Subaru Legacy/Outback 2005+

poisson

I have had the same experiences. The tires may get worse as they wear, but right now they are performing well (with less than 3.5K miles on them).

tsy

Maybe it's a difference in expectations. In my GT ltd, I expect the tires to be the last thing to give out, especially with how soft the suspension is. Needless to say, I can get the car to slide in a turn very easily in the wet, and it's not too hard to do when dry (although sometimes this was fun when done on purpose!). Braking in the wet is atrocious- ABS would kick in even when driving modestly.

But maybe you guys driving OBs don't have the same issues? Anyway, at 4K I replaced all 4 tires with Toyo Proxes 4s and it was night and day. I get more wet traction in these tires than I did with the RE-92As in the dry (NOT and exaggeration). They are quieter and more comfortable (slightly) also.

I feel like it was a total waste to get rid of such new tires, but because I am able to stop more quickly I feel it's worth every penny!

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

tom

luck11

Another reason I have historically switched is to preserve alloy wheels. Up here, salt/sand mix is used to de-ice the roads and increase traction. And its done frequently in winter because of the weather. One chip on cleared alloys, and that salt will wreak havoc on the wheels. So I switch to a) obtain more traction in snow/ice (and historically, I have noticed a huge diff between all-season compromise tires and dedicated snows); and b) preserve my "good" wheels, although this may not be as much an issue with the 05 Soob wheels.

That said, if the RE92As cut it for you based on your driving habits and the road conditions you face, then I understand the argument of not expending the funds on snows.

I will keep the RE92As for summer. With the little mileage I put on and my driving habits, I can't justify taking off brand new tires only to buy others. OK, I admit it, WAF (wife acceptance factor) plays big part in this reasoning.

Cheers,
Jay

tickman

I have a lightweight utility trailer, and if I have nothing on it (very light tongue) any bump in the road causes a terrible 'clunk' as the drawbar moves around in the hitch. Sounds like the bumper fell off! The noise is not as noticable when there is something on the trailer, and the tongue is holding the drawbar down.

I guess I'm comparing this to my old F-150. The drawbar on it seemed to be just as loose, but I never heard any clunking around. Could be the Ford was just too noisy for me to notice it!

hilbert

As many have said I am going to try on the original tires and see how they perform. I have a question though. Are RE-92As that you guys refer to, original tires on Subaru OBXT 2005. I know they are bridgestone Ponteza, but I do not know whether there are many models in it and if so, the one we have is RE-92A

Thanks,
Hilbert

poisson

I never considered the preservation of the alloys WRT to ice/salt - that is a very good reason to pull them off. Down here, they don't coat the roads unless there is an upcoming snow (I know the roads up there as my father lives in Sherbrooke).

As for the WAF, I know what you mean. Just getting the XT was hard enough ;-)

poisson

Yes, it is the Potenza RE92A on the XT. As you suspected, Potenza is a family of tires with many models (like Goodyear Eagle).

hilbert

Thanks Poisson.

rwoods

I've only owned my Subaru XT Outback wagon for a month but I did notice some hydroplanning on I-95 during a very heavy rainstorm. It was scary but I backed down on the speed from 60mph to 50mph and it didn't happen again. I'm a careful driver and I've not experienced this since many years ago with a Toyota Corrolla with worn tires. Since my Subie's tires are brand new I was disappointed. Afterall I was only going 60.

rwoods

Anyone considering the Lexus IS Sportcross vs. the Subie wagon who needs winter traction bewareof the Sportcross. Great vehicle in many ways but totally overmatched by snow and ice. My friend loved her Lexus but gave up after the three year lease for that reason.

rwoods

Sly you could sell snow tires for a living. Your arguments have me reaching for the Tire Rack website and I live on Long Island where the weather is pretty tame.

c_hunter

I've only owned my Subaru XT Outback wagon for a month but I did notice some hydroplanning on I-95 during a very heavy rainstorm. It was scary but I backed down on the speed from 60mph to 50mph and it didn't happen again. I'm a careful driver and I've not experienced this since many years ago with a Toyota Corrolla with worn tires. Since my Subie's tires are brand new I was disappointed. Afterall I was only going 60.

Maybe your tires were underinflated a little? That has a huge effect on hydroplaning, more than tire wear. There's a good article about it on the TireRack website. Suffice it to say, you're better off being slightly overinflated to resist hydroplaning.

I tend to run a couple psi more than stock for better handling.

CRaig

hilbert

I am a little confused here. I thought that the lower the air pressure the more the tire is in contact with the road and therefore better grip. The opposite holds when tire pressure is high.

Can you please clarify this?

Thanks,
Hilbert.

kmclean

Here's a tidbit I recall (for some unknown reason) from my days of flying high-performance aircraft. For standing water (where the road [runway] surface is covered with a complete layer of water - we're not talking flooding here but no pavement uncovered) and the tire is essentially bald (not an unusual condition for fighters), hydroplaning typically begins around 9 mph (converted from knots) times the square root of the tire pressure in psi. Hence, if you're running baldies at 36 psi, you'd better start paying careful attention around 54 mph. The speed is increased as tread depth increases (can't recall that calculation, but it's not a dramatic increase - up to a maximum of around a 25% increase for deep treads).

As you'd imagine, there's a lot more to it that this - many other variables - but tire pressure is the biggy, and this provides a thumbnail estimate as conditions deteriorate.

Our aircraft tires were inflated to well over 100 psi, but with landing (touchdown) speeds often over 130 knots (if we were light), there was a 30-knot or so window where we'd continue to "fly" the aircraft down the runway before jumping on the binders to avoid the hydroplaning problem.

Ken in [cold and foggy] Seattle

moutback

I don't think hydroplaning at that speed in heavy rain is surprising--I doubt many all-season tires could provide sufficient grip in such conditions at that speed.

The RE-92As on the OBXT seem fine in the rain. They don't feel sketchy as I thought they would, and have decent grip in the wet at above-normal speeds. I've never felt that I had to slow down in the rain for fear of hydroplaning (but only when I hit a puddle at 60-70 mph). As long as the speed is reasonable in nasty conditions, I think these tires are fine. I had more hydroplaning concerns in my 1991 Honda Civic (especially in light rain).

rwoods

Craig,

Thanks for the advice on tire inflation. I will bump up my inflation to 35 front, 33 rear and see what transpires. I had set it at 32 front and 30 rear on the trip with the hydroplaning.

ntk1

A message to my fellow sufferers
I have had the car back to the dealer for the second time. On this occassion, I arranged a loaner and the mechanic took it home for the evening to give it a more thorough test.
No surprize - the car was said to have no fault and that the engine was normal ! Now I realize that this area can be a little subjective however, the following points should be taken into account -
Almost everyone I give a ride to in this car asks what the problem with the engine is - I tell them that, according to the dealer, there is no problem and that this is normal for a Subaru engine - I usually get silence at this point
This problem is not unique to me, there are various reports of this issue both at this site and almost all other related sites
The only consistent thread is the complete denial by Subaru that a problem exists - I have mailed Subaru directly with no results, I have even asked Patti at this site direct questions which are completely ignored. The thoughts of "cover up" are foremost in my mind.

In 25 years of car ownership, this is my worst experience to date. My next action will be to book the car back into the dealer (for the third time) and then engage the services of a lemon law attorney.

locke2c

where is your original post describing the problem?

~c

poisson

yes, the link to the original description would be useful. That way we can tell if we have had the same symptoms.

alpha01

I'd like to know what people think about the front seats in these vehicles- I must say, after switching cars often between those in my family, the Legacy has EXCELLENT seats, at least for someone smaller in stature like myself (5-7, 145....).

Gracias, Subaru!

Hope everyone who celebrates had a great holiday.

~alpha

c_hunter

I like the seats too.

I have felt the stuttering on almost every 05 Leg/OB I drove, but it would not surprise me if dealer service guys did not notice -- they are usually pretty lazy/lame when it comes to issues like this in my experience.

I felt it several times when my OB XT was new, but it has gone away after 4700 miles; I haven't noticed it for quite some time.

Consensus from other forums is that it's an ECU problem; since my car learned to alleviate the problem, I tend to agree. This also means SOA would probably have to release a revised ECU map to truly fix the problem for those people who continue to have it.

Maybe you should try another dealer ntk1. Also, be sure to call the Subaru 1-800 number and open a case.

Craig

ntk1

I am not sure I can recall the number of my earlier numerous posts (had to take a little vacation time in Baghdad to help out GB's plans) but I guess it was around the July /August time frame. However I can assure you that if you have not noticed this, you do not have the problem. The last time I had an engine run like this was a 1973 4 cylinder ford with a burnt out exhaust valve !!!! (could have spent $500 and saved myself $25,500 for the same result)
Craig (Mr Hunter ?) thank you for the advice - I will log my case with Subaru - this will help in the inevitable legal wrangle to follow

Pete

hilbert

Craig can you please explain what you mean by stuttering. As in, is it a sound or does one get jerks. I will see whether its there in my car.

c_hunter

I think it's normally most obvious in 3rd gear under light acceleration (at least on autos). Sort of a hesitation feeling from the engine, where power surges in/out. You'd know it if you have experienced it!

Craig

poisson

Now that I think about it, I have noticed this on occasion but it has not happened recently. I do recall one time, I noticed stuttering and after I turned a corner, the car almost stalled (5EAT, not manual). I had just filled up the tank and did not remember tightening the gas cap beyond one click - so I stopped and retightened the cap and the problem went away.
I will keep a log if I notice it again. Since it hasn't happened in awhile, I am hoping it is an ECU mapping issue and the 'kinks' are worked out.

kens

I'm out in NYC visting the folks for the Thanksgiving holiday. I had a chance to drive my dad's TSX today.

It's a nice and nimble car, but I miss my Legacy GT wagon.

I'll do a more comprehensive write up later, but so far my impression of the TSX compared to the LGT (both 5ATs):

Highs:
+ Very solid feeling fit and finish. I'd even dare say almost a notch above the Legacy.
+ Nimble steering. I think it feels a little more responsive than the LGT.
+ Throttle response from a stop is not bad.
+ Nice Nav system.
+ Nice exhaust note

Lows:
- I dislike the driving position. Desipte moving my seat up all the way, the dash and hood seem to block the lower portion of my forward view.
- Suspension is a bit too firm for NYC roads. The LGT would probably be more rut and pothole friendly.
- A little shy on power. I've gotten used to how the LGT pulls hard after 2500RPM. The TSX isn't bad but it feels like there's something missing despite the sound of the engine working hard.
- Front seats feel smaller -- the higher belt line combined with the deep console wrap around made me feel a little cramped.

Ken

threelegdog5

All this talk about the RE-92As has me worrying about the tires on my GT wagon. They are REs, but I think different from the 92As, and more speced for performance than traction. Is that right? I live in western connecticut, so I expect a fair amount of ice and snow..anyone think I should just put on winter tires, and if so, any recommendations?

Thanks!

hilbert

I do not think I have noticed it (and I hope I do not), but I will watch out for it. Mine is an automatic.

I have another question. I was reading "Ten ways ...." by Click and Clack Tappet Brothers (Car talk) and they say that it is a very bad practice (for the car) to accelerate rapidly off the line. According to them this results in a much more rapid wear and tear of engine and other parts. The problem is that they do not give any guidelines as to how much acceleration is okay. Since reading that I think I start too slowly off the line. Of course I want to take care of my car but I do not want to go unnecessarily slow. Does anyone here have any objective guidelines (in terms of RPM mor something else) as to how hard one can accelerate without being hard on the car.

Thanks,
Hilbert.

michael2

I went thru 3 sets of tires on my 2000Gt, the stock RE-92's, a set of Dunlop SP sport A2's, and continental contiextreme's.

Neither the dunlops or continentals, both high performance tires I believe, ever presented any problem on wet surfaces.Snow, rain whatever, the rear end only slid out when making a turn in six inches of snow, but on a rainy surface, heavy storms especially the tires gripped like glue.

Now on my 2005 GT, I was making a turn from a stop, during a slight drizzle, and also had to back off the gas, as I felt the rear begin to slide, which is something I never experienced with the 2000 during rain.

I will change the bridgestones to either the Pirelli P-Zero Nero, or another set of Continentals. My experience with the RE-92's in my previous subaru and this one has been less then assuring.

As for tire pressure,I put 400 miles on my car every week, so intervals between visits to the dealer are short, and checking the tires are part of the service he gives me.

saedave

My test drive of the Legacy GT proved to me that I do not want one. The lag and lurch of the turbo in traffic was not acceptable. My test drive of the Bean, however, was fine except for the extra height of the suspension. If the Legacy 3.0 VDC arrives this coming spring, there will be one in my garage.

c_hunter

The 05 GT tires are RE-92A, like the Outback, but they have an even lower treadwear rating (meaning they are likely softer). This is what's confusing when discussing the RE-92 and RE-92A -- there are numerous varieties! The RE-92 on my 02 Outback LL Bean had a 340 TW rating, and were doing great when I traded the car at 45K miles. They never gave me a problem in snow or rain, and I took numerous snowy ski trips into the mountains of WV without a problem. However, the RE-92 on my 03 WRX had a TW rating of 160, and were despised by many people. These were the same variety of RE-92 on my 93 Civic and 97 Prelude, and I can confirm they were bad in the snow/rain once they wore down.

Since all varieties of the RE-92A are new (been out a year or less) I think we're just learning how the tires perform. I have no driveability issues with the RE-92A on my Outback XT, but they are excessively noisy -- they make this internal hum noise on the highway that drives me nuts. One of these days I will get replacement tires, but the $600-800 cost is going to be a tough one to swallow mentally. Spending that much to replace new tires gives me heartburn (then again, so does the hum noise...).

I grew up in NW Connecticut (Burlington) and we never had dedicated snow tires on our cars. In fact, I drove to VT to ski often and never had issues there either. However, my parents recently put Blizzaks on their Accord and it was a huge improvement for the winter (they also have an 00 Outback and stick with all seasons on that). So I definitely see the benefit in that region.

I'd say if it's not a hassle/issue buying a set of snow tires and winter wheels, definitely go for it -- the car will be a lot safer and the downsides are few. Otherwise, I am sure the stock all season tires will be adequate for the next season or two.

Craig

c_hunter

Hilbert, I think Tom and Ray are too conservative at times, and they will be the first to admit they are wrong a lot. I would definitely refrain from accelerating rapidly on a cold engine, and tend to baby my engines in general. However, you can still get on the engine and enjoy it without having a detrimental impact. This is where routine maintenance is important. I have every confidence that a well maintained engine with clean oil can handle a lot of spirited driving without any issues.

One thing I like about my Outback XT is that there is a ton of grin-inducing power and acceleration available with very little throttle. Meaning you can have a lot of fun with the car at part throttle (in contrast, I used to have to wring every last RPM out of my WRX for similar acceleration). SO as far as the XT / GT go, you don't really even need to worry about it in normal everyday driving, since the engine is pretty relaxed when it produces power. Honestly, I can't think of the last time I had an open road and could legally get on the engine enough to really push it to an extreme.

My perspective then, is that you can enjoy the engine in normal driving without worrying about it. One way to enhance the experience on 5EAT cars is to use the transmission's sport mode -- push the lever to teh left but don't actuate the +/- mode. This will upshift at slightly higher RPMs and downshift more readily. I really think it make the car a lot more fun to drive, and more responsive, again without putting much stress on the engine.

Craig

c_hunter

Hi Ken,

I think your observations are right inline with my experience driving my wife's TSX. When I have her car, the thing I miss most is the power -- it just can't compare to the GT/XT. And I think the TSX is noisier and rides rougher. A lot of it has to do with the stock Michelin tires.

The TSX has a surprisingly high beltline and seemingly low roof. In fact, it's actually in 300C territory when you compare the cars side to side. The main difference is that the TSX has a sweeping ramped "wedge" shape in the beltline, while the 300C is more blocky. All said, I much prefer Acura's implementation of the high beltline look. The Chrysler looks too chopped to me.

For "only" 200HP, the TSX is surprisingly quick off the line. The 2.4L I4 engine has a good amount of grunt too -- very similar to what we were used to with our Forester's base NA 2.5H4. The main difference is that the TSX engine doesn't run out of steam like the NA 2.5H4. SO the engine compares favorably to other NA engines out there. It definitely falls short compared to the 2.5 H4 turbo in the GT/XT, however -- at least in power. The TSX engine has a level of smoothness and refinement that always reminds me how good Honda engines can be. In my experience, they are far ahead of Subaru in refinement. That said, I like the boxer rumble myself!

Craig

hilbert

Thanks. That makes me feel good. Once the engine warms up, I will not worry too much about starting off too slowly as the light turns green or as I turn right at a red light. As you have very aptly put the engine produces Grin-Inducing power. When I read your comment I remembered myself grinning as I experienced the power of my OBXT. I am eagerly waiting to take it for a long (at least 4 hour) drive.

Hilbert.

c_hunter

http://www.wallpaperinstaller.com/movies/cartrouble2.wmv

Note to mods, that is not a link to another forum!

Craig

63corvette

Craig,
I think you have just hit the nail on the head............You have opened the door on a perspective of the tire question that I don't believe many people know about, and that I haven't seen explained here. That is that there are DIFFERENT RE92s.
After reading your post, I went out into the garage and looked at the RE92s on my 04 Outback (TW is 340) and then at the RE92s on my daughter's Maxda Protege (TW 160). They are OBVIOUSLY NOT the same tire, however, they have the same name, and therefore the wide differential in the way people report on their performence and wear. Please NOTE this is NOT explained on the TireRack.com references of the RE92 tire.
I would welcome members comments on this...and also TireRack comments if available.

robr2

Recently when I looked at the Legacy 2.5i and the GT wagons, I checked the TW Rating on the tires and was suprised to see both of them rated at 160.

mesh

As a pilot, I was always taught to fly smoothly. For a given weight, the amount of force developed that could damage the airframe or cause you to stall was directly related to speed. Doing things smoothly, not necessarily slowly, reduces the speed at which various parts make contact. For a car, smooth shifting reduces transmission wear, smooth throttle application reduces engine wear, smooth braking reduces brake and tire wear. Slamming things around may be fun, but don't blame the parts if they break. In aviation it's called over-controlling. Planes fly better, cars drive better, when they're not over-controlled.

mjc440

A few months ago I posted about fumes coming in through the air vents when my '05 Legacy 2.5i Ltd. was warmed up and idling at a light for a few minutes.

I went to the dealer last week, and, of course, they couldn't replicate the problem. (That night I was on a date, and with my luck, the fumes came back.) So the end result is that the dealer couldn't do anything about it.

I'll just live with the problem since I drive in stop and go traffic infrequently - also putting the vents on recirculate stops the fumes.

Gas mileage update: 30.5 MPG (80% highway, 7,500 miles on engine)

c_hunter

Of course, with aircraft, loads go like the square of velocity (dynamic pressure) so it's even more of a big deal!

Craig

hilbert

Thanks mesh. This is what I think Tom and Ray said in the book too. What was not clear to me is what is smooth or what is considered 'not slamming'. I know flooring your accelerator off the line (which I do not do)is slamming . What I was looking for is an objective way to define what would be considered slamming. With my current driving (after reading their book) I know I am not slamming because I press the accelerator too little, but I think I am moving too slowly. I go from 0-20 in 6 seconds or so for OBXT. I wanted to find how much I can press the accelerator without it being considered slamming. Perhaps it is hard to define and someone will have to show it to me by driving in person for me to understand it. Thanks for your input. Until then I will go to my old habit (before I read Tom and Ray) which I think was smooth, I definitely did not floor the accelerator, but I pressed it harder than I do now.

samiam_68

Somebody videotaped my typical commute to work....lol

ufanco

Hey guys

   I picked up my new 05 OBXTL on Tuesday. The thing is that when I went to take possession of the car - it wouldn't start ( well it started and immediately quit) I did this 3 times until I realized it was out of gas. The dealer apologized and gave me a full tank. However, one of my friends thinks that this may have damaged the engine. What do you think?

threelegdog5

I put Toyo Observes on my '05 GT wagon yesterday. Decided not to take a chance on the stock RE all seasons with all the winter driving I will be doing, especially since the one on the GT are more performace than traction oriented. If I had the outback, I probably would have given the REs a try in the snow..No snow/ice yet to try the Toyos on (thankfully!), but they seem to ride well enough on the dry road - not a big difference from the REs, maybe just a bit stickier...

saedave

I would not worry about the engine, but the electrical fuel pump (in the tank) is cooled by the gasoline surrounding it. Probably there was no damage, but running a dry pump very long might do something.

snowbird

My new Outback VDC is normally very quiet at idle, but a couple of times after I had filled the tank "too full", I noticed slight stuttering of the engine at idle, at Park position. After driving for a while (no stuttering while driving) and using up some fuel, the problem seemed to have disappeared. Has anyone experienced this? Or is it only my imagination? Thanks. Jason

threelegdog5

I put Toyo Observes on my '05 GT wagon yesterday. Decided not to take a chance on the stock RE all seasons with all the winter driving I will be doing, especially since the one on the GT are more performace than traction oriented. If I had the outback, I probably would have given the REs a try in the snow..No snow/ice yet to try the Toyos on (thankfully!), but they seem to ride well enough on the dry road - not a big difference from the REs, maybe just a bit stickier...

md_outback

I have the same problem with my '05 Outback LLBean, same engine as your VDC. My dealer could not replicate the problem so through trial and error I determined that the problem would occur every time I topped off a full tank with more than 5 cents worth of fuel (anything more than 3 ounces). My solution: When adding fuel and the pump shuts off automatically, do not top it off, not even a few cents to round your price paid a bit. I have not had the problem since.
MD_Outback

hilbert

The manual says not to "overfill" the tank and stop whenever the pump shuts off automatically.

poisson

This the first car I have had that is FULL when the pump shuts off the first time. The first few times I tried to add more it would overflow slightly. Now I never try to add more.

It is hard to do when in NJ as you have to tell the attendant the proper procedure (all full-serve for those who don't know).