Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Subaru Legacy/Outback 2005+

18081838586214

Comments

  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    "Keep in mind it's only FWD, too."

    Actually I tested the AWD version, which is obviously a tad slower than the FWD version, but it has no torque steer.

    Given where I live, I absolutely need AWD or I can't get home in the winter. Also, after the remnants of hurricane Floyd dumped 5.5" of rain on us in 12hours and wrecked our dirt road, I realized that I need high ground clearance, so the S40/V50 is now out of the running.

    I am left with only the Outback and the XC70, but I find the XC70 drives like a big Buick. While the VOlvo has a superb interior and is extremely comfortable, the Outback feels much more stable and nimble.
  • saedavesaedave Member Posts: 694
    Note the different horizontal rpm scales. The H-6 is plotted down to about 1200 rpm and the H-4T to 1600 rpm. If idle rpm is around 750, off idle H-6 performance might be much better than the turbo. My own test drives of both produced a pronounced preference for the H-6, but it is a shame that the great brakes and handling of the GT are not included.
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Continuous AWD on MT vehicles uses a viscous coupling (VC) to send power to the front and rear axles. The VC acts like a limited slip differential. When the front and rear axles start spinning at different rates (indicating slippage), the fluid in the VC starts the thicken and forces the front and rear axles to spin at the same rate.

    The entire process is completely passive with Continuous AWD. The unit is tuned to split power 50:50 and to allow some amount of slip before it starts to lock up to enable turning. Basically, you need some wheel spin to get the system to work. It's a very simple, yet effective system that's been in place for years. Since the power split is normally 50:50, you have less chance of ever encountering wheel spin vs. a FWD/RWD car.

    With VTD, power is normally split 45/55 (the rear bias is there for a better handling) using planetary gears instead of a viscous fluid. In addition, VTD uses an electronic clutch pack that can vary the power from that default bias (the exact amount escapes me).

    The main advantage of VTD is that because it is electronic, it can react faster and more efficiently with the vehicle. For example, sensors on the vehicle let it know when one is either accelerating or braking and can send more power to the necessary axle (ie. to the rears when accelerating). I believe it also requires less wheelspin to activate compared to Continuous AWD.

    Another advantage is better integration with the ABS system. ABS and AWD work in almost opposite ways: AWD sends power away from the wheels that are spinning faster where as ABS tries to clamp down on the same wheels. With Continuous AWD, the VC lockup needs to be relaxed so that it doesn't kick in too soon and compete with ABS (it's passive so the unit never knows if you're braking or accelerating). With VTD, the system can tell if you are braking or accelerating and can delay or engage the power transfer as necessary.

    One last interesting quirk about Continuous AWD. My previous Forester had Continuous AWD and while it worked amazingly well on snow, it did have a tendency to "oscillate". When driving in very slippery conditions, the unit starts to lock, releases, locks, etc. and can be felt as a front-to-back transfer of power. I've read that both Active AWD and VTD have a far less tendency to do this oscillation.

    Hope that helps!

    Ken
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Good question how the graphs would look like for the USDM turbos. Given that the USDM turbo has bigger displacement but a later peak torque, the slope of the first part of the torque curve (where the turbo is spooling) probably starts higher but has a slighlty lower slope. My guess is that initial throttle tip-in will be better with the USDM model.

    In any event, I think it's great that we can chose between two fantastic engines.

    Ken
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    "My own test drives of both produced a pronounced preference for the H-6, but it is a shame that the great brakes and handling of the GT are not included. "

    Well I think the Outback handles amazingly well for such a tall and off-road capable wagon. I agree about the weak brakes though, that is my number one concern with the Outback. I cannot fathom why Subaru didn't put their best brakes on the XT and VDC. It puts in doubt their supposedly "security conscious" image. I'm hoping that putting better tires on it will improve the breaking distance.

    But even the GT is not that great under breaking. The Volvo S40 smokes it big time.
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Braking distance is greatly influenced by the tires as well. I don't think the OB models have poor brakes at all. It's the higher profile all-season rubber that hampers braking distance. The current brakes on the OB are strong enough to lock the wheels up and activate ABS. It's the tire grip that determines how much braking force can be applied before the tires lock.

    That phenomemon is clearly shown with the GT. It has oversized brakes that have been reported to be very fade resistant, yet the all-season rubber hurts it against the S40 (which can be optioned with summer tires).

    Hey, you can't give all the GT goodies to the OB models! :-)

    Ken
  • goneskiiangoneskiian Member Posts: 381
    Tom,
    Mine is the same way. I've tracked the difference on every tank but the very first and it's actually a bit more than 1 mpg high. I have no idea why it's this way.

    I am still loving the GT. Up to nearly 7100 miles now and it's all I could have wanted in a car.

    Now if I could just get my iPod to hook up to the stereo! I've been closely following the discussion over at legacyGT.com and hope Craig and centerpunch come up with a fix I can do myself. Doing in myself would mean that anyone can because I have absolutely no electronic/audio experience. All I know is that if you let the smoke out of the wires that's a bad thing and you can't get it to go back in. ;-)

    Cheers!
    -Ian
  • goneskiiangoneskiian Member Posts: 381
    Craig,
    Let me know when you have some available I'll test them if you can help me (with lots of pics and detailed instructions) get it installed.

    Better yet would be something like what Dension has done with their iceLink product. I'd love to be able to control the iPod with the stereo controls and also avoid the "silence" CD.

    -Ian
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Yeah, I agree with you, but I fear we have reached the end of the line without schematics or other engineering info about the radio. Finding the three audio pins in the 14-pin connector was a feat in itself, and I think centerpunch over on the LGT forum deserves a lot of credit for that. At this point, I see the remaining advances being how to hook up to the L/R audio lines and get everything integrated well.

    The circuit board will allow us to intercept the flat-flex cable (FFC) that runs from the CD changer to the radio. It basically just has two FFC connectors and some RCA cables. Unfortunately, it would require partial disassembly of the radio/HVAC unit to install the board, which makes it impractical for most people. Once you get the radio apart, plugging in the board is the easy part!

    All of the parts are available from DigiKey, but they require a custom board for integration and also, the pin spacing on the FFC connectors is so tight it precludes hand soldering. So, this has to be manufactured by a board shop.

    Craig
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Any of the crew that are EEs, this is a good time to jump in and wow us with your expertise! So far, a bunch of hacker MEs have done all the work, so you can guess what that means!

    Craig
  • beanboybeanboy Member Posts: 442
    I'm still trying to figure out emission differences between the catless uppiped WRX STi and the catted uppipes of the Forester and Legacy. Both are considered Low Emission Vehicles (LEV), so there isn't even a "look-ahead" factor by Subaru in terms of meaning tougher standard emissions in the future. Anybody know how much 'dirtier' the STi is over the Legacy GT?

    Why did Subaru put in an expensive piece of equipment (probably at least $50 dollars at the factory level, which is huge on cars where every cent counts) on their volume turbo vehicles, when their top performing model meets the same emission standard and goes without?

    As you might have guessed, an STi uppipe will be going on the GT shortly after purchase... Just curious as to why Subaru did it in the first place.

    -B
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    I am not 100% sure about this, but it may have to do with the fact that the number of STi sold is paltry compared to the Legacy/Outback with the turbo motor. The emissions requirements may be based on a fleet average, I don't know.

    There's really not an equal substitute for having a cat close to the engine where the exhaust is hottest, that's why it's such a common approach.

    Craig
  • zman3zman3 Member Posts: 857
    geneshk:

    It's yours if you want it. If you haven't taken Rob up on his offer in message 4187 let me know how to contact you so we can arrange delivery of the coupon.

    Karl
  • geneshkgeneshk Member Posts: 2
    Karl,
    Great!

    Please send me your email address to the one shown in my member profile, which is open to members. I will respond with shipping info and will be happy cover the cost.

    Much appreciated.
    Gene
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    So the AWD S40/V50s are here now? When I looked there were still FWD only.

    Go price a V50 T5 with AWD though, nearly $30 grand for starters. And keep in mind it's a compact.

    -juice
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    The S40/V50 AWD have been available in Canada for a couple of months, but I know they were not expected to show up in the USA until the fall.

    Actually a well equipped V50 T5 AWD is pretty much exactly the same price as an Outback XT here in Canada, but it should really be compared to the Legacy, and I haven't checked those prices.

    But as I said, the Volvo is out of the running for me because of the lack of ground clearance. I was just comparing engine torque bands and braking ability, that's all. The Outback's breaks are amongst the worse on the market: only behemots like the Hummer have worse breaking distance. And while the tires play a part in that, it's not the whole story as most cars don't have very good OEM tires to begin with.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Gotcha.

    It's been a while since I drove it. I sampled the S40 T5 both with the manual and the auto. I thought the auto tranny lagged a lot and hesitated in shifting, something the Legacy GT I drove did not do. The Subie's tranny was so much better, that alone would decide it for me.

    The manual Volvo was a lot better, to me a requirement for the T5.

    Here is my Legacy GT full review:

    ateixeira "Town Hall Test Drive Team" May 20, 2004 10:42pm

    Here is my S40 T5 FWD review:

    ateixeira "Town Hall Test Drive Team" May 20, 2004 10:22pm

    The relevant portion from my T5 review:

    shifts were a little slow in full auto and manual mode. Plan ahead for shifts. The slush box also sapped some useful power from both models

    Just my opinion/experience, YMMV as they say.

    -juice
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    I pretty much agree with your findings.

    I personally think both those cars are much better in manual. I find the auto trannies of both cars take too much away from the turbo engines.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I guess we didn't really test off-the-line acceleration in the GT auto, so perhaps I just didn't sample it in the situations where it would have bothered me.

    We did mostly rolling acceleration to merge onto the track, then track use, 2 laps. I went 3 times, once with a manual and twice with the auto.

    Took me about 3 days to wipe the smile off my face.

    -juice
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    Ken, thanks for your explanation of the various AWD systems. I had been reading and re-reading all of Subaru's writing on it and found their message very confusing.

    They seem to be caught between a rock and a hard place. The VTD is obviously superior (if it wasn't, why would they bother with the complexity), but at the same time they try to say that the VC on the manuals is just as good.

    Your explanation makes a lot of sense. I guess the VC on the manuals is "good enough", but there are many advantages to the VTD. Although one could argue that the simplicity (hence reliability) of the VC is a big advantage.
  • saedavesaedave Member Posts: 694
    There seems to be general agreement that the turbo models may be fine with manual trans, but problematic with auto trans.

    This poses a problem for Subaru's up-market positioning since most up-market buyers will opt for automatic. To compete with the Audi A4 3.2 quattro or G-35x for example, the H-6 will be necessary. With the H-6 priced just a little higher than the GT, the Legacy would be a very good, slightly lower priced alternative to the Audi and Infinity. When Audi and Infinity intenders test drive the turbo most of them will come away with negative feelings toward Subaru. The longer the wait for the H-6, the more such people who will cross Subaru off of their lists.
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    I'm not sure that "general agreement" and "problematic" are the right words.

    Most people here seem to like the Turbo/5EAT combo, although I personally much prefer the 5MT for the turbo engine. I'm not saying that the auto is problematic, just that it doesn't suit my personal taste and I find the MT allows you to bettter exploit the turbo's pwer band.

    However, I agree with you that Turbo's do not compare to the smooth power delivery and drivability of a good 6. In that sense, I can certainly see lots of people who are used to a good 6 not liking the turbos. I'm certainly amongst them.

    The turbos are thrilling in a "boy racer" kind of way, and they are a good way to get impressive power at a reasonable price. But turbos are no subsitute for cubic inches (as the old saying goes). Once you get past the thrill of the turbo rush, the smooth power of a 6 is much nicer to live with, especially if you want an auto tranny.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I think even the auto is plenty more than adequate for its price level.

    Most Audis and Volvos are turbos as well. Only when you hit $40k do you see more cylinders.

    Keep something in mind folks - the H6 is needing big discounts while it's hard to even find an XT Limited Outback. Who wants to bet most of those are automatic? I bet at least 80% are.

    The consumer has spoken, turbo over H6 all the way, even with the auto.

    -juice
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    Not questioning that. Both auto and manual offer outstanding performance for the money.

    But the manual gives you about 1 sec off the 0-60 time, better control over the engine's power band, and it is cheaper to boot! So if the auto is a great deal, the manual is an outstanding performance per dollar value.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    True, true.

    At least we have choices!

    The G35x only comes with an automatic, did you know that? And the BMW xi wagon only comes with the 2.5l engine. You can't get the 3l with AWD in a wagon.

    -juice
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Yeah, plus the xi wagon's torque is fixed to something like 35:65. It doesn't vary.

    I think the best performance buy is the base GT sedan with stick. No frills, mucho thrills.

    Speaking of the G35, I've read that the 5EAT used in our Subies are of the same design as the Jatco J507E transmission used in Nissan and Infiniti to mate up with their 3.5L engines. Pretty cool.

    Ken
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    "Boy racers" must be really popular among the sophisticated and wealthy. All the top MBs are turbocharged (even their v12- if that's not enough displacement, what is?) as is the top dog 911, and Jaguars use forced induction, and as mentioned the Audis and Volvos.

    The Turbocharger is an efficient and lightweight method of achieving more hp without requiring the added weight of more displacement. Of course you cannot substitute displacement in the end, but a well designed Turbo will easily equal if not surpass a larger displacement engine (as is the case here with the 2.5turbo vs the H6)

    As a more 'grown up' "boy racer" I appreciate the turbo in my GT Ltd. Maybe the reason this car makes me smile so much when I drive it is it makes me feel younger? Boyish? That's not a bad thing. ;-)

    tom
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 235,200
    V-10.. No turbocharger.. 507 HP

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I didn't know that, but I do know that JATCO makes some great trannies.

    The 4 speed auto in the MPV was only so-so, they upgraded to a JATCO 5 speed and it's much better.

    So Infiniti uses the same tranny, eh? That's funny. Good funny.

    The Legacy is sort of grown up, a perfect car for someone who outgrows a WRX, or just feels silly driving a blue rally car.

    -juice
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    Actually Ken the base GT was what I was looking to buy. It has all the necesities and then some, and is about 150lbs lighter than my GT Ltd. There just weren't any in Seattle when I bought my car, so I had to settle for a Ltd. ;-(. Oh well, we all make sacrifices. ;-)

    If Subaru could turn the H6 into a torque monster like the Nissan 3.5 v6- it would very much change the picture. Gobs of low end torque would be great with AWD.

    tom
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    If Subaru could turn the H6 into a torque monster like the Nissan 3.5 v6- it would very much change the picture. Gobs of low end torque would be great with AWD.

    All it takes is "cubes." A same-size-as-the-Nissan 3.5 H-6 would do the trick. :)

    Bob
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    Bob, is that an observation or a suggestion? ;-)

    tom
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    The Altima SE-R is out- another $30K ($29,200) sports sedan.

    Minus the AWD, but with the stiffer suspension 18" tires I bet it outhandles the GT, probably low 6s to 60 with a 6spd MT.

    Subaru may need a better handling GT with a 6spd MT if they're going to keep up! Is the STi coming?

    tom
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Bob, is that an observation or a suggestion? ;-)

    Both Tom :)

    Even before the new Legacy and Outback debuted in Japan a year ago, I was hoping for a 3.5 H6, and mentioned it here a number of times. I was thinking then (and still do) that a 3.5 H6 would be much easier to battle the excellent Nissan 3.5 engine.

    Bob
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    There seems to be general agreement that the turbo models may be fine with manual trans, but problematic with auto trans.

    I don't think this is the case. Some people may prefer the 5MT, but the 5EAT/turbo combo is definitely not problematic.

    I've been driving and preferring manual transmission nearly all my life, and the 5EAT/turbo combo in the GT and XT was the first auto that made me think otherwise. I still think the rapid fire upshifts with the 5EAT are truly amazing.

    I agree that you lose a little performance with the auto, but on the flip side, the 5MT is no gem either in terms of shifter feel. And of course the upshifts of the 5EAT are snappier/quicker than any driver/MT combo. So there are trades to both choices. If you are after maximum acceleration and minimum lag, the 5MT is the obvious choice, but that's the only clear difference in my opinion.

    After weighing all the trades, I came away more impressed with the 5EAT than the 5MT, so that's what won in the end for me.

    Craig
  • beanboybeanboy Member Posts: 442
    http://www.mazda.com/publicity/release/200409/0923e.html

    2.3L Direct Injection Turbocharged 4 Cyl.
    256hp/280ft/lb
    Active Torque Splitting AWD system
    0-62mph in 6.6 second
    Mazdaspeed-tuned suspension
    6 speed manual tranny
    18" Wheel/Tire Combo

    The introduction of a direct-injection fuel system to the turbocharged engine infuses the already powerful acceleration that is expected of turbo performance with ample torque in the low and mid range to deliver excellent response, while also realizing lower emissions. A six-speed manual transmission will be the only gearbox available in all markets.

    Under controlled Mazda test conditions, the flagship sedan routinely delivers 0-100 km/h acceleration times of 6.6 seconds. Acceleration from 80-to-120 km/h can be achieved in approximately 5.3 seconds.

    To promote control and drivability, Mazda’s new active torque split, all-wheel-drive system will be offered as standard equipment. The active torque coupling mounted in front of the rear differential is electronically controlled and, in accordance with road surfaces and driving conditions, adjusts the front/rear torque distribution to deliver optimum drive power to each wheel. The result is powerful acceleration and the ability to fully balance the car.
  • moutbackmoutback Member Posts: 39
    From www.media.subaru.com:

    CHERRY HILL, N.J. , Sept. 22, 2004 -- Subaru of America, Inc., the only car company that features Symmetrical All-Wheel Drive as standard equipment on every vehicle in its product line, today announced a mid-year price increase on all 2005 model year Subaru Baja, Forester, Impreza, Legacy, and Outback models, effective this month.

    The MSRP for all 2005 models increased $100, except Legacy and Outback 2.5i non-Limited models, which increased $300.

    Destination and delivery charges remain $575 for all 2005 model year vehicles (Alaska deliveries are $725). Legacy and Outback four-cylinder models (excluding turbo) that meet Partial Zero Emission Vehicle (PZEV) requirements will be available to dealers in California, New England States, New York and some bordering states. The base MSRP of the PZEV models is $200 higher than the federal specification models.

    For a complete 2005 price chart, please visit www.media.subaru.com.
  • goneskiiangoneskiian Member Posts: 381
    Hmmm....are you sure that 0-60 run is correct? The GT does that almost a second quicker. Sounds like Mazda's just playing catch up to me. ;-)

    -Ian
  • goneskiiangoneskiian Member Posts: 381
    Glad I got mine when I did. Of course, $100 bucks is not a lot when considering a $25K to $30K purchase. Should add up in quantity for Subaru though. They deserve a little extra profit for providing such a quality automobile. I still get a big smile everytime I get to drive my GT Wagon.

    Cheers!
    -Ian
  • aussie outbackaussie outback Member Posts: 26
    Just confirming that in Australia - our Outbacks have full size spares. Our tyres are 225/45x17, and they fit in the spare tyre well.
  • aussie outbackaussie outback Member Posts: 26
    Apologies in advance if you are sick of reading about a car you can't have...so I promise this is my last road test reference.

    The Legacy 3.0R-B just scored 19/20 - the BEST EVER road test score awarded, from one our national newspapers - admittedly not a particularly renowned road testing source.

    The road test isn't listed on their website yet, but there is a reference to it on the Subaru.com.au site:

    http://www.subaru.com.au/news/?newsid=12072

    The only real difference between Australia and USA which needs to be taken into account is that European brands which compete with Subaru (eg Audi/BMW) tend to be priced around 30-100% higher. Whereas in the USA, the difference might be only 0%-50%.

    I plan to test drive one on Tuesday when I take the Outback in for its 3000 mile service. If successful, I will provide some feedback.

    - Aussie Outback
  • lumbarlumbar Member Posts: 421
    However, $300 on the base model is not insubstantial, particularly when you consider those shopping at that level may be less likely to pay it. I think that this is an "interesting" strategy by SOA considering that -some- models appear to be selling well (but not to the point of unavailabiity), while one hardly sees any of certain other models. Of course, SOA is privy to the real numbers.
  • saintvipersaintviper Member Posts: 177
    Hi Guys,
    Been catching up with this discussion as my wife and I are thinking of replacing her problematic Audi A4 1.8T with a new Legacy. I went and test drove a Legacy 2.5i Limited yesterday and thought I would offer some comparisons with our 99 A4. I realize that this is not a totally fair comparison given that the A4 lists for about $4000 more, but these are the 2 cars I'm comparing so bear with me. FWIW, I've pretty much vowed never to buy another German car again, but it is a really nice car to drive and look at both inside and out, and I want to replace it with something of similar style and class, but more reliable. My own experience with my WRX has been excellent, so I'd be happy to go with another Subaru if they made such a car.

    I've been reading the reviews of the Legacy and they all rave about the interior. When looking at the pictures online, I wasn't all that impressed, but upon seeing it for myself, it really is quite impressive. The Audi's interior is really a work of art, but the Subaru nearly matches it and even exceeds it in some ways. The leather seats look really nice and actually quite similar to the leatherette (vinyl, but very nice) seats in the Audi. The center stack on the dash looks stunningly good. Controls look good. The steering wheel isn't as nice as Audi's sport steering wheel, but still is very nice. The controls in the Legacy feel good and make much more sense and are easier to use than the button happy Audi. (I counted once and there are nearly 70 buttons on the Audi's dash.) The Legacy has dual climate control which the Audi doesn't.

    Engine: The 168hp engine in the Legacy compares favorably with the 150hp 1.8T in our Audi. Plenty of power and torque, though the 1.8T sounds smoother. A significant drawback on the Subaru was the 4 speed auto tranny vs. the 5 speed auto on the Audi. The Audi seems to have an almost inate ability to read your mind and shift accordingly. Shifts are solid, but smooth. The Subaru was slow to downshift, and when it did, the shift was very abrupt, and the shift itself seemed to take a long time. Also, with only 4 gears, the shift points are further apart, so when you downshift, the engine revs go a bit higher making the shift seem even more abrupt. The Legacy turbo models have 5 speed trannys, so maybe this isn't as big a problem as on the 2.5i, but for my wife, we don't need a GT.

    Some other disappointments with the car. Subaru did a great job on the interior with the stuff you see, but need a little more work on some of the stuff you don't see. The Audi is noticably quieter inside, especially when going over bumps. I would attribute this to better sound deadening materials and thicker glass on the Audi. Another disappointment was the size of the back seats. The back seats in the Audi are a bit small and I was thinking that the Legacy was a bigger vehicle and would have more room in back. There was a little more room, but it's still pretty tight back there. The Legacy trunk was a little bigger, but also not as big as I expected. I guess I was expecting dimensions similar to a Camry or Accord. The fact that the seats don't fold down like they do in the Audi isn't a dealbreaker because I have a WRX wagon for carrying bigger stuff, but it's still disappointing.

    Moving to the outside of the car, the car generally looks good, but there are some problems most of which were subjective, but I'll point them out anyway for the sake of discussion. First of all, I was looking at a regal blue model which is dark blue. One problem with dark colored cars is that they look great when clean, but terrible when dirty. For some reason, the dealer knew for several days that I was coming, but didn't wash the car. (It hasn't rained in over a week BTW.) It was filthy when I saw it and looked terrible. The metallic paint also seemed to have a purplish tint to it which I didn't like. Color can be changed though and I imagine a silver one would look just fine even when dirty. The other problem I had was that the overall design looked very bland to me. The car looked alot like a Saturn to my eye which I don't consider a good thing. Older Subarus and even my 02 WRX seem to have a lot more character which isn't always a good thing, but they grow on you after a while. Maybe the look of the Legacy will to, but my first impression wasn't so good, though by no means did I think it was ugly.

    So that's it. I was seriously thinking of trading in the Audi as early as this weekend, but I think I'm going to spend a bit more time looking around. I suppose it's a bit unrealistic to think that a $26K Subaru would match up to a $30K Audi, but that's what the reviews have been saying, so I thought I'd give it a look. Subaru has made quite a bit of progress and the interior design is right up there. There are just some things like the noise inside and the transmission that need some refinement before it can truely compete with these cars. I think if Subaru keeps going in the direction that they are, they can get there, but they aren't there yet.
  • snowbirdsnowbird Member Posts: 120
    I saw in another thread a post by an Outback 2.5i owner complaining that "the AC cycles every 20-30 seconds between cold and warm..." Has anyone else experienced this? I am due to pick up my new 3 OR VDC in a couple of weeks and would be interested in hearing comments from others. Thanks. Snowbird
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Excellent and well thought out writeup. Have you considered the Legacy GT? It's got the much better 5EAT, certainly has more power, and is probably priced much like the A4.

    Bob
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    So do you think there is room for the 225/55-17 tires on the US model? That's another 45mm on the diameter according to my math...

    Craig
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Just confirming that in Australia - our Outbacks have full size spares. Our tyres are 225/45x17, and they fit in the spare tyre well.

    Are you sure? I thought your H6 Outback tires are 215/55x17, and H4 Outbacks had 215/60x16 tires.

    Bob
  • tsytsy Member Posts: 1,551
    The 0-60 time makes me think the hp numbers are off again.

    tom
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    The Mazdaspeed 6 will be a limited model, right? Kind of like when Subaru introduces the Legacy STi. ;-)

    Any word of a wagon? The sub $30K sport sedan market is getting quite crowded. The choices are much more difficult in that space. I'm kind of glad I needed a wagon!

    Ken
  • needanewcar2needanewcar2 Member Posts: 23
    Craig, I was hoping I could get your opinion (and anyone else who wishes to contribute)

    I am trying to decide between the OB Turbo and the 3.0 VDC '05.

    It will be used mostly for city driving and occasional long highway trips (we live in snowy winters in Montreal). Your advice?

    Also, from reading comments here, the brakes on the OB are not great. Would that be a reason to pass on the OB, and perhaps go with the Forester (which is my other option).

    Thanks to all of you who have made the decision to this point much easier

    Rosanne.
Sign In or Register to comment.