Subaru Crew Cafe

1168169171173174343

Comments

  • jfljfl Member Posts: 1,399
    Take it from me, they were much worse 20+ years ago.

    Loosh...try not to laugh too much after the procedure.

    Get well quick!

    Jim

    Edit: I typed this before reading all the intervening posts.

    nj - There are other possible ways to get a hernia grunting while seated...and no, that's not how I got mine.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    In my defense I only grunted on the 2nd lap, at 120+ mph. ;-)

    -juice
  • goosegoose Member Posts: 77
    This question concerns offroad capability.

    I live in Southern AZ and a 4 X 4 truck/suv is primarily for 4 X 4 designated road use and not bad weather driving. I like a car ride but I can't take a Acura up a primitive dirt road. So, do you know just how much off road capability the Outback has? I've gotten away with using a car on maintained dirt roads but a unmaintained dirt road is a challenge for even a vehicle like the Tacoma PreRunner, which has the clearance of a 4X4 but not the drive system. Pictures would really help. I'm not talking about rock crawling, just the occasional use were and encountered washed out road would require one tire would be fully off the ground.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Get the Outback but give paisan a call about installing some skid plates, front and rear.

    8.4-8.7" is as good as you'll get on anything that is even remotely car-like, so Outback will fit the bill as good as anything.

    -juice
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Outbacks (and Foresters) are fine for light off-roading if you are a sensible driver. Definitely get automatic transmission, it is better off-road.

    I frequently take my Outback (00, 02, now 05) to my inlaw's cabin which has a steep washed-out dirt road. It is in pretty bad shape. Some people take regular cars but end up scraping bottom pretty badly, lifting wheels off the ground, and getting stuck. They have to navigate real carefully. With the OB it's a piece of cake -- the extra ground clearance and long-travel suspension makes it feel very secure. In snowy or muddy times of the year, the Outback is pretty much the only car inthe family that can make it to the cabin.

    As Juice noted, the ground clearance is about as good as you will get for any of the regular SUV choices. The Outback's smaller size, lighter weight, and sophisticated AWD system actually make it superior to most SUVs in my opinion.

    Craig
  • bat1161bat1161 Member Posts: 1,784
    Craig-

       Why do you say an automatic is better for doing off-road driving? I would have thought the manual is better. Or is is the same way they say an auto is better for towing?

    Loosh- good luck.

    Mark
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Mark,

    In offroading, you're often driving a lot in part-throttle conditions. With a manual, it means you'll be feathering the clutch quite a bit.

    Also, I've heard that the auto AWD on Subies do less front-to-back power swapping compared to the viscous coupling on the MTs so they are a little more stable going up dirt roads.

    Ken
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The manual is still very capable but yes you do more clutch work.

    That said, mine survived a full week on the sand at the OBX and I still have the original clutch at 67k miles.

    -juice
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    will next Impreza go up against the new A3?

    http://autoweek.com/files/specials/galleries/a3/pages/1.htm

    http://www.audi.co.uk/newcars/model.jsp?section=/models/a3/a3spor- - - - - - tback&liveConnect=true

    This new A3 might provide a hint of what we might expect from the next Impreza in terms of looks and content. I believe the A3 is coming to the USA next spring.

    I could see the next Impreza wagon being compared to it. It's got a 101" wheelbase. Priced at $25K, with a 200hp 2.0 turbo. AWD will come later.

    Bob
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    the clutch comments are definitely true. I don't offroad cars/trucks EVER but I have done a lot of enduro dirtbike work. a little bit of that and you know exactly why true enduros have a light clutch (often hydraulic) instead of the heavy action motocross type.

    ~c
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Why do you say an automatic is better for doing off-road driving? I would have thought the manual is better. Or is is the same way they say an auto is better for towing?

    Yep, it the same reason as they are preferred for towing. You can get a lot more finesse control with an auto -- the torque converter happily soaks up what would be a lot of clutch slipping on a MT.

    ATs are really good for ascending steep hills. With a MT, you'd have the choice between healthy throttle (which is likely too fast) and slipping the clutch. Do that up a long hill and the disadvantage becomes very apparent. With an auto, you can creep up the hill nice and steady.

    Craig
  • grahampetersgrahampeters Member Posts: 1,786
    G'day

    The constraint on the Outback is not the underbody clearance or AWD system which is better than most fancier 4WDs, but rather the rear departure angle.

    I use my Outback, here in soggy Southern Australia, on rather more severe roads and tracks than you will normally see in the USA. After owning it for 5+ years, the only real problem I have had is the towbar scraping and a slightly embarressing collision with a volcanic rock I did not spot whilst traversing a paddock (field to you).

    Driven sensibly, I have not been bogged once in the time I have had the car, a first for any vehicle I have owned in the last 25 years. Obviously, it is not a Toyota Landcruiser but the ability on farms and muddy trails is outstanding.

    I am hard-pressed to think of any car that offers stunning highway performance whilst also being so competent off road. The handling on road is amongst the best for a medium sized wagon (probably the best) and off road, it has few vices.

    Sorry I can't post some photos but the more interesting places I get to are a bit too overgrown for decent lighting. Our forests have multiple layers meaning that winter sun is very weak.

    One useful tip - if the brakes start to squeal or bind through mud build up (this only happens after many miles (25+) on two inch thick gloop, the disks may have a build up. Stop and reverse with the brakes on to shake off the mud.

    Auto is better in 4WD conditions than Manual. Ours come with Dual range but clutch is not fantastic and auto gives better power delivery.

    Incidentally, a batch of 3.0 Outbacks have just hauled caravans through the Outback. The 4wd magazines are raving about how they are the best tow cars around for desert conditions.

    Kind regards

    Graham
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    A3 will go up against the C230 Sport Coupe (hatch really) and the 9-2x and S40/V50 maybe.

    Will the Impreza move up that much? Right now I think the VW still has nicer materials, it should catch up to the Golf before it aspires beyond it.

    VW will have a new R32 with more power rumored.

    Thanks mike. That's my green one in the first two pics, no problem getting through those deep ruts. That's Ed's Forester (which he just traded in) crossing the water, I went right before him.

    It's more than most trucks see in their lives.

    -juice
  • lark6lark6 Member Posts: 2,565
    I sort of miss the black one. :-)

    Ed
  • lucien2lucien2 Member Posts: 2,984
    A classic example of why I am letting my subscription go. First, they mount the argument that it is an uphill battle for Audi, and use the 318ti and C230 as examples. Except that the A3 isn't a 2 door and isn't a hatchback. It's a wagon. Then they go on to say it is a 5 door, but isn't "stodgy looking." Huh? What, exactly, is the definition of the "stodgy" 5 door? Golf? WRX? Matrix? Mazda3? All these cars, incidentally, are much more in the A3 niche than the 318ti or C230 in the first place. It's just sloppy, make-it-up-as-we-go-along writing and it's worn me down. They use passive voice all the time, and fall back on cliche quite often. When I first subscribed it was some of the best auto writing out there. Now it blows.
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Just got a new MAC G4 with dual-boot capabilities (runs both OS9 & OSX). I needed a computer that could run both systems, therefore a new G5 was out of the question, as it only runs OSX. The one I got was one of the last dual-boot units out there.

    I still have my old G4, so I can gradually *learn* OSX. OSX looks pretty wild. Tuesday I'm taking an OSX course, which takes about 4 hours.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    a new Apple 23" high-definition monitor. This will come in handy with some of the software I use which have an incredible amount of menus (Photoshop, InDesign, etc.).

    Bob
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Graham: Your post reminded me that your seasons are the opposite of ours!

    Bob: Congrats!

    Ken
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Congrats! The 23" screen is sweet!

    Craig
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Craig, this is the latest new 23" monitor with the aluminum frame. It was just released.

    Apple is also just about to release a new 30" monitor—at $3,200 a pop!

    Bob
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Actually, $3200 is a bargain considering the 22" model was over $6000 a few years ago. I have a 22" at work and love it. The wide screen format is perfect for all the CAD and graphics work I do, and it's fantastic for page layouts. The new 23" is even nicer!

    I hope you like OS X. I had to help someone with OS 9 recently, and it reminded me how cumbersome and clumsy it was. Once you get over the learning curve for OS X, I think you will find it is a whole lot nicer. It's way more stable too. I recently had to reboot my computer after an OS update, and checked the uptime beforehand -- up 138 days! That's pretty good for a machine I hammer on heavily 5-6 days a week. I don't think I ever went more than a couple weeks with OS 9 or Windows.

    Craig
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    that's a big monitor!

    I think I'd probably spring for a 19" LCD if anything, though. (Still ticking away fine on a 17" Nokia 447x Pro, 6+ years of 10x7 @100hz...)

    ~c
  • njswamplandsnjswamplands Member Posts: 1,760
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    Interesting idea- but looks really heavy! Probably useful on a Maybach where weight doesn't matter. Maybe good for limos or armored cars? But what is Bose doing with such technology? Interesting change from stereos and speakers?

    Cool monitor Bob. Great for watching movies! ;-)
    I agree that OSX is much more user friendly- which version did you get? I'm running Panther which seems to run a little quicker than Jaguar did. Although the next version, Tiger, I believe, should be coming out soon.

    I guess I'll have to stick with my lowly 19" for now. ;-).

    tom
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I agree that OSX is much more user friendly- which version did you get?

    Not sure? Whatever the last dual-boot G4s were running.

    Bob
  • jfljfl Member Posts: 1,399
    I finally upgraded to OS X Panther this year (from OS 9).

    Other than forgetting to export my internet bookmarks and some minor printing issues (old printer w/o OS X drivers) it's great.

    Jim
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    One of my printers isn't working properly, plus I got to create all new font suitcases. Some apps may need to be re-installed. I need to upgrade others. it'll be a while before I have it dialed in...

    Bob
  • corvettecorvette Member Posts: 11,365
    I've seen some issues of communication problems, all with Epson printers, but can't conclude it was the fault of the Epson printer/driver. I have three friends that use Macs, with five newer Macs between them, and I'm the go-to guy for computer problems (PC or Mac). FWIW, the two iBooks in that group were recently stricken by the infamous logic board failure.
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    Bob, click on the little apple in the top left hand corner and select 'about this mac' and it should tell you which software version you have, 10.1.x, 10.2.x or 10.3.x. 10.2 is Jaguar, 10.3 is panther. I don't know if 10.1 has a name?

    tom
  • corvettecorvette Member Posts: 11,365
    I *really* want:
    2004/5 BMW 330i Performance Package 6-speed, barring that:
    2004/5 BMW 325i 5-speed, but my local BMW dealer is a jerk, and I can't afford the 330i PP. The 325i is in my price range, however, the crummy dealer situation still applies.

    I drove the G35, Passat, and TSX and came away nonplussed with them, the G35 was best of the bunch. I drove the Legacy GT 5-speed on a whim and loved it. I also drove a 2.5i automatic Legacy. Not as fast, but still impressive. My main reservation with the Subaru is the lack of stability control. I know AWD helps, but it doesn't do everything a stability control system does.

    In reading about the other Subarus (but not driving them), I'm now confused. Here are my impressions:
    1) The Legacy GT is nice with the manual but suffers from turbo lag with the automatic (I never drove a GT automatic).
    2) The Forester XT is reputed to be faster than the Legacy GT sedan. I haven't driven one.
    3) The Impreza WRX is also a contender for my consideration, although I haven't driven one.
    4) There is a great lease deal on the Legacy base and GT, but no prices posted for the Limited. I would probably be buying so it's not that big of a deal.

    Essentially, I'm looking for a great handling car (or Forester :). The Legacy GT with its sport suspension is nice. I'm not sure about the Forester. How does the Forester XT's handling compare to the Legacy GT's?
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    I was reading this months C&D and they were touting the new Vette's performance as a bargain at $45K. Now, I think an STi numbers wise is almost the same, minus perhaps the skidpad results. Could you add $15K in modifications to an STi and make it faster on a racetrack than the Vette while still being useable on the street? Or would it be better to take an Impreza and add $25K in mods (or a used one for that matter)? Just wondering if it's possible, or is there no way a little four cylinder is going to be a match for the broad power delivery of a 6 liter V8 or the handling of a Vette, while still being fairly comfortable on the street.

    Is the Corvette really a bargain?

    Just wondering if anyone with more experience has any thoughts.

    tom
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    Having driven them all, I think the FXT is a little faster than the GT, but having a higher center of gravity hampers it's ability to corner as well as the GT- it is fun to drive though. The WRX is the slowest of them all (but still quite fast) and more nimble, especially with bigger wheels. The STi will blow them all away, will handle better, but I never drove one in the rain so I'm not sure what happens to the summer tires when the weather goes to pot- probably not good things.

    I drove my GT a bit in this past heavy rain and found the AWD quite well planted. You can steer the car with the throttle and feel the balance between under and oversteer (it's a little eerie feeling the front wheels scrub and then the back wheels slide- but still in control). I'm not sure how much VDC would add to this. In theory it may improve traction but unless you hang out at 9/10 all the time, I doubt you'll need it. And I doubt any 3 series, stability control or not, is going to keep up with the AWD of any of these cars.

    It's a hard choice. I almost bought the FXT because it's so fun to drive- in Japan they have an STi version- it must be really fun! But the GT LTD is much more refined inside and so quiet.

    Just drive them, and then flip a coin if you can't decide! ;-)

    tom
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    the corvette is really a bargin. the STi and Evo's incredible paper numbers are boosted significantly by abusive AWD launches that no owner should routinely do, and insanely sticky summer-only tires. they are not four-door 'corvettes' at 2/3 the price.

    if you want a 330i six speed, get a CPO if you stay with BMW. I definitely would not settle for a 325!

    the Legacy GT's turbo lag is minimal but is noticeable coming from a 330.

    ~c
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Tom

    It's OS 10.3.5. So I guess it's a Panther version.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I posted this link many months back, but the guy who runs Revetec just posted over at nabisco. Their 1350cc engine uses WRX cylinder heads!

    http://www.revetec.com/website/

    Bob
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    Bob- great- you're up to date! I think you'll find Panther is quite easy to work with- and very stable. Best of all, you don't have to worry about most of the viruses and worms running around!
    That Revetec engine is really neat! In theory it generates much more power because the pistons can fire more frequently (if I understood the technical stuff right). Maybe FHI could plop one in one of their WRXs!

    Colin- it sure seems like the vette is a bargain. My question was with engine and suspension and tire upgrades, can you get a 4 door Impreza to equal a vette on the race track while remaining a livable car. I would say your evo borders on hard to live with on a daily basis- the roads around my house are much too bumpy for that car!

    tom
  • corvettecorvette Member Posts: 11,365
    The GT has the best styling of the bunch. I find it hard to believe that the WRX is slower, but I'd prefer a midsize anyway.

    FYI, summer tires are generally great in the rain, it's snow and slush where they go to pot. Even high-performance all-seasons (like Michelin Pilots) suck in the snow, compared to low-performance all-seasons (which suck compared to dedicated snows).

    The Legacy is really new, so Cobb Tuning doesn't have cool stuff out for it yet, all the mods for the FXT looked tempting. I would probably be happy with a non-turbo Legacy model if it had the sport suspension setup of the GT. Also, I had (and loved) a 325i non-sport package. The acceleration was fine with a manual. The handling and road feel was better than anything else in its class. The dealer was an idiot who couldn't get the paperwork done without resorting to corrupt practices. I turned the car back in after having it eight days, on the advice of my counsel. Worst car buying experience ever! The local Subaru dealer appears to be very reasonable in comparison!
  • corvettecorvette Member Posts: 11,365
    The Vette may be a bargain, but in typical GM fashion, they cut corners in the interior materials. Even on the new one. GM and Lutz hate safety features. Side airbags are optional? At $45 grand? What is this, a Kia? Oh, wait, even Kias have side airbags standard now. If it weren't for government regulation and tort actions, GM wouldn't have improved their safety since the Ralph Nader heydey.
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    wow, those are some interesting opinions.

    mine is that you don't need side airbags in any car, but in particular in a corvette. :) why go through all the effort of keeping weight to a minimum, including a pricey titanium exhaust, just to stuff gratuitous weight in the doors that adds little value?

    when you get broadsided, the car's structure and luck are all that matters. if the door/chassis holds, you will probably survive. if not, you probably won't. an airbag's protection against glass and whiplash is ultimately meaningless in the chassis intrusion question.

    ~c
  • hondafriekhondafriek Member Posts: 2,984
    I could not agree more, if you get T boned all the side airbags in the world will not make bit of difference.

      Cheers Pat.
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    I don't know about you guys, but the data I have seen indicates that side airbags help a lot. They will make a difference between a bad injury and a really bad injury. In some cases that may be negligible, but I'd rather have every little bit of protection.

    Craig
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    What Craig said. I'd rather have them than not have them.

    Bob
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    they help against whiplash and glass. they do not help when the chassis integrity is compromised. how could they?

    I'd rather not need them than needlessly overprepare. I own a lot of helmets but don't wear any of them on a daily basis in the car. :)

    ~c
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    they help against whiplash and glass. they do not help when the chassis integrity is compromised. how could they?

    When the side of the car caves inward and the car moves inward while your body lags behind due to inertia (ie, Newton's 1st law), would you rather crack your elbow/shoulder/head/ribs on the door frame or a firm pillow?? I'll take the pillow! You'd have to be in a wicked extreme impact for the difference between the door frame and an airbag to be negligible. For everything else, the airbag has to help.

    Craig
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    In a catastrophic side impact, the airbag's effect is certainly reduced. The first side bags were typically mounted lower and to reduce significant chest trauma. Newer curtain bags are designed for better head and neck protection. As stated above, I'd rather hit my head on an airbag than the grill of an Excursion, but the bigger point is that the curtain stops your head from flying out towards the impacting vehicle and so is significant. BTW, research has shown that wearing helmets in cars and personal aircraft would save lives, just nobody is about to try promoting it.

    Nicholas
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Loosh: have to agree about Autoweek's writing. I used to read it cover to cover the day it arrived.

    Now they pile up.

    One exception was an excellent article written about Ayrton Senna, the F1 driver from Brazil that died at Imola. It was written warts-and-all, uncensored, and IMO very accurate.

    Bob: 23"? Wow. Size matters, eh? ;-)

    -juice (on a measly 18" LCD)
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Bob: 23"? Wow. Size matters, eh? ;-)

    It does when you have menus out the wazoo filling up your screen, like I often do. :)

    Bob
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.