It seems to me that the niche Subaru had was that its vehicles were AWD while most of the competition was not. In the cross-over SUV field all of the competition is AWD, so in effect the niche is gone. Of course there is only so much money that you can charge for a car and much more for an SUV, even if it has the same drive trane. I am sure that was a large part of the motivation behind the Tribeca.
The good thing is that, unlike American car companies, who would respond to such a slow start with automatic price slashing, Subaru does have a tendency to take in the criticisms and evolve the product.
So true! That's exactly what Chrysler did with the Pacifica (another vehicle with a launch gone bad). By the time they got their content and pricing straightened out, the hype for the vehicle had faded and they were never able to recover the Pacifica's positive image. The incentives have been in place ever since.
It's too soon to say the Tribeca will forever be considered a flop, but Subaru doesn't think it's too soon to make judgments. They cut production. Would they do that if they thought it was too soon to tell?
Varmint, I agree! I thought the Pacifica was a really nice car. Good designed. Seemed to be of good quality. Good value. Sometimes patience is indeed a virtue.
I think they are separate considerations. Cutting production is simply good business and inventory management. In my mind, I could cut production, re-think the product, re-group and come out with a good version two. A cut in production doesn't necessarily mean I am giving up on the product in the medium-to-long term.
"Not really ... as Bob said, the entire powertrain (engine, trans, AWD system) was carry-over, and the chassis is just a stretched Legacy. Sure they were aiming for more production volume to fill up the excess capacity, but I don't think the investment was really all that big."
When was the last time Subaru introduced a new vehicle which was NOT based on an existing platform? Seriously, was it in the 80's? It seems to me the Tribeca was as big an investment as Subaru has made in the US market.
Yes, cutting production and rethinking the product is the responsible thing to do. I think that's the right move. But the fact that Subaru is doing this tells us that changes are needed. They wouldn't be taking action if they thought it was too soon to tell. Obviously, they think something is wrong with the Tribeca. Which puts the vehicle in the "achievement deferred" category. That's all I'm sayin'.
We can count on varmint to provide the glass-half-empty point of view for any Subaru issue.
SoA is aiming for 35k annual sales (2916/month), and it's over 2000/month and still growing (in math I was taught that means UP, not down). Glass half full, see what I mean?
They're not far off original targets, and probably won't quite get there but they could get pretty close. That is despite a controversial look that the press absolutely clobbered in reviews.
Now think of this - they could soften the look and make it more generic, safe and conservative, and that alone could help them meet the sales goal. Can face-lifted styling take it from 2100 or so to 2900 per month? I think it could.
I'd need more data to comment on the production, basically the ideal is a 60 day supply. GM tends to hover around 75-80 and that is their problem. High-demand hybrids have essentially a just-in-time supply, i.e. no inventory at all.
They may cut back if the assembly line is running more efficienctly than they had estimated, though 50% is a pretty drastic cut (it's proposed, by the way, it has not happened yet).
Anyone have a hard copy of Automotive News handy? They publish a chart about once a month with that data.
When was the last time Subaru introduced a new vehicle which was NOT based on an existing platform?
Earlier this year.
Bob - shame on you for forgetting the R1 and R2!
And before anyone says "not for US sale" keep in mind there are a couple of them driving around SoA headquarters for testing.
when you say things like "original targets" - remember there were two "original sales targets" before the one you mention, which was generated after sales had started off slow. If they had made the sales target that was the true original, they would not be proposing a 50% reduction in production. Which is set to happen in the quarter beginning in about three weeks, so even though it has not happened yet, it is not far off.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The problem with that is there are so many sources. Some said 17k, but that was this calendar year. Others said 35k, still others said 40k. 35k was mentioned most often so I use that.
Over in the Honda thread someone just mentioned Honda will cut production rather than slash prices and offer big incentives to preserve residuals, sounds like Subaru is doing the same thing.
I see pros and cons for the Tribeca so far, cons include:
* below sales targets * media was all over the styling (remember Jalopnik?) * fog light covers have been a quality glitch
And the pros:
* broke people in to the new look, paving the way * got people used to paying over $30 "for a Subaru?" * 3rd best selling model in the lineup * has not cannibalized Legacy/Outback sales * sales still growing * no major quality glitches * has not yet required big incentives * used existing powertrain
OK, sales is King, I'll admit, but while it's the biggest issue it's not the only one.
If you compare to a true flop like the Aztek, well, the Pontiac pretty much had none of those pros, except the very last one about the powertrain. I guess it didn't cannibalize other Pontiacs, but only because noone bought them at all.
Let me start by saying that I have always liked Subaru and their products. I am looking for a sedan/small SUV vehicle (non minivan) that can handle 3 car seats in the back...this is proving VERY difficult. I looked at the Tribeca. The price shocked me. Mid 30's basically. The 3rd row seat is a show item only and totally unusable. Even the salesman laughed about it. But I still like Subaru. I wish the Forester was a bit roomier in the back seat - it it was I'd own one tomorrow.
I agree 100% with that comment. My 2006 Outback 3.0R wagon stickered for $30K, and that is with cloth and no moonroof. The LLBean was about $3500 more. It took me a long time to come to terms with the prices of the new Outback's before I could pull the trigger on the deal.
I agree on the pricing. Is 40K the new 30K? With BMW and Land Rovers moving into the 50K range, seems like $35K-$40K is where the bulk of the market will be. I mean, $32K for a RAV? I'd rather have my XT Turbo for $28K.
I also agree with you that a few tweaks on the styling and more power in the engine and the Tribeca will be a very formidable competitor.
Let's go back to the point of this forum. Is Subaru sinking? It sure doesn't feel like it. If I were named the CEO of Subaru tomorrow, here's the few key areas that I would focus on:
1. Better relationships with the dealers. Major improvement needs to be made here. The situation is not bad but could be much better. Model--see how Nissan and Mazda recently upgraded dealerships.
2. Evolve the Tribeca. Tweak design on the rear end, increase engine power and make sure it comes out loaded for $35K--Subaru can do this!
3. Hybrid, hybrid, hybrid. Add a hybrid to the line and make it an option across all the brands.
4. Fire the advertising agency (new Web site is much, much better) and re-focus advertising.
Is Tribeca a sales flop? No, not in my opinion. If the sales are increasing on a monthly basis, which they have to date, then it isn't a flop. I think sales will continue to increase and eventually end up in the 2500-2800 per month range. That is decent sales for Subaru, especially on their most expensive model. It could be worse,like Baja, but don't get me started there.
The original SOA 2005 Calendar sales projection were for 17,000 units and 35,000 forecasted for 2006 CY. I don't think year end sales totals for Beca will look bad at all, not quite up to target for '05 CY, but not a disaster either. European models will also start the 3rd quarter of '06, so that will boost production more.
Yes, SIA will cut Beca production in half for the 1st quarter of '06. Current production of 144 per day will reduce to 72 per day. This is temporary and mainly to reduce the number of days on hand. April '06 and they are scheduled to go back to normal production volume again. I see this as a practical and smart reaction to slightly reduced sales forecasts and not as a disaster. Subaru likes to target between 45 and 60 days onhand. GM will let their days on hand grow to over 100 before they act on it. Fortunately Subaru is more business savvy than GM.
Sticker shock is common nowadays, Edmunds' RAV4 was $32.7k and guess what? It didn't have a 3rd row or NAV for that matter.
I am not a fan of the RAV4, but I do not see that being any more out of line than the LL Bean Outback. Most of the ones around here sticker for about $33,500. That makes the RAV4 $800 cheaper. I am assuming that the RAV4 was the new V6 (3.5L?).
"We can count on varmint to provide the glass-half-empty point of view for any Subaru issue."
Somebody has to lay off the kool-aid. :P
Well, let's put some numbers on the page. Here are the monthly sales since the Tribeca was launched.
2129 2093 1867 2022 1833 1540 583 (just one week)
That's an average (mean) of 1930 units each month (excluding the first week of sales).
Sales have been increasing at a rate of 98 units per month (overall).
If we assume an average increase over November, December sales should be about 2,227. That would bring the Tribeca's total unit sales for 2005 to 14,294 (including the first week). This would be only 16% off Subaru's projection for the calendar year (17,000 units).
Even if the Tribeca has an "average" month in December, they'll only be off by 17.6%.
So, I'm not sure where that 26% figure came from. (Can't pin that on me!) Unless it was published before recent sales figures were released. IMO, 16-17% is a good deal less troubling than 26%. So, the Tribeca is merely "floppy", not a complete flop.
If their goal is to reach 35,000 units per year (2,916/month), they'll need another 10 months to get there from their current average.
the new RAV looks to be more powerful than Tribeca, or less expensive, depending on which engine you choose, with about the same interior space. In fact, it might be less expensive either way. Certainly lighter. And great-handling, in the Sport trim with the 18" rims. Can Tribeca maintain the upward sales trend?
Saw another one on the road here yesterday on my way home, kind of a burgundy color. That makes two now.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
To be fair, that's a special edition model, they are only making 500 of those, and it includes NAV and 18" rims. A plain Jane Legacy GT sedan costs a whole lot less and has the same powertrain, so the shocked people have an alternative right in front of them (and in greater numbers).
April '06 and they are scheduled to go back to normal production volume again
Thanks for the inside scoop, mayberryguy. Half did seem like too drastic a (permanent) cut to me.
Bob: R1/R2 are esentially new vehicles, especially when you take the R1e into account, that's a new powertrain too.
RAV4 will have a greater impact on the Highlander than it will on the Tribeca. HL is closer in size, has even less power, and the 3rd row is perhaps the smallest of the 3. And it doesn't have the nice wrap-around interior of the Tribeca, so it feels closer in interior ambience.
It's a tough segment, Honda just added a lower-cost FWD Pilot, too.
Lots of snow could help the Tribeca, but December is usually a very slow sales month. I predict sales will settle in around 2400 per month or so, missing the original targets.
I don't know if it's national or just local, but Honda put on a lease special around here for the 2WD Pilot LX that is cheaper than Sube's introductory offer on the Tribeca. Now of course, it's not AWD, but it IS a Honda. Lots of competition out there for the Tribeca.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I believe most of these are EX models, probably even EX-L or above. I once checked a local dealer and only 7/100 in stock were LX models. Plus I see few on the roads.
So they may pick up a few bargain hunters who also want to save on fuel (I think it also gets VCM), but this is not the type of customer shopping for a Tribeca.
What's going to happen is the segment as a whole will continue to expand, people are buying fewer cars basically.
Ditto what Juice wrote. The new RAV4 doesn't have the interior space to compete head on with the Tribeca. It's closer to CR-V sized on the inside, which would make it more competitive with the Outback.
The 2WD Pilot is about $1,200 less than the AWD models. All 2WD models have VCM and ANC, but the fuel savings are only 1 and 2 mpg on the city and highway estimates respectively.
RAV4 will have a greater impact on the Highlander than it will on the Tribeca. HL is closer in size, has even less power, and the 3rd row is perhaps the smallest of the 3. And it doesn't have the nice wrap-around interior of the Tribeca, so it feels closer in interior ambience.
I'd attribute the decision to have two very similar vehicles competing against one another to simple mismanagement if we were talking about GM or Ford. Toyota management seems smart enough not to make such a gaffe, however. They must figure that the new RAV-4 and the Highlander won't cannibalize each other's sales, though on what basis I don't know.
The Highlander is due for revision within a year. It's actually overdue since it was introduced in 2001. The next one is likely to be sized more like the Pilot and should not compete with the RAV4.
Besides, Toyota only expects to sell 30% of all RAV4s with the V6. The I4 will be the dominant model on the market.
that Toyota won't be building too many 4-cylinder Highlanders after December. In fact, they will probably emphasize three-row V-6s now, as they have stated they expect the take rate on RAV4 three-rows to be fairly low.
And when Highlander grows substantially next fall, I expect the new model will no longer have a base 4-cylinder. At which point 4Runner will start to be built with more V-8s than V-6s. Whew! Talk about trickle up! :-)
So the hybrid Camry arrives next summer, and Toyota will be building some Camrys at SIA (not the hybrid ones, though, I don't think). When will the debut of the hybrid Legacy/Outback occur? I would love to see Subaru offer hybrid variants of all the models, if they can afford to.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I'm not sure they ever built many of them. By far most are V6s.
So the engine will keep most of them from overlapping. Between the two, I'd still opt for a V6 RAV4, since it has more power and better fuel efficiency. The slight trade-off in space would be OK since I'd be moving up in size anyway.
4Runner is a trucker's truck, I perceive that differently.
And when Highlander grows substantially next fall, I expect the new model will no longer have a base 4-cylinder. At which point 4Runner will start to be built with more V-8s than V-6s. Whew! Talk about trickle up!
The next logical step: Toyota will be buying some of the 1001-hp. motors from Bugatti for the new Sequoia :P
a Highlander, isn't it? Point is, RAV and HL will be the same size for the next 10-12 months.
And while Tribeca may be bigger on paper, it doesn't feel a whole lot bigger than HL. There is more knee room in the back seat, but the front seems the same, and the cargo room feels a little smaller in the Subaru.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
SF and 'nox have horrific space efficiency, engineers should study them to discover how *not* to utilize interior space.
The smaller Tucson actually has more combined leg room than its big brother. The new Santa Fe is bigger and basically enters the mid-size segment, too, V6 and all. And unlike the RAV4, most of those probably will be V6s.
The Equinox? Well, besides the fact that it got a decade-old pushrod powertrain from China (it should have gotten the V6 that the Vue gets), the rear shock towers seemingly eat up about 2.3 acres of the interior. So it doesn't feel nearly as roomy as it should.
If Chevy put in that motor and switched to a more compact rear suspension, they could probably squeeze in a 3rd row as well, and draw a lot more interest.
Flagship Dealership groundbreaking took place in Plano, TX. This'll be the model for future "signature" dealerships around the country, incorporating lots of slate, glass, cherry hardwood flooring, metallic finishes, and high ceilings. Nice details include large curved glass through which to view the showroom and windows to actually show off the service department to waiting customers, which I think is a super idea - helps communicate a sense of honesty and develop trust.
Yes, all very true. However, I am not sure that the core Subaru buyer cares.
I've posted numerous times in the forum about the kind of person who buys a Subaru (the core brand buyer) and the loyalty to the brand on a number of levels. I understand that Toyota and Honda both make absolutely terrific cars. However, and it bears worth repeating, I ain't buying one.
Of course, there is a small percentage of the market that do a head to head comparison between the Toyota, the Honda and the Subaru and make a decision. Certainly, Subaru needs to woo those buyers to increase sales.
However, for the core Subaru buyer--meaning those most likely to buy a Subaru--we don't care. I have the utmost respect for Toyota and Honda but I would never buy those cars and neither would my friends. We just won't. Interestingly, I mentioned this to the owner of the dealership where I bought my car (after I bought the care, of course) and he said it was something he commonly heard from the majority of his customers. He said that they normally ask their buyers what other cars they were looking at and comparing to Subaru and the most common answer they got (granted, an informal survey) was "I wasn't looking at other cars."
Sounds good, but I wonder who will foot the bill? Usually dealers do, but the manufacturer subsidizes it a bit, offers incentives like better availability of hotter models.
Subaru has always been missing that something that catches people where they live. I have had one and my wife thinks they are cute. But we don't have one now. We would consider one but unless we were like the devoted Subaru owners we know there is just too much compitition at better pricing out there. Admittedly I don't need AWD most of the year. And also admittedly I can stay home when I might need AWD we have still considered Subaru if we trade in our truck or my wife's car. But for now I worry that Subaru is beginning to look a little like Saab. A hard core following but simply not enough of them to keep them in the black. Once before Subaru had to reinvent themselves maybe they will see the light and do so again. We can only wait and see.
That seems more like a bashing to me. Kind of the "they tried, but boy did they fail" award.
"Grand Undertaking -- Though Strident" and "From the front snout flanked by wings to a belt line along the side that suddenly -- and unfathomably -- becomes aggressively pronounced before its resolution in the shape of the tail lamps" does not sound real positive to me. Kind of like calling it the Aztek award.
I disagree. I see it more as them rewarding Subaru for having the courage to attempt this brand makeover, and while perhaps maybe(?) not 100% successful, are pretty darn close. They wouldn't have given Subaru the award if they thought they failed.
I thought it was more tongue-in-cheek. Kind of the good and bad of the design world. Maybe I misunderstood the tone. Regardless, I don't personally find the Tribeca that offensive.
"half empty" vs "half full". If it is an award for trying to be different but failing to create good design, than that is NOT an accolade.
However, if they are being awarded for creating something different that works, then it IS an accolade.
FWIW, Tribeca was the only car whose styling was roundly mocked in this year's Autoweek annual wrap-up. They pasted a dead weasel on the front of that grille and pronounced it improved. They hypothesized that an optional trim package including the oversize rat would be a hot seller.
I thumbed through it, and in my quick survey of the remainder of the wrap-up, I could not find any other 2005 model being made the butt of styling jokes. This model is as close as we have gotten so far to a post-Y2K Aztek, at least as far as its treatment in the press.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Comments
So true! That's exactly what Chrysler did with the Pacifica (another vehicle with a launch gone bad). By the time they got their content and pricing straightened out, the hype for the vehicle had faded and they were never able to recover the Pacifica's positive image. The incentives have been in place ever since.
When was the last time Subaru introduced a new vehicle which was NOT based on an existing platform? Seriously, was it in the 80's? It seems to me the Tribeca was as big an investment as Subaru has made in the US market.
Bob
SoA is aiming for 35k annual sales (2916/month), and it's over 2000/month and still growing (in math I was taught that means UP, not down). Glass half full, see what I mean?
They're not far off original targets, and probably won't quite get there but they could get pretty close. That is despite a controversial look that the press absolutely clobbered in reviews.
Now think of this - they could soften the look and make it more generic, safe and conservative, and that alone could help them meet the sales goal. Can face-lifted styling take it from 2100 or so to 2900 per month? I think it could.
I'd need more data to comment on the production, basically the ideal is a 60 day supply. GM tends to hover around 75-80 and that is their problem. High-demand hybrids have essentially a just-in-time supply, i.e. no inventory at all.
They may cut back if the assembly line is running more efficienctly than they had estimated, though 50% is a pretty drastic cut (it's proposed, by the way, it has not happened yet).
Anyone have a hard copy of Automotive News handy? They publish a chart about once a month with that data.
When was the last time Subaru introduced a new vehicle which was NOT based on an existing platform?
Earlier this year.
Bob - shame on you for forgetting the R1 and R2!
And before anyone says "not for US sale" keep in mind there are a couple of them driving around SoA headquarters for testing.
-juice
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Over in the Honda thread someone just mentioned Honda will cut production rather than slash prices and offer big incentives to preserve residuals, sounds like Subaru is doing the same thing.
I see pros and cons for the Tribeca so far, cons include:
* below sales targets
* media was all over the styling (remember Jalopnik?)
* fog light covers have been a quality glitch
And the pros:
* broke people in to the new look, paving the way
* got people used to paying over $30 "for a Subaru?"
* 3rd best selling model in the lineup
* has not cannibalized Legacy/Outback sales
* sales still growing
* no major quality glitches
* has not yet required big incentives
* used existing powertrain
OK, sales is King, I'll admit, but while it's the biggest issue it's not the only one.
If you compare to a true flop like the Aztek, well, the Pontiac pretty much had none of those pros, except the very last one about the powertrain. I guess it didn't cannibalize other Pontiacs, but only because noone bought them at all.
-juice
The 2nd row splits 40/20/40, a rare features in this class that would be very useful for your 3-across arrangement.
Sticker shock is common nowadays, Edmunds' RAV4 was $32.7k and guess what? It didn't have a 3rd row or NAV for that matter.
Try the Mazda5, maybe. Even with NAV they're $22-23k.
-juice
I agree 100% with that comment. My 2006 Outback 3.0R wagon stickered for $30K, and that is with cloth and no moonroof. The LLBean was about $3500 more. It took me a long time to come to terms with the prices of the new Outback's before I could pull the trigger on the deal.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I also agree with you that a few tweaks on the styling and more power in the engine and the Tribeca will be a very formidable competitor.
Let's go back to the point of this forum. Is Subaru sinking? It sure doesn't feel like it. If I were named the CEO of Subaru tomorrow, here's the few key areas that I would focus on:
1. Better relationships with the dealers. Major improvement needs to be made here. The situation is not bad but could be much better. Model--see how Nissan and Mazda recently upgraded dealerships.
2. Evolve the Tribeca. Tweak design on the rear end, increase engine power and make sure it comes out loaded for $35K--Subaru can do this!
3. Hybrid, hybrid, hybrid. Add a hybrid to the line and make it an option across all the brands.
4. Fire the advertising agency (new Web site is much, much better) and re-focus advertising.
5. Exploit new relationship with Toyota.
The original SOA 2005 Calendar sales projection were for 17,000 units and 35,000 forecasted for 2006 CY. I don't think year end sales totals for Beca will look bad at all, not quite up to target for '05 CY, but not a disaster either. European models will also start the 3rd quarter of '06, so that will boost production more.
Yes, SIA will cut Beca production in half for the 1st quarter of '06. Current production of 144 per day will reduce to 72 per day. This is temporary and mainly to reduce the number of days on hand. April '06 and they are scheduled to go back to normal production volume again. I see this as a practical and smart reaction to slightly reduced sales forecasts and not as a disaster. Subaru likes to target between 45 and 60 days onhand. GM will let their days on hand grow to over 100 before they act on it. Fortunately Subaru is more business savvy than GM.
You just won the Understatement of the Year award for 2006 :P
Isn't the R1 & R2 the engine and drivetrain are shared with the Pleo? They all have 660cc transverse engines.
Bob
I am not a fan of the RAV4, but I do not see that being any more out of line than the LL Bean Outback. Most of the ones around here sticker for about $33,500. That makes the RAV4 $800 cheaper. I am assuming that the RAV4 was the new V6 (3.5L?).
Somebody has to lay off the kool-aid. :P
Well, let's put some numbers on the page. Here are the monthly sales since the Tribeca was launched.
2129
2093
1867
2022
1833
1540
583 (just one week)
That's an average (mean) of 1930 units each month (excluding the first week of sales).
Sales have been increasing at a rate of 98 units per month (overall).
If we assume an average increase over November, December sales should be about 2,227. That would bring the Tribeca's total unit sales for 2005 to 14,294 (including the first week). This would be only 16% off Subaru's projection for the calendar year (17,000 units).
Even if the Tribeca has an "average" month in December, they'll only be off by 17.6%.
So, I'm not sure where that 26% figure came from. (Can't pin that on me!) Unless it was published before recent sales figures were released. IMO, 16-17% is a good deal less troubling than 26%. So, the Tribeca is merely "floppy", not a complete flop.
If their goal is to reach 35,000 units per year (2,916/month), they'll need another 10 months to get there from their current average.
Saw another one on the road here yesterday on my way home, kind of a burgundy color. That makes two now.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
April '06 and they are scheduled to go back to normal production volume again
Thanks for the inside scoop, mayberryguy. Half did seem like too drastic a (permanent) cut to me.
Bob: R1/R2 are esentially new vehicles, especially when you take the R1e into account, that's a new powertrain too.
RAV4 will have a greater impact on the Highlander than it will on the Tribeca. HL is closer in size, has even less power, and the 3rd row is perhaps the smallest of the 3. And it doesn't have the nice wrap-around interior of the Tribeca, so it feels closer in interior ambience.
It's a tough segment, Honda just added a lower-cost FWD Pilot, too.
Lots of snow could help the Tribeca, but December is usually a very slow sales month. I predict sales will settle in around 2400 per month or so, missing the original targets.
-juice
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
So they may pick up a few bargain hunters who also want to save on fuel (I think it also gets VCM), but this is not the type of customer shopping for a Tribeca.
What's going to happen is the segment as a whole will continue to expand, people are buying fewer cars basically.
-juice
I'd attribute the decision to have two very similar vehicles competing against one another to simple mismanagement if we were talking about GM or Ford. Toyota management seems smart enough not to make such a gaffe, however. They must figure that the new RAV-4 and the Highlander won't cannibalize each other's sales, though on what basis I don't know.
Besides, Toyota only expects to sell 30% of all RAV4s with the V6. The I4 will be the dominant model on the market.
And when Highlander grows substantially next fall, I expect the new model will no longer have a base 4-cylinder. At which point 4Runner will start to be built with more V-8s than V-6s. Whew! Talk about trickle up! :-)
So the hybrid Camry arrives next summer, and Toyota will be building some Camrys at SIA (not the hybrid ones, though, I don't think). When will the debut of the hybrid Legacy/Outback occur? I would love to see Subaru offer hybrid variants of all the models, if they can afford to.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
So the engine will keep most of them from overlapping. Between the two, I'd still opt for a V6 RAV4, since it has more power and better fuel efficiency. The slight trade-off in space would be OK since I'd be moving up in size anyway.
4Runner is a trucker's truck, I perceive that differently.
-juice
The next logical step: Toyota will be buying some of the 1001-hp. motors from Bugatti for the new Sequoia :P
-juice
And while Tribeca may be bigger on paper, it doesn't feel a whole lot bigger than HL. There is more knee room in the back seat, but the front seems the same, and the cargo room feels a little smaller in the Subaru.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The smaller Tucson actually has more combined leg room than its big brother. The new Santa Fe is bigger and basically enters the mid-size segment, too, V6 and all. And unlike the RAV4, most of those probably will be V6s.
The Equinox? Well, besides the fact that it got a decade-old pushrod powertrain from China (it should have gotten the V6 that the Vue gets), the rear shock towers seemingly eat up about 2.3 acres of the interior. So it doesn't feel nearly as roomy as it should.
If Chevy put in that motor and switched to a more compact rear suspension, they could probably squeeze in a 3rd row as well, and draw a lot more interest.
Though it's selling well, so what do I know?
-juice
I've posted numerous times in the forum about the kind of person who buys a Subaru (the core brand buyer) and the loyalty to the brand on a number of levels. I understand that Toyota and Honda both make absolutely terrific cars. However, and it bears worth repeating, I ain't buying one.
Of course, there is a small percentage of the market that do a head to head comparison between the Toyota, the Honda and the Subaru and make a decision. Certainly, Subaru needs to woo those buyers to increase sales.
However, for the core Subaru buyer--meaning those most likely to buy a Subaru--we don't care. I have the utmost respect for Toyota and Honda but I would never buy those cars and neither would my friends. We just won't. Interestingly, I mentioned this to the owner of the dealership where I bought my car (after I bought the care, of course) and he said it was something he commonly heard from the majority of his customers. He said that they normally ask their buyers what other cars they were looking at and comparing to Subaru and the most common answer they got (granted, an informal survey) was "I wasn't looking at other cars."
-juice
http://blogs.edmunds.com/.ee8de48
This is a publication for automotive designers and the automotive design community.
Bob
"Grand Undertaking -- Though Strident" and "From the front snout flanked by wings to a belt line along the side that suddenly -- and unfathomably -- becomes aggressively pronounced before its resolution in the shape of the tail lamps" does not sound real positive to me. Kind of like calling it the Aztek award.
Bob
Subaru is being applauded for trying to create something different even though they failed to do it well.
Bob
However, if they are being awarded for creating something different that works, then it IS an accolade.
FWIW, Tribeca was the only car whose styling was roundly mocked in this year's Autoweek annual wrap-up. They pasted a dead weasel on the front of that grille and pronounced it improved. They hypothesized that an optional trim package including the oversize rat would be a hot seller.
I thumbed through it, and in my quick survey of the remainder of the wrap-up, I could not find any other 2005 model being made the butt of styling jokes. This model is as close as we have gotten so far to a post-Y2K Aztek, at least as far as its treatment in the press.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)