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.
Comments
-Brian
With the Edsel's failure there were a number of factors that came together, not just the grille. Ford introduced a new full-size car when the country was starting to—in VW's words, "think small." So the timing of this "brand" launch was all wrong. The nation's economy and mentality was changing, and the Edsel did not reflect or address this change. Ford was trying to match GM and Chrysler by offering another (redundant) middle-priced line. Dumb move, as DeSoto died shortly after Edsel did, for the very same reason—too many overlapping brands and models. And yes, the horse-collar grille was shocking too. However the grille was an easy and obvious target, but it wasn't the total reason for the brand's failure.
A result of the Edsel failure was for the auto industry to do more focus groups, and to really test potential design directions with the public. In the past "experimental" cars were used primarily by the car manufacturers as "announcements," rather than "case studies." I think the Edsel's failure helped redirect the purpose of what future concept cars should do; that being not just design studios flexing their creative muscle for bragging rights, but really to study what the public wants, and how they react to design and ideas. Concept cars became much more important, and they became much more of a research vehicle if you will, all thanks to the Edsel's failure.
Bob
I wasn't complaining about the interior - just comparing the designs. Sheesh - I know you love Subarus but stop taking everything little comment as a direct slam.
Bob
Oooh - that gets dealers all excited!
Maybe in your part of the world. But the XC-90 has actually sold very well and Volvo is very happy with it.
I'll second that - here in Boston you'll see just as many XC90's as you do RX330's.
Bob - that's what I see everytime I come out of my house or office. I have to live with that styling for 6-7 years. I have to like it or I'm not buying it!! In any car.
...when you consider the interior—the place where everyone "lives—" it's an even smaller percentage! For me, the interior is far, FAR, FAR more important than the grille of any vehicle.
The interior is just as important to me as exterior styling, but again - it's a package deal for me.
True, but the time I have to stare at the front of my vehicle while walking to it is tiny compared to the time spent behind the wheel. I think most people priorities are all wrong here.
Yes, it is a package deal, but features, comfort, and driving experience far outweigh exterior styling IMO—and this is coming from someone who has earned his living by design for 30+ years.
Bob
Quite often, only peak HP or Torque numbers are used in comparisons. The comparison you did is valid, but only at the specific RPM at which the engine is generating a given amount of torque -- in this case the peaks at 4000+RPM.
What tells a better story of how a vehicle will perform is a graph of torque/HP vs. RPM. An engine with lower peak torque could still be outperforming a higher peak torque engine at lower RPMS.
Generally, vehicles that provide lots of low-end torque will be quicker off the line and generally more driveable around town. It's also sometimes refered to as "usable torque". A great example are some Honda engines. While they had very comparable peak torque/HP numbers to some larger displacement engines, the peaks did not arrive until very high in the RPM band -- something that's great for racing applications, but maybe not so for a daily driver. It's all about how much torque one can get in the RPM band one will normally be driving.
Another factor in changing how powerful a vehicle feels is gearing. Through shorter gearing, a lower HP/torque vehicle can be made to respond well for a given range of vehicle speeds. That's why it's not possible to gauge straight line acceleration based solely on engine output and vehicle weight.
Hope that helps.
Ken
We all have different priorities and overall package including styling is important to me.
You're right. After having looked at juice's photos and read through your accounts, the front end of the B9X seems less of an issue to me. I would think any car enthusiast would see beyond one dimension of a vehicle and take it for it's whole. A great example of that is the bug-eye WRX. It sold on the basis of it's performance and value.
However, for a non car enthusiast, the front-end could mean a lot -- a lot more than any one of us could imagine. While it probably doesn't describe the members on this forum, there are probably a significant number of people who may write off a given model due to it's looks. They'll see it in a catalogue, deem it "ugly" and never even get to the point of visiting a dealer to see it in the flesh. I know lots of people who shop for vehicles like that.
Also another consideration is the target market for the B9X. Unlike the WRX, it's trying to compete in a segment that's more heavily image concious. To be highly successful, all the parts need to jive together. I'm concerned that the "typical" B9X buyer is going to fall into this category and write off the vehicle before ever seeing it in the flesh.
Ken
- B9 brochure
- Drive magazine with a B9 introduction article
- Post card invite to see the B9 at the Philly autoshow
- No bills. :-)
DaveM
I agree. It just never ceases to amaze me.
Also another consideration is the target market for the B9X. Unlike the WRX, it's trying to compete in a segment that's more heavily image conscious. To be highly successful, all the parts need to jive together. I'm concerned that the "typical" B9X buyer is going to fall into this category and write off the vehicle before ever seeing it in the flesh.
Well, they will eventually see it sooner or later. My wife, who could care less about cars, often asks to me: "what car is that in front of us," or I saw this <insert car> at the shopping mall today"... So sooner or later even non-car people will take notice.
Bob
I agree. It just never ceases to amaze me.
Bob - don't forget as a designer, you probably have a more open mind to new/different design ideas. Most people know what they like and tend to react very critically to things they don't. Now I'm in the high end plumbing fixture business where form is often more important than function - that happens when a faucet sells for almost $1,000. We see lots of new design ideas all the time. I don't like all of it but over the years I've becoming more accepting. Over the past few days, the Tribeca has grown on me.
As for the category, I read this morning there are over 6 dozen SUV's in the marktetplace. That's a crowded field. The WRX was all by itself.
Oh, without a doubt. If we were debating this among automotive designers, the responses would be much different. I'm not saying they would like it, not at all; what I am saying there reasons for liking (or not liking) would likely be based on different criteria, than the criteria expressed here. The issues discussed here I'm sure would be part of the conversation, but they would also get heavily into design and design theory. They would talk in a much more rational, and less emotional manner. They would talk about why certain design features are good or bad; from an aesthetic viewpoint, from an engineering standpoint, from a cost standpoint and from a marketing standpoint. Concept, brand identity and corporate vision would be a large part of the discussion too.
Believe me, it would be a much different conversation. Talking serious design here or on other non-design oriented forms is like talking Russian to someone who doesn't speak the language.
And that's not meant to be a slam against anyone here. It would be the same if anyone here tried to talk math or science with me. I'd be lost in 10 seconds.
Bob
The Tribeca doesn't have any of that. It's ugly and then it matches the rest of the field. So far, there's nothing outstanding to compensate for those looks.
I hope that the price comes in way below the competition. That will allow dealers to move the metal. People looking for a good vehicle without paying the premium that Toyota and Honda often command would go for it. The Tribeca could then serve as something like a Hyundai, developing a following with budget-conscious folks who are willing to try something different.
You and others here are applying the word "ugly" as if it were a universal truth. That flat out is not the case. That is your personal opinion, and you're certainly welcome to it. Just keep in mind your opinion is not shared by everyone here, nor is it a "fact." It's just an opinion, nothing more...
Bob
The Tribeca is interesting but I have to admit that it looks a lot smaller that I was expecting. But I certainly dont think it looks ugly. Odd, different, weird, but not ugly. I was also expecting it to have a larger engine and tow in the mid-SUV range.
As far as function, I'm not sure if there is reasonable access to the 3rd row and its unclear from the pictures if its a 3rd row in name only (like the Highlander) or an actual 3rd row. Its also difficult to tell if there any storage room with the 3rd row up. I'm not sure it would have been right for us anyway. It suspect it will appeal to some fraction of the large market that need a minivan but dont want to drive a minivan.
PS: I'm the poster formerly known as nematode.....and I like minivans.....and wagons
I certainly hope so for the sake of Subaru. My wife is one who is not very much into cars (helps to keep our household balanced). I often look to her as an indicator of a "general public" reaction to a given vehicle since I am fairly biased when it comes to Subarus. She'll quite often use looks as the initial filter before even considering performance, value and reliability. With the B9X, her immediate reaction was "I don't like how it looks". Given this initial reaction, it's going to be an uphill battle for me to get her to even consider this as a vehicle for her. I'm afraid her reaction will be shared by many others outside of this community.
Ken
Sports car, wagon, SUV in one awesome package. Very little lag i could feel.
But overall it is fantastic.
guess u never dated a person whose face you couldnt get by?
finally, ty bob.
Oooh - that gets dealers all excited!
and the new 2005 is in such demand you can get them below invoice at fitzmall. how long was the wait for the odyssey before production finally caught up? so the triazteca will be around invoice in a matter of months
ok who decides who a car enthusiasts is? someone who loves the outside shell cant be one?
is not the goal of someone selling something to please the potential customer? or is it to have an artsy movie that no one sees?
i dont believe this car to be an academic exercise therefore if the design loses more people then draws them in, is it not then a loser?
nope he is right, ugly but with killer performance at a cheap price
psssst and inside the community
I still say it will be a success, and Subaru will meet its sales goals.
Bob
http://members.cox.net/harmony.hunter/b9web/
First things first -- many of you know I hated the front end and overall styling when we saw those spy pics a few weeks ago. Well, I am here to say I was totally wrong about the styling! In person, the B9 looks great. I actually like the front end now, and the rest of the vehicle has distinctive styling with a lot of flair. It looks good and unlike any Subaru you have seen before (those were my wife's thoughts too and she doesn't really get into cars). This is the first Subaru with a flowing and blended body shape, in contrast to the "stacked-box" shape the current models have.
While my Outback XT relies on a lot of deliberate styling cues (such as fender flares and prominent wheel spokes), the B9 has a very gentle grace too it. Just looks good. One thing that I really noticed was the lack of bumper protrusions front and back. The front is especially well rounded and looks nicely integrated. I believe this is one reason the potentially obnoxious grille design looks so good in person -- it is distributed over the whole front and replaces typical bumper cues with something more interesting.
I got some good info from the SOA rep. Pricing will be low to upper $30K range as we already know. There will be a base 5 passenger cloth version, and a 5 passenger with premium/Ltd package that adds leather, heated seats, and upgraded stereo (perhaps moonroof too, which would be consistent with Subaru's typical Ltd/premium packages). Rear seat DVD will be an option on the 5-pax Ltd model (it requires the upgraded stereo) and I think the guy said Nav will only be available on the 7-pax models. If I ever get a Tribeca, it would likely be the 5-pax with premium package and no DVD.
The reason for the framed windows on the doors is very simple -- because the rear door is so wide (=large and heavy pane of glass with a big perimeter), the glass required a frame around it for rigidity, bracing, and sealing. They just could not pull off a frameless window design here.
Gas mileage is estimated at 18/24 by Subaru. I would not expect EPA numbers to be any different since Subaru probably runs the exact same test to get their numbers.
The show car looks like it went down a production line, so SIA must have the line almost ready to go (in other words, this was definitely not a hand built car with a bodyshop paint job like you sometimes see with intro cars). Quality and fit/finish was excellent, and the paint job was top notch.
The interior is very nice, but the styling really didn't appeal to me too much. Personally, I like the Legacy/Outback interior better. I think the swoopy styling in the Tribeca reminds me more of a minivan! Still, this would not be a showstopper for me.
I didn't really pay attention to the third row seats since I would buy a 5-pax version, but people were sitting back there and it looked manageable. Definitely tighter than the third row of a typical LWB minivan, however.
There are window defroster vents in the front doors with a duct passage from dash to door.
Front seats felt good, but not as heavily bolstered as the ones in my OB XT.
The Tribeca has a double wishbone rear suspension. This is the first Subaru that I know of with this sort of suspension geometry (long favored by Honda in the front).
Overall, I like the Tribeca a lot but will have to drive one before I can really give a solid review of the vehicle. Compared to the other vehicles I saw on the show floor, I think Subaru has managed to differentiate the Tribeca from the competition quite nicely. It easily beats the Highlander/Pilot on styling and looks inside and out, and I suspect it will beat them on driving/handling too. The Freestyle and Pacifica are classic Ford and Chrysler, respectively, and don't appeal to me at all (Freestyle, in particular, looks like a half-hearted effort). Nothing in GM's lineup worth mentioning. RX is too far in the luxury direction for my tastes. Murano is noticeably smaller in usable space and the styling is too extreme (takes away a lot of practicality and the ergonomics are horrible). If the Tribeca 5-pax with leather comes in at $34K like the specs on NASIOC indicate, I think it would be a pretty good vehicle, and I would certainly consider one.
Craig
without being shot or hung or lashed or....
ty bob glad you can debate without the rage :-)
btw i still cant figure out what is wrong with minivans. they are like subarus, very functional and do what they do well. i think my fxt is ugly next to my minivan and the new legacys ( except the sedan ) dont get me excited either.
when i told my wife afbout the tribeca ( ok i will drop the triazteca given the gotta see it person reports ) she was very interested in replacing the odyssey to get awd until i told her the dimensions ( we need to 7 real people with stuff ), price ( anything above 30k requires gods approval i think ) and mileage ( i get over 20mpg on the odyssey and around 15mpg on the fxt )
oh well enough talk i have an image to uphold
Craig
i get use to the faults until i drive my '88 supercharged toyota mr2 and am reminded of cornering limitations all over again.
What he said ^
However, I think this car will be very expensive to insure. Not only is it an SUV (insurance is already higher), but if you get into any type of low-speed fender bender, it will require MAJOR body work and cost 1000s of dollars.
Sly
Well, when you think about it -- the Tribeca can only possibly work to increase Subaru's overall sales over what they have now. It would have to seriously damage their whole brand image to lose overall customers, and I don't see that happening at all. It's a very nice vehicle that won't appeal to everyone, but it will still find more overall customers than it loses. If anything, the Tribeca is going to bring new customers into Subaru showrooms and keep some current Subaru owners from shopping elsewhere for a 7 seat vehicle.
Craig
very interestingly, only the pics you posted show that they are NOT as pronounced as they are shown in other pictures
If for 100 people looking at buying a car like the Tribeca more people are turned off by the design then are attracted by it, then it is not a very succesful design.
I'm sure the B9 will attract more customers to Subaru, although I think they will mostly come from previous Subaru owners/lovers who had to buy another brand's minivan in the past to get 7 seats. The real question is will they sell enough of them, without deep discounts, so they can actually make money with it.
Any new car development like this costs 100s of millions of dollars, takes a lot of sales to recoup that investment.
Sly
The back bumper "cover" looks like it could take some impact without spreading damage elsewhere (horizontal seam), but the front cover (which is over the whole front face) butts up to the fenders with an angled seam. Looks like an impact to the front cover could also damage the fenders if the cover gets pushed back. And that could be really expensive.
Craig
so subaru should not stop the baja so it wont lose those 7k annual sales?
me thinks there is a cost to produce and market each line so a net gain of 1 sale tribeca would not be a positive for subaru ( i have no idea on break-even numbers for the tribeca ).
thanks for making me relook at the pics, your right that hood looks like it is very close to the far front. cant wait until IIHS and CR report on this.
i have two easy cars to insure on my insurance policy, '03 odyssey and '04 fxt ( fxt is actually cheaper cuz my wife with 1 accident and commutes to nyc is female and i am male with zero accidents and work at home, i hate insurance sex prejudices ) and my insurance continues to rocket up and the cars depreciate, yuck. nj sucks on car insurance.
so anything that increases my insurance is hard to take.
J/k folks, but Craig is right. You really do have to see it in person. Subarus for some reason, always look much better in person than they do in pictures.
Craig, did you get a chance to sit in it? I see it was roped off.
Bob
After looking at the Tribeca, it is clear that this it not going to be another Baja; for one thing, the Tribeca is a whole lot more mainstream than the Baja ever was. My only worry -- will the 5-pax Tribeca eat into Outback sales. In my case, I would probably opt for the Tribeca because it is roomier inside and has a fresh new look (hard to believe I am saying that after owning an 05 Outback for only 6 months). But it really depends on how it drives and accelerates.
I had 4 people in my OB XT last night for the trip to and from the car show with dinner afterwards. Driving through Richmond on 64/95 is stressful. Even so, the OB XT was awesome. Plenty of power and the handling was great. So, I will definitely look for similar "performance" when evaluating a Tribeca. It's got to be able to handle urban highways and get out of it's own way quickly.
Craig
Noone? Really? Remember The Crying Game? It was a huge hit because it was so unique.
i dont believe this car to be an academic exercise therefore if the design loses more people then draws them in, is it not then a loser?
Absolutely false. It doesn't have to make everyone happy, it has to make a few like it enough to buy it.
The great majority of folks find the Honda Element hideous, yet it was the #1 selling new import nameplate the first full year it was out.
Number ONE.
All the "beautiful", or conservative designs, sold LESS.
Proof that theory is just bogus.
Fact is if the design was anonymous and forgetable noone would notice it. You'll pass about 30 Honda dealer on the way to your Subaru dealer and give up along the way and buy a Pilot.
Tribeca's design is compelling, love it or hate it. Hate it, no problem, sales volumes will be low, as expected.
Love it? Great, then you'll make the effort to go buy one.
-juice
I was wondering about that too. It's bound to be a little slower than an Outback H6 VDC, as it's about 600 pounds heavier, depending on trim content. Other than that, I think this has it over the Outback in every way.
Bob
http://www.boxer6.com/photochops/tribaja.jpg
This is what I'm looking for! A marriage of the Tribeca and the Honda Ridgeline.
Bob
Satellite radio? I don't think so, but I didn't ask specifically. Remember you have the aux input, though, so you could add one if you have the DVD option.
XC90: went to check one out again yesterday. Didn't pay enough attention at the show. It's nice, taller than the Tribeca, but materials are only a match, no better and no worse. Design is very "safe" but really falls flat compared to the Tribeca's gorgeous interior.
HP/weight ratios for the MDX and Tribeca should actually be pretty similar. Torque is a concern, but we gotta drive one to see about that.
3rd row - I would put booster seats back there. Infant seats are only used for a relatively short period of time - 2-3 years or so. Kids are in booster seats until they are 8 years old.
So the 3rd row would be for those 3-8 year old kids, and for that it's perfect.
RDX should be big enough for one kid. My Forester carries 2. But then I have a lap dog and varmint has a pair of greyhounds. Dunno, maybe with the 60 portion of the back seat folded?
-juice