and IMO offsets any loss in handling on a street-driven car. There are things you can do to reduce the body lean without losing the ride height.

    Good luck with your purchase.

    Ed
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,576
    Is it not possible to purchase the car in Montreal and have it serviced at your local dealer? It seems as though you would be receiving the best both have to offer if you could arrange it this way.
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • .......am i just a pathetic sucker who needs to toughen up? i don't know - after test driving a couple of cars and talking financing options with the local dealer, and after three years of very good service they have given me on my WRX, I find myself falling a bit for the 'have-pity-and-show-support-for-your-local-dealer-or-risk-walmart- izing-the-car-industry' spiel.

    Yes, they would have to service the vehicle if I asked them too, but perhaps there would not be a lot of friendliness to go with.

    It is handy to have a local dealer who will deliver me to the golf course and pick me up after my round while my car is being worked on.

    Like I said however - if there ends up being $1500-$2000 savings to be had by buying in Montreal, I'll probably have to do it.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,576
    I see from where you are coming, but I doubt that the local dealer will treat you with less friendliness should you decide to purchase in Montreal. My guess is that more money (for the dealer) is made in the service department than in the sales department. After all, you buy the car once, but you have it serviced time after time after time. It is in the dealership's best interest to keep you coming back for service, even if it cannot compete with the "big boys" for the initial sales.

    Best of luck to you!
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • thanks xwesx

    i will post again next monday or tuesday to finish my story.
  • transaction completed in Montreal 2.5XT LTD, will take delivery next week sometime.
    decided on a 4 year lease.
    just have to get rid of (by all accounts very crappy) OEM tires and buy snows and summers.
    leaning toward HAK2 studded and Turanza LS-V.
  • sdufordsduford Posts: 577
    Both are excellent choices for tires. I would recommend you make a deal with your dealer or a local tire shop to swap the tires out immediately though. Otherwise once they have a bit of mileage they will be worth next to nothing. I got $200 for my RE-92s on eBay and they only had 2000 kms on them.

    Sly
  • sduford

    my dealer offered me the same - $50 ea. for the 92's.

    monday i'll see if the tire store can do a bit better.

    have just read a bit about the upcoming HAK 4. square studs, genuine Finnish rapeseed oil of all things, and supposed improved grip vs. the HAK2. i don't think it will be out 'til next year however, so what to do, what to do?

    i guess i could put on the Turanzas and try to be careful for these last 4 or 5 weeks of winter and wait 'til next fall to get snows. i suppose i'll be driving a bit on the slow side for a month or so, breaking in the XT, so....maybe this is easily do-able.
  • c_hunterc_hunter Posts: 4,487
    H4 Turbo has a lot more guts than the H6 at lower RPMs, by a long shot. You can feel it and the power curves show it as well. On the highway, they feel about the same.

    I had the previous generation H6, and I agree, it is one smooth and quiet engine. In fact, I have not really come across a nicer engine in any car. If you want refinement, the H6 is hard to beat and it is much better than the H4 turbo. That said, Subaru made huge improvements in NVH on the 05 Outback models, and you're less likely to notice the H4's more raucous behavior.

    Craig
  • I've got a 97 Outback with about 83,000 miles. I'm starting to look for new tires. I live in the Seattle area. I'm looking for a tire that will do well in the rain and maybe a little bit of snow but I really want a quiet tire. So far I'm considering Michelin MXV4, Michelin XW4, and Michelin HydroEdge. Any opinions on these or others?
  • bkaiser1bkaiser1 Posts: 464
    I had these on my 01 Outback -- they were great tires, if expensive. On the highway, they were silent and still handled well at high speeds in the mountains. Snow traction was okay -- at least as good as other all seasons I've had. I wouldn't hesitate to buy them again.

    B
  • hoxhox Posts: 24
    I'd love to know as I may wait if its signficant like a 6 speed.

    hox
  • garandmangarandman Posts: 524
    I have 34,000 miles (just by chance I pulled into the tire dealer at exactly 120,000 miles) on HydroEdge on a '97 OBW. They still show 9/32nds tread depth - 11/32nd is new.

    These tires are supurb in rain and handle well in the dry. Best all-around passenger car tire I've ever had. The other tire that OBW owners seem to like is the Goodyear TripleTread, but I have not driven on them.
  • K9LeaderK9Leader Posts: 112
    I replaced the OEMs on my 2000 OBW at about 35K miles (when I bought the car). The OEMs had a bit of tread left but one had a chunk out of the sidewall, and I wanted some new tread for the winter.
    I got a good deal on the MXV4s at Costco. I've had the MXV4s on my 1994 Lincoln Mark VIII (same size as the OBW), and have been satisfied.
    They are a bit expensive, but worth it. This is the fourth time in the last six years I have used Costco for tires -- consistently the best price I could find anywhere.
  • ebony5ebony5 Posts: 142
    Any suggestions on what type/brand and size battery I should get for my '96 OBW, and approx. how much it would cost. I live in New York City. Thanks.
  • amsbearamsbear Posts: 147
    I just replaced mine on my 98 OBW two days ago. The replacement was a ProStart from Pep Boys and the size is a Group 35 with a 550 CCA rating. It cost me about $70. They had two other choices there in the same size category which were a little more expensive with the same or just a little better CCA rating.

    Alan
    98 OBW Ltd
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Sounds good to me, I bet that's a lot more CCAs than the stock battery.

    -juice
  • ebony5ebony5 Posts: 142
    Thanks for the info. Do the batteries for the '98 and '96 OBWs have the same group size;
    Group 35?
  • amsbearamsbear Posts: 147
    They should take the same size. I just checked the Autozone website and for both 96 & 98 they offer Group 35 as the OEM replacement or optionally the Group 26R.

    Actually, there was a label on the top of my old battery that had the size and CCA specs. Group 35 with 490 CCA.

    The battery swap took less than 5 minutes to do with just a 10mm deep socket wrench. Remove the two nuts that hold the securing apparatus, and then loosen the two nuts for the battery terminal connectors. Take off the securing apparatus, move the wires out of the way and lift out the old battery. Install new one by reversing these steps.
    Oh yeah, add another couple of minutes to reset the clock and radio presets ;)

    Alan
    98 OBW Ltd
  • lfdallfdal Posts: 679
    If you have the time and inclination, its a great time to remove any old crud from around and under the old battery box.

    The battery box may have some old acid / crud built up from the old battery. Removing that and rinsing the area with some baking soda and water, then rinsing with some clear water will help neutralize any acid that's accumulated over the years.

    Don't forget to wear rubber gloves and eye protection.

    Also, don't forget to disconnect the negative (-) terminal first. Else, you might find out just how much juice is left in the old battery.

    Larry
Sign In or Register to comment.