Howdy, Stranger!

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





2013 Subaru Outback

2456713

Comments

  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,599
    edited June 2012
    I'd take a Legacy GT over the C250 even if they cost the same amount!

    Oh you'd take a bag of poo over most cars as long as it had a Subaru badge on it!!

    Turn it around - I'd take the C250 if it cost the same as the Legacy GT. And in reality the Legacy is creeping closer to the price of an MB which suprises me.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited June 2012
    Go drive a C250, you'll take that back.

    The throttle on that car is awful. The first inch of travel does nothing, literally. Then you press it more, and after some lag, all the power comes on at once. So it's lag, then more power than you wanted.

    In Sport mode is slightly less bad.

    C350 ($40,575) is a much nicer car, but below that, I'll pass.

    In fact I just read that for the C300 4Matic models with will use a de-tuned 3.5l V6 instead of the turbo.

    Heck, they should do that for RWD too!
  • vrmvrm Posts: 301
    I'd wait for the new one just to get the timing chain, and the easy-access oil filter. Oil changes would take 5 minutes.

    Does easy-access oil filter mean I do not have to slide under the car to change oil?

    Also, I did not see any mention on the Subaru website or press release. How do you know about this easy-access filter?

    Thanks.
  • dcm61dcm61 Posts: 1,432
    You still have to slide under to drain the oil.

    The 2013 Outback uses the 2011 & 2012 Forester FB25 engine ... there are pictures all over the web showing the easy-access (top mounted) oil filter. It's also the same location on the 2012 Impreza FB20 engine.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Add a fumoto valve for the oil drain plug, and you may only need to squat down once or twice.
  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    Just got a report from someone at SOA that has driven one, who said that the suspension has been tweaked considerably and the transmission is a Phase Two and much quieter on the ’13 MY.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    stopped at a deal today to check out colors, and the salesguy shared updates they had.

    along with the new engine/trans, the front end (bumper and lights) will be redesigned, they are adding rear seat air ducts, and there are going to be a few new colors. Might be a few more things I forgot, but those were the big ones.

    and the MSRP of a 2.5i limited is going up only about $400, so a good deal for what you are getting.

    They will show up soon, and the dealers can order within the next week.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Glad to know they're listening to feedback.

    The roof rack cross bars are farther apart now, too. Remember first year models had no folding mirrors? I bet real-world MPG will improve with the new engine. Forester did if you look at fueleconomy.gov reports.

    Nice to see they fixed all those mistakes.
  • vrmvrm Posts: 301
    1) Is the FB25 engine better than the BOXER engine?

    2) Does the back seat fold *flat* in a Outback?

    Thanks.
  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    the FB25 is still a boxer engine (that just signifies being a flat, horizontally opposed engine). But it has some advantages over the previous engine.

    No clue about the seat, but when I tried it I don't recall seeing a noticeable bump.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Timing chain vs belt, better torque curve, oil filter at top for ez access, and no coolant flow thru the heads to end gasket leaks.

    Same hp but significant changes under the skin.
  • mr_practicalmr_practical Posts: 2
    edited June 2012
    Hello folks. I'm about to take the plunge after all the years of owning Audis (sedans and wagons) so I am trading my aging A6 Wagon in for an Outback. I know it won't be a perfect comparison since I am used to driving an older Audi A6 Quattro Wagon but I figured someone should take a stab at it just to give some people a reference for some of the simpler things like handling, road feel, etc. I loved my old A6 but after nearly 16 years and 180,000 miles, the instrument cluster just blew, brakes need replacement and other things finally gave out and I also wanted side air curtain bags that the Audi did not have (last model before it became standard) for my current driving. I'm a moderate mileage driver (25-30,000 a year) but I live and commute into New York City which is probably the most "car adverse" city to commute into from a wear and tear standpoint. The pounding of road conditions plus the harshness of the winter/summer routines do take a toll on any car.

    I know a lot of people who swear by their Subaru so I'm putting my money on it and going for a 2013 Outback 2.5i Limited on lease to see how the car works. If I like it, I'll buy it out for my son and let him drive it the first 100,000 miles or so, if not, it'll be back to Audi at the end of the lease. I'm hoping that this is a more affordable option for my kids to keep the car a long time, vs. putting $45-50,000 into a new A6 Wagon or the Allroad that is coming out this year. Stay tuned.

    I will probably get a lot of the options since they all look pretty interesting. I hope to do this comment column as a long term "driving commentary". The lease program is supposed to come out early July and I've already picked out all the options for my car when they start writing up orders. I like the fact that this model has the extra 2 mpg over the 2012 plus the stiffer chassis which will hopefully give it a better ride closer to the Audis which are legendary in their road hugging characteristics. I'm not expecting a high performance car but I will try and give people some useful commentary between the two cars (even though the Audi I last drove is an older one). I recently had an Audi loaner and while some of the gismos were nice, the driving feel of the car really had not changed much in comparison to my older car other than the newer cars were a bit more powerful and tighter on the front end which I would have assumed given the higher wear and tear on my older car's suspension vs the loaner. I am also hoping that even though the Subaru has a higher road clearance, the boxer mounted engine is supposed to keep the center of gravity lower but we'll see how this feels when I get behind the wheel. I have another SUV at home so I already know the feel of a somewhat taller car and I'm hoping the Subaru drives closer to the Audi sedan profile.

    I haven't locked in the pricing and lease yet but I'll probably wind up with a car with an invoice price around $35,000. I am not getting the bigger engine intentionally as I want the better gas mileage. Except for a couple of smaller cosmetic things, I'm going to get every electronic option to keep the car's resale value someday on the higher side. I'll probably even try the Eyesight option even though I'm usually not a version 1.0 buyer of anything and having something controlling the car besides the driver isn't my usual sense of control (although blindspot warning is something I do think makes sense). Also, unless you need to tow or haul something of size, who needs anything higher than the 170+ horsepower engine. My 130+ hp Audi A6 has more than enough power to accelerate on any of the highways with short ramps like the parkway entrances in Connecticut. Anyone needing more than 170 is just throwing money away for no good reason except vanity on the 1/4 mile time tests.

    Wish me luck on the new Subaru and I'll try and report out my experience as I go.
  • otis123otis123 Posts: 426
    In our 161K miles driving our LLBean H6 Outback, there were two or three times the extra horsepower saved our lives. Driving in the greater tri state area and into/out of the city. I'd reconsider the advantage of the extra horsepower - it rides differently, too... more upscale like an Audi. Didn't know the A6 came in a 4... Good luck!
  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    Drove a 2013 legacy last night (2.5i). It actually seemed pretty quick to me. Hard to imagine it not being enough motor to get the job done. And definitely better MPG to go along with it.

    also, Subaru has pricing up for the 2013 now (on the build your own). I specced one out identical to a 2012 on Edmunds (a 2.5i limited with moonroof) and MSRP was only up by $290. A definite bargain considering the upgrades they added.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    the 2013 brochure is out too (looks like they beat the cars this year). one thing I noticed is they list the special appearance package in the brochure (gray trim, saddle leather, and seat memory mostly), but it is not listed on the build your own page, so that may be late availability.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • vrmvrm Posts: 301
    A definite bargain considering the upgrades they added.

    I am not sure which "upgrades" you are referring to.

    The only two changes in the 2013 are the revised roof rack with integrated cross bars and a different engine.

    You have to pay for all other options and/or upgrades.
  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    new engine and transmission upgrade (better performance, drive-ability, long term durability and maintenance requirement and MPG), the cross bars, rear seat air vents I remember. Plus new electro gauges on the premium model that I priced. And I think there were a few other minor tweaks.

    so overall, for less than $300 (plus being a model year newer) it was a good bargain for what you get, especially if you plan to keep it for a long time (and don't want to worry about head gaskets or timing belts).

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,657
    edited July 2012
    Drove one about a week ago, a 2.5 Premium CVT. Was pretty impressed, as the car seemed a bit quicker than the '12 model; and it seemed to handle a bit better too, although I didn't get to drive it on any challenging roads. Bottom line is that I came away impressed.

    Today I went to another dealer to drive another, as I always like to follow up with a second road test to confirm my initial impressions, and to hopefully garner some more insight into the vehicle.

    Well today I was not disappointed, as the model I drove was a Limited CVT with the new and updated navigation—and the all-new optional Eyesight! Not only that I got to drive it on some fun country roads, as was able to check out the revised suspension.

    Comments:

    • The suspension is a big improvement over the '12 model. The car felt really taut on the curvy country roads. Subaru has claimed that it has reduced body roll by 40 percent. I believe it. The car felt much more "Euro-like" on the country back roads. As good as this felt, I'm sure the Legacy is even better. A big thumbs up here.

    • As with the earlier version I drove, the '13 Outback with this new FB25 engine felt quicker than earlier models. Even the salesman who was with me commented on that, as this was the first time he had been in the '13 model. He also commented that the CVT whine, found on earlier models, was absent in this car. My only wish is that engine had direct injection with ~ 190 or so horsepower, as 173 hp is merely average in this segment. Having said that, there is definitely more low- and mid-range power than before, and that's where most people spend their time anyway. So again, a solid thumbs up here.

    • The navigation also seems to have been improved. The salesman commented on the graphics being better than before. It also uses an SD card for easy map upgrades. We played with it a bit, but really can't compare it to the older version, as I'm not that familiar with it. I can say what I saw here was fine, and can only assume it's better than what they previously offered. A rear-view camera is part of the package, and that worked fine—and is almost worth the price in itself. For those who tow (me!), a rear-view camera is really helpful in lining up the trailer hitch with the trailer.

    • As to the Eyesight, I had mixed feelings. It warns you should happen to wander out of your lane, which is good. However any time you change lanes intentionally, it also warns you with a buzzer. After a while I think that buzzer might drive you nuts. So I'm not so sure I like that aspect.

    Now the adaptive cruise control (part of Eyesight) I love! You have three choices of how much distance you want between you and the car in front. You also get a graphic on the instrument cluster showing what distance of separation that you have selected. I like that. When you come upon a slower car in front, you are alerted by a quick buzz and a graphic of the rear of a car appears next to the cruise indicator on the dash. The car also slows to the speed of the vehicle in front. You don't have to do anything. It's really neat. Should the car in front speed up and pull away, the graphic on the instrument cluster disappears along with a buzz to let the driver know that the vehicle in front is no longer within the CC range. Also neat is the actual mph that the CC is set at is displayed. In my case, it was 60 mph.

    The downside to Eyesight is that you have to get navigation and the moonroof. Those who don't want those features are out of luck.

    This vehicle also had the optional rear seat back rubber protectors, which work in conjunction with the rear rubber cargo floor area protector. This is the first time I've seen these. They've been offered in other markets before, but never here. The seat back protectors appear to be permanently attached to the seats, which may (or may not) be a problem?

    The MSRP for this vehicle was a bit over $35K. Yeah, that's a lot for a 4-cylinder car.

    Bob
  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,584
    Showed this to my wife, since the OB is on her short list. I drove the legacy, but we have not yet seen a 2013 OB. Might have to go searching next week.

    She liked the adaptive cruise, not that we would ever get much use out of it, since I hardly ever use cruise, and am paranoid anyway so I drive with my foot hovering over the brake. And she rarely drives on longer highway stints (that is my job!)

    Also, you get the rear view camera on the limited with the moonroof package, even without the navigation, it just has it in the rear view mirror instead of the display screen.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • dcm61dcm61 Posts: 1,432
    Also, you get the rear view camera on the limited with the moonroof package, even without the navigation, it just has it in the rear view mirror instead of the display screen.

    Rear view camera is also standard on Premium w/ moonroof (since MY2011).
Sign In or Register to comment.