Howdy, Stranger!

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





Subaru Legacy/Outback 2005+

1218219221223224356

Comments

  • sdufordsduford Posts: 577
    Do not put regular gas in a Turbo engine!

    It will cause detonation and at best the ECU will have to pull WAY back and you will have terrible performance. At worst you will very quickly cause severe damage to your engine.

    Some engines can live with lower ocatane,a t least for a while. But not these turbo engines!!!!

    Sly
  • sdufordsduford Posts: 577
    I'm not discounting initial quality at all. I was just pointing out that this statistic doesn't mean that Subarus are more reliable then a Lexus, in the long run.

    Sly
  • dcm61dcm61 Posts: 1,464
    ...assuming the bump up is fixed at current levels. I wouldn't count on it.

    It's been 16 to 20 cents more for years in my area.

    Unless the additives / octane boosters (or whatever they use to get premium) change in price, the price of crude should not affect the price difference in grades.

    I'm sure Colin will set me straight if I'm out of line. :-D

    DaveM
  • c_hunterc_hunter Posts: 4,487
    Don't do it -- definitely use premium. On regular gas, the timing will be retarded to prevent detonation and the end result is going to be less power, less boost, etc. If you're going for the turbo motor, best to fully exploit it rather than hobble it.

    I'll tell you right now, I love my XT, but if gas mileage and gas costs matter a lot to you, then it's not the right vehicle for you.

    CRaig
  • kyfdxkyfdx Posts: 29,105
    About half the Shell stations in my area charge a premium of $0.22 now... But, we get 93 octane for that, not 91.... The rest of the stations are still at a $0.20 difference..

    MODERATOR
    Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • myamaxmyamax Posts: 2
    Hello! I just sold my car today (an older Honda Prelude) and have decided on the Legacy 2.5i sedan. While I have taken one out for a test drive a time or two, I do have a few questions for those of you Subaru owners:

    - I am seriously considering an automatic, after 12 years of driving a standard car. Has anyone purchased the automatic and in hindsight wished they would have got the manual instead? Am thinking about the cars 'get up and go' (and dont want to go for the turbo model due to $$...too many student loans to pay off first!!)

    - with respect to mileage, it seems you folks are getting somewhere in the mid to high 20's with your Subaru's. Out of curiosity, in order to improve the mileage has anyone tried an 89 or even 91 octane fuel in their 2.5i? I know in my Honda using the higher octane (91) fuel made a significant difference in the mileage which more than made up for the extra cost, so I always used the premium fuel. The Subaru manual says the minimum recommended octane is 87...just curious to know if anyone has tried something better.

    - any other advice re: purchasing my Subaru would be appreciated. I am hoping to have bought and received it within the next 2 weeks.
    Thank you.
  • krzysskrzyss Posts: 843
    "there is upto 3 ft of snow, i never showel"

    It is called ground clearance not AWD ;-)

    Krzys
  • sdufordsduford Posts: 577
    Personally I didn't like the 2.5i with the 4EAT.

    That engine was surprisingly peppy with the manual, but was too slow for me with the auto...

    Just my 2 cents...

    Sly
  • sweet_subiesweet_subie Posts: 1,394
    other suvs that have same ground clearance spins, what do attribute this to ? i will to AWD
  • krzysskrzyss Posts: 843
    that my Legacy GT with similar AWD would get hanged on 3 ft of snow. I would attribute it to low clearance and not presence of AWD.
    AWD would get me suspended further down the road.

    Krzys

    PS 3ft of snow asks for ground clearance. Which and how many wheels are spinning is minor issue if they cannot touch the ground.

    PS2 Do you have 3ft of snow on the ground when you drive or road is plowed and you just go through the bank the plows made ?

    Other SUVs have probably wrong or bald tires. Driver could be an issue too.
  • occkingoccking Posts: 346
    I have the 2.5 4EAT & getting used to it. Sure, not real quick off the line, but more than adequate. Sure beats my wife's 97 Honda Odessey with the 2.4 140 horses job. As I put more miles on it does seem a little more responsive. So far, at close to 6000 miles have averaged 24.8 (actual) miles so hoping it will improve with the warmer weather.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Max makes a good point, public perception lags several years behind reality.

    If Hyundai stays on track, then my guess is 5 years from now the public will think of them as a quality car maker. The jokes have already mostly stopped.

    OTOH, Lexus could slack off completely for 4-5 years before the public would recognize that.

    -juice
  • njswamplandsnjswamplands Posts: 1,760
    look at mercedes and bmw. look at their reliability. according to juice law they have hell to pay in about 2 years.
  • hondafriekhondafriek Ottawa CanadaPosts: 2,924
    Regular in this area is costing about $3.87 a gallon and premium usually runs 50 cents a gallon more. For those that don't know my location, it is Ottawa Canada.

    Cheers Pat.
  • sdufordsduford Posts: 577
    You are incorrect Pat.

    a US gallon is 3.785 litres, and the exchange rate is about 1.22. Currently gas is about 79 cents in Ottawa, so that is .79 x 3.785 / 1.22 = $2.45 US.

    Premium is usually 6 more cents per litre which would be .85 x 3.785 / 1.22 = $2.63 US or 18 cents more per gallon).

    And if you go across the river to an Ultramar gas station on Thursdays, the premium is the same price as the 89 octane, saving you 3 cents a litre.

    Sly
  • hypovhypov Posts: 3,068
    sduford, "Subaru Crew: 2005+ Subaru Legacy/Outback" #6741, 8 Mar 2005 12:13 pm

    Yes, but a CAD earned and spent in Canada is equivalent to a USD earned and spent in USA.

    CAD 3.87/gal is expensive.

    -Dave
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,504
    No doubt about that, Krzys! The Subaru's AWD will take it through deeper snow than a 2wd with similar GC could handle (all other factors, such as tires and driver ability, being equal), but in my experience (and I get 6 months/year to play with '96 OBW ~ 6.5" clearance), anything more than 14" of sustained depth will "get me suspended further down the road." :-D If it is "wet" (very compact) snow, the same can happen in 8-10".

    I can pop it through some pretty deep burms and short stretches of maybe 50', but my front bumper is feeling the effects of that..... Subarus plane up on deep, compact snow pretty well, so as long as there is momentum and a straight line, it glides quite admirably.

    Now, let me also clarify that I am one of those stubborn fools who currently uses all-seasons. A real winter tire could probably help the car plow through at least another 6" of relatively dry/light snow.
  • sdufordsduford Posts: 577
    That would be .79 * 3.785 or $2.99 cdn per US gallon. You must be using Imperial gallons, which are 20% larger (4.54 litres).

    Sly
  • c_hunterc_hunter Posts: 4,487
    I went from a 97 Prelude (5-spd manual) to a 2000 Outback (5-spd manual). During test drives, it was immediately apparent to me that the auto trans was not going to cut it with the base 2.5 engine. I just didn't like the way the auto transmission shifted and it seemed to suck the life out of the engine. With the 5-spd manual, however, the Outback was downright fun to drive and I didn't miss the Prelude a whole lot.

    Since then, I have had an 02 LL Bean with the H6/auto and it was nice. I now have an 05 XT with the 5EAT and couldn't be happier. If I was going back to a base engine (and that is actually appealing for the better gas mileage) I would either get an Outback with a 5-spd manual or a Forester with auto-trans. My wife had an 03 Forester XS with the base 2.5 engine and a 4EAT and it was a blast to drive. Much better vehicle size for the engine/transmission combo.

    Other things to consider -- auto is better for offroad use, for creeping along at slow speed, and for heavy traffic. Those things gradually drove me to automatic over the years, despite the fact that I preferred manual. Fortunately, the 5EAT matched with the turbo motor in my XT is quite good, and I don't miss manual so much anymore.

    Craig
  • kenskens Posts: 5,869
    What were your opinions on the 2.5i with automatic during your test drives? If you felt it was more than adequate, chances are you will be happy with it during your ownership. Most automatics break in over the first few thousand miles and improve responsiveness compared to when new.

    However, if you are the type that likes more spirited driving and engine control, then you may end up wishing for a manual in the end. But beware -- Honda makes some of the best manual trannies in the industry. Subaru's is okay, but not one to bring in rave reviews. Be sure to try both out before you buy.

    As for gas milage, the answer is it depends. With my former 98 Forester 5MT (similar engine to the 2.5i) I never really saw an improvement in performance or milage when switching octane. Since the EJ25 engine does not have the ability to advance timing (only retard it based on knock), it doesn't have the built-in ability to take advantage of the knock-resistance of higher octane fuel. In fact, I've even heard of some folks getting worse milage and performance when going to 91.

    Happy shopping!

    Ken
  • squirtdadsquirtdad Posts: 22
    I know the spec differences between the XT and GT, but does anyone have seat of the pants experience as to the real differences in handling and braking? I expect the GT to be better, but is it significant (if not a lot of difference then the XT gets the nod because of more ground clearance)?. Thanks in advance for input.
  • hondafriekhondafriek Ottawa CanadaPosts: 2,924
    The price of gas in Ottawa is 86 cents a litre, and has been for the last 2 weeks and I priced a gallon for what I am paying for it albeit is imperial and not US. So 4.5 times 86 cents ==$3.83 CDN an IMP gallon.Or 86x3.785=$3.26 a US gallon.

    Incidently I just filled today and payed 85.9 you can find it sometimes at 79 cents a litre if you are lucky enough to be out in the particular half hour each day that they are selling it at that price.

    And I don't know what station you are using typically Petro can and Imperial oil premium is 10 cents a litre more.

    Cheers Pat.
  • sdufordsduford Posts: 577
    I use Ultramar in Hull and they just went up from 79 to 81 cents. 89 octane is 3 cents more, and 91 octane another 3 cents but on Thursday, 91 is at the 89 price. So sounds like it's worth a trip across the river!

    Sly
  • kenskens Posts: 5,869
    In my test drives while car shopping I had the chance to drive an OBXT and GT wagon back-to-back on a 5 mile loop that included freeway and city driving. I tried to drive both in my normal manner -- spirited when the opportunity presents itself.

    Not surprisingly, I noticed a difference in how the two behaved on the same loop. The OBXT leaned more through turns especially on freeway on-ramps. The long travel suspension also did allow for some brake dive and squat. In contrast, the GT wagon seemed to corner relatively flat and exhibted very little brake dive/squat. The other thing to note was road feel. The GT with lower profile tires and stiffer suspension does communicate every little bump more than the XT.

    From a braking perspective, I don't believe I noticed a difference. The GT does have better hardware which may make a difference under repeated braking either on a long downhill or at the track. Again, the only marked difference was in the amount of brake dive between the two models.

    Ken
  • gearhead4gearhead4 Posts: 122
    Go with the manual.

    I owned a 2000 Legacy L with the 2.5 litre and 5 speed. It scooted around pretty well and got an average of 26 MPG. I traded in on a 200 wagon wagon with the 4EAT auto trans. The auto shifted firmly but the performance was hurt badly and averaged around 23 MPG.
    It took me less than a year to dump the Legacy with the AT.
    I now have a 2005 Legacy 2.5i Sedan manual trans. Performance is acceptable, I only have 3000 miles and have taken no road trips and I am averaging about 26 MPG on winter formula fuel. I expect to average around 27 to 28 with summer fuel and warmer temps.
    I experimented with some higher octane fuel and noticed no better performance or MPG.
    With your recent experience with the Prelude, I feel you won't be happy with the automatic in the Subaru unless your willing to pay for the turbo and tolerate MUCH lower MPG.
    Hears the math... Legacy weighs in at 3200 lbs, probably 400 lbs more than your Prelude. It has 168 HP, but the extra weight, friction and inertia of the AWD will use at least 8 HP. An Auto Trans will suck another 5 to 10 HP (big price to pay).
    I am willing to accept the AWD penalty for the traction and handling advantage, but until arthritis hits my joints, I am happy to participate in shifting on my own.

    Just my 2 cents.

    Jim
  • gearhead4gearhead4 Posts: 122
    ...I traded it in on a 2003 Legacy Wagon ...
  • krzysskrzyss Posts: 843
    "4.5 times"

    And this is your problem.
    There are U.S. Galons and Imperial Galons.
    One is 3.7.. l and the other 4.5.. l. You are using wrong galons.

    Krzys
  • hondafriekhondafriek Ottawa CanadaPosts: 2,924
    Well for a start I am using Gallons not Galons, and if you go back to my post I did the cost in Canadian dollars for both Imperial and US gallons.

    So before you correct someone make sure you have the horse before the cart.

    (Here is what I posted.
    The price of gas in Ottawa is 86 cents a litre, and has been for the last 2 weeks and I priced a gallon for what I am paying for it albeit is imperial and not US. So 4.5 times 86 cents ==$3.83 CDN an IMP gallon.Or 86x3.785=$3.26 a US gallon)

    Cheers Pat.
  • tmontytmonty Posts: 16
    ...same here. Tried the 4EAT (for the fun of it - would never consider the auto) and found it surprisingly sluggish when compared to the manual.

    Tom
  • c_hunterc_hunter Posts: 4,487
    In my case, the difference between the GT and the XT was very small compared to the difference between either car and my previous 02 Outback. They have made huge strides with the 05 Outbacks, and the handling/steering is quite good compared to the older ones.

    I was all set to trade my 02 Outback in on a 05 GT wagon, and drove an XT for the heck of it. That turned out to be the best blend of what I wanted in a car. And I am glad I got the XT -- just this weekend I was driving through an unplowed parking lot to go skiing, and I really appreciated the extra ground clearance.

    If you don't plan to go offroad or drive in the snow, and you value on-road handling and looks, I would get the GT. Otherwise, the XT is a great bet and probably one of the best handling "sport-utility" vehicles out there.

    Craig
Sign In or Register to comment.