AutoWeek and the automotive press (in general) are not groups of whom I have much respect for as "design" critics. They may know cars, but they don't know design.
"Popular opinion" has never been a good barometer of good design or good taste. All it reflects is what is "currently" popular. 50 years ago the "public" demanded cars have fins and a ton of chrome. 'Nuff said.
My comment about the glass being half empty were not about the award, but on varmint always finding a way to put a negative spin on anything Subaru related.
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.
Some people claim that the 'beca's console and dash resemble the diagram of a uterus and fallopian tubes :P
Here's a way to deal with sticker shock which worked for me. I was shopping the Volvo XC and the Audi A6 wagons. After seeing those stickers the Subaru OB XT LTD seemed quite attractive. And I got all I really wanted: AWD, awesome acceration, exquisite interior, adequate utility, nice high riding view. I even got XM satellite radio, all for less than $32k. I was closer to $40k with the Volvo or the Audi. And less I forget, the reliability has been stellar.
Varmint is your foil...he's Colmes to your Hannity. He brings out the best in you. And the result is entertaining and informative for your loyal and happy audience, me included.
He and I have been debating here on Edmunds for years, and we actually agree on far more than we disagree. He and I are pretty much in sync with Hondas, Acuras and trucks (I think?). There are, I'm sure, other topics we agree on too—and, we have defended one another many times in other threads.
Where we butt heads is on Subarus. I am convinced he has a bias against the Subaru brand, a charge he will vigorously deny, I'm sure.
Go back and read any of his posts pertaining to Subaru, here and elsewhere, and you will find in almost all cases a negative tone to his posts. Rarely is he complimentary to the brand—and if he is, it's usually grudgingly. I'm not just talking about recently, you can go back 6 months, a year or more. It's there for anyone to check out.
Go back and read any of his posts pertaining to Subaru, here and elsewhere, and you will find in almost all cases a negative tone to his posts. Rarely is he complimentary to the brand—and if he is, it's usually grudgingly. I'm not just talking about recently, you can go back 6 months, a year or more. It's there for anyone to check out.
There are several people here who fit that description, both pro and con. It's one of the reasons I seldom post anymore - same naysayers, same cheerleaders. Once in a while an obvious new flamer, almost never a new booster. In any event nothing revolutionary.
I suppose it will take the hindsight of years to see which is more accurate - I suspect the middle ground.
What's in order here is a different sort of glasses. Read the article. It says it all.
All I was doing was trying to let Bob know that he was making a mistake with regard to the intent of that award. It's clear he mistakenly thought that Subaru was getting an award for good design and was touting it as such. I was not the first to try correcting Bob. (Zman3 was.) Rather than admit to the error, Bob chose to call me biased. (Zman3, apparently, was not.)
But, hey, I've got a wild idea. Why don't we try posting about Subaru instead of each other.
In the grand scheme of things, this award is not news. The negative view of the Tribeca's styling is already well documented. And I don't think anyone suspected Subaru was trying to be conservative when they designed it. So the award really doesn't tell us anything new.
Varmint that's a load of crap and you know it. You've been out to get Subaru ever since you've been posting here. As far as I'm concerned you're no different than that jerk over on the Ridgeline forums.
The public in general has awful taste, horrific really. Bling is so trendy right now for all the wrong reasons. Chrome is heavy, expensive, ugly, and doesn't last. Yet the public loves it and correlates it to luxury. Go figure.
I hate chrome, just hate it. I bought the Forester L rather than the S to avoid the chrome grille!
steering wheel on the new Civic Si looks like a jock strap
I've also heard it being compared to a certain part of the female anatomy that the Tribeca's grille has also been compared to. Kinda silly, in both cases.
Any time a designer strays from the ordinary (read: borign), they take it on the nose, heavy criticism from the editors with degrees in Journalism or Mech. Engineering. People that know little/nothing about design, probably could not design a brochure or logo layout to save their lives.
This is how designs get watered down, and this is why so many cars and trucks are "cookie cutter". SUVs in particular are just 2-box shapes, and yes the Forester is very guilty of this offense.
You have to fit the mold, the pressure is intense. Look at all the best sellers - Explorer, Tahoe, Grand Cherokee, Escape, CR-V - look at the outlines of these and any non-car-expert would be hard pressed to tell them apart.
One small box, followed by one big box. Voila. Design.
a surprising number of these vehicles are undifferentiated from their competitors due to apparent hesitation on behalf of vehicle manufacturers to assume any risks. In effect, a multitude of cars and trucks are operating "under the radar" in efforts to offend any potential customers
Undifferentiated, hesitation, risk-free, unoffensive. Sounds like some people in this thread would love these designs.
This is how designs get watered down, and this is why so many cars and trucks are "cookie cutter". SUVs in particular are just 2-box shapes, and yes the Forester is very guilty of this offense. You have to fit the mold, the pressure is intense. Look at all the best sellers - Explorer, Tahoe, Grand Cherokee, Escape, CR-V - look at the outlines of these and any non-car-expert would be hard pressed to tell them apart.
I suppose one virtue of this boring design is that the vehicles don't look dated after just a few years. A decade-old Explorer, for example, doesn't have an obvious "old vehicle" look about it. The design, boring as it may be, tends to age well. More radical designs may not be quite so timeless. I have a hunch that a 2006 Nissan Murano, to use another example, will look old and obsolete ten years from now.
Dunno, I like the Murano, I don't think it will seem old. Time will tell. A Jag E-type or Porsche 356 still looks stunning today, and they were bold, rounded shapes.
Tangent - I bet contemporary reviews called the E-type ugly at the time, probably compared the curves to a heavy woman's thighs!
Something interesting - JD Powers found that women like the Murano a lot, but for the Tribeca it was mostly men. Given the segment is female dominated (let's fact it, soccer moms are buying car-based SUVs), that could explain why the Tribeca is selling below forecasts.
The public in general has awful taste, horrific really. Bling is so trendy right now for all the wrong reasons. Chrome is heavy, expensive, ugly, and doesn't last. Yet the public loves it and correlates it to luxury. Go figure.
I couldn't have said it better!
Any time a designer strays from the ordinary (read: borign), they take it on the nose, heavy criticism from the editors with degrees in Journalism or Mech. Engineering. People that know little/nothing about design, probably could not design a brochure or logo layout to save their lives.
Precisely. Accepting the word of auto journalists or any layperson not trained in design as "design gospel" is like having a plumber critique Shakesphere.
Any time a designer strays from the ordinary (read: borign), they take it on the nose, heavy criticism from the editors with degrees in Journalism or Mech. Engineering. People that know little/nothing about design, probably could not design a brochure or logo layout to save their lives.
Precisely. Accepting the word of auto journalists or any layperson not trained in design as "design gospel" is like having a plumber critique Shakesphere.
Ok, having said that, why do you two think the Tribeca is under performing? Unrealistic projections from Subaru, price, or styling?
Like I said before, I am indifferent to the Tribeca styling. People I know don't like it. My wife does. Responses across the whole spectrum. But if styling is the issue, then who cares what people with an eye for artistic styling think. If John Q Public doesn't want it, it kind of defeats the purpose of trendy styling, does it not?
Ok, having said that, why do you two think the Tribeca is under performing? Unrealistic projections from Subaru, price, or styling?
• Lousy 3rd-row seat space.
• 3.0 engine is too small for 4200 pound vehicle.
• Price/content ratio. It's too expensive for the features offered.
• It was the last crossover into this segment, and it wasn't significantly better than the competition in any given area. The rule being "if you're going to be the last to the party, you had better be the best dressed" didn't occur. It's good, but it's not "great." The Tribeca needed to be GREAT.
• And yes, controversial front styling.
If the first four items listed were absent, the last item would be much easier to deal with.
As to the "controversial" styling, all it needs is time. In a year or two from now the Tribeca will look positively ordinary.
Here's a simple fact of life: Most people don't like change. It moves them out of their comfort zone, and they generally don't react well to that sort of thing. Why? I don't know, but I suspect it has to do with deep down survival instincts. I'm sure a shrink could better elaborate as to what motivates people, but that's just my gut feeling.
In any event, the Tribeca represents a HUGE change for Subaru and everything it has stood for in the past. So it's very different (a.k.a. it represents CHANGE!).
Okay, here's another issue that drives me nuts with the critics here and elsewhere: It's "different," and somehow different = "bad." Where is it engraved in stone that different is just another word for bad?
One of the reasons the WRX (and WRX STI) succeeded is that they exceeded expectations. The Tribeca barely met expectations, and in some cases didn't even meet expectations. The styling is just one of many aspects. It's not the whole deal.
Lastly: This whole new design direction that Subaru is going through is very much a "work in progress." We have seen a whole bunch of concepts based on this new look. Some work better than others, for sure. Do I think the Tribeca is great looking? No, but it's not nearly as bad as the critics make it out to be. Can it be improved? Absolutely—and with just a few minor nips and tucks here and there, I bet it could be great looking.
It seems to me that Subaru tried to be really different with the Tribeca and the only way that Subaru could stand out from the competition was to to give the Tribeca, lets say, an unusual visage. When I see one I think of the Edsel 45 years later. My wife looked at a Forester last year and probably would have bought it except for the incredibly poor salesmanship. She ended up getting a Pacifica. It also helped that our family of five (three young kids) could fit in the Pacifica much better. To reinforce the later observation, I see far more Subarus than any other vehicle with roof mounted carriers. This means to me that the vehicle is too small. Back in the day, Subaru was pretty much the only game in town that offered small AWD vehicles. Now many companies offer AWD Cross-over SUV's (which Subaru has just entered) and many are offering AWD cars and wagons. Subaru has lost its niche and now must compete on its merits. Customer loyalty only goes so far.
How long has that brand been around? A decade or so? Maybe more? Look at all styling changes they went through before they "found" their look.
The new Inifinitis look great, but it took them a while (and a number of design twists and turns) to get to this point. Subaru has been going through this new market change for only a few years. So give them some time. They'll get there, just like Infiniti did.
Other than the G35 coupe, I don't think Infiniti is doing that great with the looks, either...
I agree about Subaru, though... The Tribeca is fairly generic, except for the schnozz.. That could be fixed, easily... But, if they keep putting it on all the cars, it will be harder to get away from..
Then I say you're the exception, rather than the rule. I think most people think Infinitis are pretty good looking these days. The current models are light-years better looking than earlier versions of that brand.
That's true.. almost anything is better looking than the J30 and some of the old Nissan clones...
But, the M-class has a big fish-mouth grill and boy-racer taillight treatment... and looks really narrow from behind.. The GS is a much better looking car.
The Q45 is mostly inoffensive, but is as bland as the RL..
The G35 sedan seems behind almost all of it's competitors in the looks department, though it is decent looking..
I agree.. you are right.. most people seem to like them.. but, it isn't as though they've solved the "beauty" issue... I put them behind BMW, Audi, Lexus.. and slightly behind Acura..
They still don't seem to have a signature "look".. At this point, they could put the Infiniti badge on almost anything....
As I said before... The G35 coupe is gorgeous... better looking than the Z-car on which it is based..
I think most of their success in looks, comes from not cloning Nissans as much any more... I'm still not impressed..
regards, kyfdx (I like the Legacy GT wagon.. to get back on topic)
I see far more Subarus than any other vehicle with roof mounted carriers. This means to me that the vehicle is too small.
Subaru offers various types of roof carriers as dealer-installed options. As far as I know, few if any other manufacturers make it so easy to get them.
My wife looked at a Forester last year and probably would have bought it except for the incredibly poor salesmanship. She ended up getting a Pacifica. It also helped that our family of five (three young kids) could fit in the Pacifica much better. To reinforce the later observation, I see far more Subarus than any other vehicle with roof mounted carriers. This means to me that the vehicle is too small. Observation, or emotional response to your poor treatment?
A vehicle that is nearly two feet longer, nearly a foot wider, and four inches higher has more volume!
Specific to your question of roof racks on a Forester, how does a Kayak fit in your Pacifica? How about a 3-4 snowboards and related gear? The Forester is a far more economical, durable, manueverable choice compared to any of the Land Bruisers, while offering the ability to go down rough dirt roads and trailheads fully loaded.
Personally, I'm amazed that anyone buys a Pacifica instead of the minivan. It's lighter; has much more room inside; has the same powertrain; and gets the same or better mpg. Pacifica owners aren't fooling anyone - they're middle-aged and have kids - is it just vanity?
Last week there was an article in the LA times auto where a reviewer talked about what his "wife" thought of the Tribeca. He had brought one home to review and she said it reminded her of the automotive equivalent of a Ork. You would have to have seen the Lord of the rings to understand what she was saying. Good or bad design in not the point. Accepted design sells and the toss a look in the buyers face doesn't always work. It is one thing if you also have better prices than the compitition but asking the buyer to reach into their wallet for something their friends will mock is asking a lot.
We on these boards often admit that people are swayed by Madison avenue and then act surprised because the very method that is used works. Public opinion is valid when it comes to selling things. Why buy a Pacifica rather than a Mini-van? Image. Like it or not that is how the world works. We live in a culture that made fun of Scrooge. Wishing that people would overlook image for practical design is simply wishing. Not going to happen. At least not in the numbers that will make a company profitable.
Wow. I never looked seriously at the Tribeca before I bought my Outback. If I ever considered a Tribeca it would be for my wife. I didn't realize it tipped the scale at 4200 lbs. I love the 3.0 in my Outback, but I can see how it would have less than stellar performance hauling around an additional 700 lbs.
why do you two think the Tribeca is under performing? Unrealistic projections from Subaru, price, or styling?
Price. It's not so much that it's not worth the price of admission, more that usual Subaru customer is not used to paying it. They'd go to Subaru to find a cheaper alternative to an Audi Quattro. Tribeca forgot about the "cheaper" part.
I'm the target customer, looking to move up in size from a Forester. Yet I paid $19,200 last time, so let's say $25k is my limit, within reason. The Tribeca I want would set me back $30-35k or so. That's at least $8 grand more than the loaded S models were last time I bought a Subaru.
Selfishly, I would rather have seen an entry-level, utilitarian 7 seater. And that model would have done more volume, too. Folks here will recall I like unpainted bumpers, manual seat adjustments, and manual HVAC controls.
I'll ask varmint this - do you think they would have met the projections if they'd gone with a conventional two-box clone? Same price, content, everything else, just generic style.
I doubt it.
So we can't blame styling for that.
People I've spoken to that passed stated other reasons, number one being poor rear visibility and in one case the driving position. Little things like a telescoping steering wheel and a rear backup camera can capture those customers.
Getting back to suggestions, what I think Subaru could do is come up with an B9-Outback. The Tribeca is more like the Legacy, but remember it's the Outback that has done volume, so build an Outback-style vehicle on the B9 platform.
It could even look different, perhaps more conventional. Add the two-tone, the fender flares, raise it a little, make the roof rack and cross bars standard, maybe even go as far as squaring off the rear end and giving it the 2.5T engine with a hood scoop and all.
They could hedge their bets this way, keep the Tribeca's edgy style yet also offer a boxier alternative with the formula that has worked for them so well for the past 10 years.
We regulars like the Legacy, sure, but let's face it, that has been their best kept secret since the 2.5GT came out. You say Subaru, the public says Outback. I bet most people have still never heard of the Legacy.
In hindsight, isn't it rather peculiar/risky that they chose to mimic the Legacy, rather than the Outback, the model that has been their cash cow for a decade?
As I have been shopping for a carrier for my Forester and plan on getting one this week. When I tell them I have a Subaru the standard answer is OH great they will go right on your roof racks. I plan on putting 3 pairs of Snow boards, 1 pair of Ski's and all the boots up there. The reason I belive you see Subarus with alot of carriers ect on top is that a lot of owners use there Subi for out door activities. I dont want all that wet gear in the back regardless...
Subaru basically has an agreement with Yakima, so anything in their catalog will bolt right on. You can even use the Subaru cross bars, just buy the purpose-built clamps, I think they're just $7 each.
The alternative is to buy round cross bars, but that costs more and they're noiser than the aircraft-wing style cross bars Subaru uses.
Another bonus - get a Subaru Chase Master Card and you can earn 3% back in Subaru Bucks, and yes you can buy accessories with those. We have $300 accumulated right now, and that would be enough to buy a couple of those racks you mention.
-juice
PS The other reason you see a lot of stuff on the roofs is because Subaru owners really are outdoorsy, not poseurs!
"Popular opinion" has never been a good barometer of good design or good taste. All it reflects is what is "currently" popular. 50 years ago the "public" demanded cars have fins and a ton of chrome. 'Nuff said.
"I'll ask varmint this - do you think they would have met the projections if they'd gone with a conventional two-box clone? Same price, content, everything else, just generic style."
I think Subaru would be coming a good deal closer.
For my part, I don't think the 1½ box shape is the problem. There are several other vehicles with a small front clip... MDX, RX330, M-Class... So, the shape is fine... or, at least, inoffensive. The offending styling ques are in the details, not the shape.
I agree with Bob that the engine is merely adequate. I disagree that the Tribeca is priced too high for what you get. The content and options are fine. The interior is great. With the exception of the engine, performance is on par or better than most. Utility is fine. Fuel economy is good. None of the cross-overs has a respectable 3rd row seat. Subaru's reputation is fine.
That leaves the styling.
With styling closer to that of the Outback (which is quite good), I don't see why Subaru couldn't capture 60K Tribeca sales per year. That would be competitive (sales-wise) with vehicles like the Freestyle or Pacifica.
To me, on the cheap, the upgrade from a Forester is not the B9 but rather an Outback...in doing so you go from a minium of 21K for the out the door for the F to 24K out the door (today) for the OB and pick up up some niceties such as styling, a more lush interior, a 'harder' exterior and some standard equipment upgrades (though you are not getting much more in terms of volume). To jump from that same 21K to 30K is rediculous. Moreover few folks will consider it an upgrage unless they are already driving a top of the line OB. I liken this to someone upgrading form a Corrola to the Lexus version of the Highlander! Perhaps Subaru needs a luxory line and new brand name for such vehicles. I think the should concentrate on the first REAL 'next generation' Forester while they still have some market share. I do not just mean slapping in some new bumpers and tweaking the engine as they have done for a decade or so.
We'd be in a Forester now (still in the running) if: 1) It looked more like a truck/SUV 2) Was a few inches taller 3) A few inckes wider 4) a few inches longer.
We are considering the OB because it has a different look to most everything else out there BUT you really do not get much more for your money than the Forester in the size category....and I'd only really use the heated seats and mirrors and wipers during a small portion of the year....to bad that was not a 1K option!
I think if Subaru wants to move more cars it needs to forget about the B9 and put its efforts into the next generation Forester and Outback. Tweaking those few attributes would add up to a Subaru that could kick some you know what...in my opinion. Maybe they are looking to corner the small wagon/SUV market. Maybe they have it all figured out. Maybe all the other brand are wrong in going bigger. Do we really need those extra inches all around? Do we need the truck-like look? Like the dude said, its all about image and thats how us humans are. We are also real good at following the leader and the leaders are getting bigger. For those who disagree, it will be interesting to see the next generation of the Forester. I bet it will grow taller and fatter and get a useless 3rd seat. UNLESS....there are enough practical folks out there who take advantage of the current saftey and price. I am trying to be practical...but we are a dying breed---especially when others offer more for about the same price.
still on the fence.....new RAV and V are on the way...we'll see
You have taken my comments and used them out of context.
Nowhere have I said that you can't have opinions, or that you can't express your opinions. Nor have I said that we all can't have have differing opinions.
What I have tried to say is that—contrary to public opinion—the Tribeca is NOT ugly, or badly designed. It is "different," and nothing more.
Yes, it is controversial, only because it is so different from what people have come expect from Subaru. Yes, it is pushing the limits as to what many find acceptable—and that's fine.
If Subaru is to be criticized, IMO, it's trying to do too much too soon—trying to force a new look upon a public that's reluctant to accept a new look, or a new look that is so radical from what they're used to.
Much to my disappointment, I've heard pretty strong rumors that Subaru may indeed be bowing to public pressure and will be throwing in the towel, as a facelifted Tribeca is reportedly in the works. Will it be for '07? I don't know, but as I understand it, it won't be too long.
Is that an indication that the public was right, and that I and others were wrong? Not one bit. It simply means that Subaru needs to survive before it needs to stand on principal. While a strong supporter of the brand, I've long been a critic of how Subaru goes about its business. This is just one more example.
Comments
"Popular opinion" has never been a good barometer of good design or good taste. All it reflects is what is "currently" popular. 50 years ago the "public" demanded cars have fins and a ton of chrome. 'Nuff said.
My comment about the glass being half empty were not about the award, but on varmint always finding a way to put a negative spin on anything Subaru related.
Bob
Some people claim that the 'beca's console and dash resemble the diagram of a uterus and fallopian tubes :P
(There is some truth in that remark too)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The fact that some may have neglected to fully comprehend the intent of the award cannot be blamed on me spinning it.
http://i.tnpv.us/pv/2005/08/29/HON2005082948646_pv.jpg
But your description of the Tribeca's interior would apply just as well.
Varmint is your foil...he's Colmes to your Hannity. He brings out the best in you. And the result is entertaining and informative for your loyal and happy audience, me included.
Bob from Long Island
As to varmint:
He and I have been debating here on Edmunds for years, and we actually agree on far more than we disagree. He and I are pretty much in sync with Hondas, Acuras and trucks (I think?). There are, I'm sure, other topics we agree on too—and, we have defended one another many times in other threads.
Where we butt heads is on Subarus. I am convinced he has a bias against the Subaru brand, a charge he will vigorously deny, I'm sure.
Go back and read any of his posts pertaining to Subaru, here and elsewhere, and you will find in almost all cases a negative tone to his posts. Rarely is he complimentary to the brand—and if he is, it's usually grudgingly. I'm not just talking about recently, you can go back 6 months, a year or more. It's there for anyone to check out.
Bob
That's not true. It is an actual award and is meant to encourage other designers to take more chances.
Bob
There are several people here who fit that description, both pro and con. It's one of the reasons I seldom post anymore - same naysayers, same cheerleaders. Once in a while an obvious new flamer, almost never a new booster. In any event nothing revolutionary.
I suppose it will take the hindsight of years to see which is more accurate - I suspect the middle ground.
Ed
Bob
oh you havent noticed the old grab life by the horns shape??
maybe bob can shed some lite on designing items to represent female anatomy???
Not me. It would get bounced from here for sure.
Bob
All I was doing was trying to let Bob know that he was making a mistake with regard to the intent of that award. It's clear he mistakenly thought that Subaru was getting an award for good design and was touting it as such. I was not the first to try correcting Bob. (Zman3 was.) Rather than admit to the error, Bob chose to call me biased. (Zman3, apparently, was not.)
But, hey, I've got a wild idea. Why don't we try posting about Subaru instead of each other.
In the grand scheme of things, this award is not news. The negative view of the Tribeca's styling is already well documented. And I don't think anyone suspected Subaru was trying to be conservative when they designed it. So the award really doesn't tell us anything new.
Merry Christmas.
Bob
And sadly that 2nd half is making a come-back...
The public in general has awful taste, horrific really. Bling is so trendy right now for all the wrong reasons. Chrome is heavy, expensive, ugly, and doesn't last. Yet the public loves it and correlates it to luxury. Go figure.
I hate chrome, just hate it. I bought the Forester L rather than the S to avoid the chrome grille!
steering wheel on the new Civic Si looks like a jock strap
I've also heard it being compared to a certain part of the female anatomy that the Tribeca's grille has also been compared to. Kinda silly, in both cases.
Any time a designer strays from the ordinary (read: borign), they take it on the nose, heavy criticism from the editors with degrees in Journalism or Mech. Engineering. People that know little/nothing about design, probably could not design a brochure or logo layout to save their lives.
This is how designs get watered down, and this is why so many cars and trucks are "cookie cutter". SUVs in particular are just 2-box shapes, and yes the Forester is very guilty of this offense.
You have to fit the mold, the pressure is intense. Look at all the best sellers - Explorer, Tahoe, Grand Cherokee, Escape, CR-V - look at the outlines of these and any non-car-expert would be hard pressed to tell them apart.
One small box, followed by one big box. Voila. Design.
Yawn.
-juice
from their competitors due to apparent hesitation on behalf of vehicle
manufacturers to assume any risks. In effect, a multitude of cars and trucks
are operating "under the radar" in efforts to offend any potential customers
Undifferentiated, hesitation, risk-free, unoffensive. Sounds like some people in this thread would love these designs.
-juice
You have to fit the mold, the pressure is intense. Look at all the best sellers - Explorer, Tahoe, Grand Cherokee, Escape, CR-V - look at the outlines of these and any non-car-expert would be hard pressed to tell them apart.
I suppose one virtue of this boring design is that the vehicles don't look dated after just a few years. A decade-old Explorer, for example, doesn't have an obvious "old vehicle" look about it. The design, boring as it may be, tends to age well.
More radical designs may not be quite so timeless. I have a hunch that a 2006 Nissan Murano, to use another example, will look old and obsolete ten years from now.
Tangent - I bet contemporary reviews called the E-type ugly at the time, probably compared the curves to a heavy woman's thighs!
Something interesting - JD Powers found that women like the Murano a lot, but for the Tribeca it was mostly men. Given the segment is female dominated (let's fact it, soccer moms are buying car-based SUVs), that could explain why the Tribeca is selling below forecasts.
-juice
I couldn't have said it better!
Any time a designer strays from the ordinary (read: borign), they take it on the nose, heavy criticism from the editors with degrees in Journalism or Mech. Engineering. People that know little/nothing about design, probably could not design a brochure or logo layout to save their lives.
Precisely. Accepting the word of auto journalists or any layperson not trained in design as "design gospel" is like having a plumber critique Shakesphere.
Bob
Let's not take this down to the level of a personal spitting match OK?
Thanks for your cooperation on this!
Precisely. Accepting the word of auto journalists or any layperson not trained in design as "design gospel" is like having a plumber critique Shakesphere.
Ok, having said that, why do you two think the Tribeca is under performing? Unrealistic projections from Subaru, price, or styling?
Like I said before, I am indifferent to the Tribeca styling. People I know don't like it. My wife does. Responses across the whole spectrum. But if styling is the issue, then who cares what people with an eye for artistic styling think. If John Q Public doesn't want it, it kind of defeats the purpose of trendy styling, does it not?
• Lousy 3rd-row seat space.
• 3.0 engine is too small for 4200 pound vehicle.
• Price/content ratio. It's too expensive for the features offered.
• It was the last crossover into this segment, and it wasn't significantly better than the competition in any given area. The rule being "if you're going to be the last to the party, you had better be the best dressed" didn't occur. It's good, but it's not "great." The Tribeca needed to be GREAT.
• And yes, controversial front styling.
If the first four items listed were absent, the last item would be much easier to deal with.
As to the "controversial" styling, all it needs is time. In a year or two from now the Tribeca will look positively ordinary.
Here's a simple fact of life: Most people don't like change. It moves them out of their comfort zone, and they generally don't react well to that sort of thing. Why? I don't know, but I suspect it has to do with deep down survival instincts. I'm sure a shrink could better elaborate as to what motivates people, but that's just my gut feeling.
In any event, the Tribeca represents a HUGE change for Subaru and everything it has stood for in the past. So it's very different (a.k.a. it represents CHANGE!).
Okay, here's another issue that drives me nuts with the critics here and elsewhere: It's "different," and somehow different = "bad." Where is it engraved in stone that different is just another word for bad?
One of the reasons the WRX (and WRX STI) succeeded is that they exceeded expectations. The Tribeca barely met expectations, and in some cases didn't even meet expectations. The styling is just one of many aspects. It's not the whole deal.
Lastly: This whole new design direction that Subaru is going through is very much a "work in progress." We have seen a whole bunch of concepts based on this new look. Some work better than others, for sure. Do I think the Tribeca is great looking? No, but it's not nearly as bad as the critics make it out to be. Can it be improved? Absolutely—and with just a few minor nips and tucks here and there, I bet it could be great looking.
Bob
My wife looked at a Forester last year and probably would have bought it except for the incredibly poor salesmanship. She ended up getting a Pacifica. It also helped that our family of five (three young kids) could fit in the Pacifica much better.
To reinforce the later observation, I see far more Subarus than any other vehicle with roof mounted carriers. This means to me that the vehicle is too small.
Back in the day, Subaru was pretty much the only game in town that offered small AWD vehicles. Now many companies offer AWD Cross-over SUV's (which Subaru has just entered) and many are offering AWD cars and wagons. Subaru has lost its niche and now must compete on its merits. Customer loyalty only goes so far.
The new Inifinitis look great, but it took them a while (and a number of design twists and turns) to get to this point. Subaru has been going through this new market change for only a few years. So give them some time. They'll get there, just like Infiniti did.
Bob
Other than the G35 coupe, I don't think Infiniti is doing that great with the looks, either...
I agree about Subaru, though... The Tribeca is fairly generic, except for the schnozz.. That could be fixed, easily... But, if they keep putting it on all the cars, it will be harder to get away from..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Bob
But, the M-class has a big fish-mouth grill and boy-racer taillight treatment... and looks really narrow from behind.. The GS is a much better looking car.
The Q45 is mostly inoffensive, but is as bland as the RL..
The G35 sedan seems behind almost all of it's competitors in the looks department, though it is decent looking..
I agree.. you are right.. most people seem to like them.. but, it isn't as though they've solved the "beauty" issue... I put them behind BMW, Audi, Lexus.. and slightly behind Acura..
They still don't seem to have a signature "look".. At this point, they could put the Infiniti badge on almost anything....
As I said before... The G35 coupe is gorgeous... better looking than the Z-car on which it is based..
I think most of their success in looks, comes from not cloning Nissans as much any more... I'm still not impressed..
regards,
kyfdx
(I like the Legacy GT wagon.. to get back on topic)
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Subaru offers various types of roof carriers as dealer-installed options. As far as I know, few if any other manufacturers make it so easy to get them.
To reinforce the later observation, I see far more Subarus than any other vehicle with roof mounted carriers. This means to me that the vehicle is too small.
Observation, or emotional response to your poor treatment?
A vehicle that is nearly two feet longer, nearly a foot wider, and four inches higher has more volume!
Specific to your question of roof racks on a Forester, how does a Kayak fit in your Pacifica? How about a 3-4 snowboards and related gear? The Forester is a far more economical, durable, manueverable choice compared to any of the Land Bruisers, while offering the ability to go down rough dirt roads and trailheads fully loaded.
Personally, I'm amazed that anyone buys a Pacifica instead of the minivan. It's lighter; has much more room inside; has the same powertrain; and gets the same or better mpg. Pacifica owners aren't fooling anyone - they're middle-aged and have kids - is it just vanity?
Bob
The grilles now all have a "family" look to them.
Bob
We on these boards often admit that people are swayed by Madison avenue and then act surprised because the very method that is used works. Public opinion is valid when it comes to selling things. Why buy a Pacifica rather than a Mini-van? Image. Like it or not that is how the world works. We live in a culture that made fun of Scrooge. Wishing that people would overlook image for practical design is simply wishing. Not going to happen. At least not in the numbers that will make a company profitable.
Wow. I never looked seriously at the Tribeca before I bought my Outback. If I ever considered a Tribeca it would be for my wife. I didn't realize it tipped the scale at 4200 lbs. I love the 3.0 in my Outback, but I can see how it would have less than stellar performance hauling around an additional 700 lbs.
Image preferences also might come into play. Some people might be embarassed to drive minivans because of their soccer-mom image.
Bob
Daimler Chrysler has AWD available in minivans as well. As does Toyota.
He didn't say he preferred the styling of the Pacifica, but that it had more room than the Forester.
Bob
Price. It's not so much that it's not worth the price of admission, more that usual Subaru customer is not used to paying it. They'd go to Subaru to find a cheaper alternative to an Audi Quattro. Tribeca forgot about the "cheaper" part.
I'm the target customer, looking to move up in size from a Forester. Yet I paid $19,200 last time, so let's say $25k is my limit, within reason. The Tribeca I want would set me back $30-35k or so. That's at least $8 grand more than the loaded S models were last time I bought a Subaru.
Selfishly, I would rather have seen an entry-level, utilitarian 7 seater. And that model would have done more volume, too. Folks here will recall I like unpainted bumpers, manual seat adjustments, and manual HVAC controls.
I'll ask varmint this - do you think they would have met the projections if they'd gone with a conventional two-box clone? Same price, content, everything else, just generic style.
I doubt it.
So we can't blame styling for that.
People I've spoken to that passed stated other reasons, number one being poor rear visibility and in one case the driving position. Little things like a telescoping steering wheel and a rear backup camera can capture those customers.
-juice
It could even look different, perhaps more conventional. Add the two-tone, the fender flares, raise it a little, make the roof rack and cross bars standard, maybe even go as far as squaring off the rear end and giving it the 2.5T engine with a hood scoop and all.
They could hedge their bets this way, keep the Tribeca's edgy style yet also offer a boxier alternative with the formula that has worked for them so well for the past 10 years.
We regulars like the Legacy, sure, but let's face it, that has been their best kept secret since the 2.5GT came out. You say Subaru, the public says Outback. I bet most people have still never heard of the Legacy.
In hindsight, isn't it rather peculiar/risky that they chose to mimic the Legacy, rather than the Outback, the model that has been their cash cow for a decade?
-juice
Matt
The alternative is to buy round cross bars, but that costs more and they're noiser than the aircraft-wing style cross bars Subaru uses.
Another bonus - get a Subaru Chase Master Card and you can earn 3% back in Subaru Bucks, and yes you can buy accessories with those. We have $300 accumulated right now, and that would be enough to buy a couple of those racks you mention.
-juice
PS The other reason you see a lot of stuff on the roofs is because Subaru owners really are outdoorsy, not poseurs!
Hey, I resent that. I'm a poseur that uses my Outback for getting around in the snow in the winter. Plus, it holds my golf clubs.
Any how, we had trouble telling which Subarus were there for our meet, and which were there rock climbing. Or perhaps both?
I was handing out free Subaru logo'd hats to members but I'm sure I ended up giving a bunch away to non-members as well.
-juice
"Popular opinion" has never been a good barometer of good design or good taste. All it reflects is what is "currently" popular. 50 years ago the "public" demanded cars have fins and a ton of chrome. 'Nuff said.
rsholland, "Subaru's fortunes sinking - can they turn it around?" #1460, 22 Dec 2005 10:15 am
Accepting the word of auto journalists or any layperson not trained in design as "design gospel" is like having a plumber critique Shakesphere.
rsholland, "Subaru's fortunes sinking - can they turn it around?" #1480, 23 Dec 2005 6:07 pm
But when KYFDX questions Infiniti styling...
Then I say you're the exception, rather than the rule. I think most people think Infinitis are pretty good looking these days.
rsholland, "Subaru's fortunes sinking - can they turn it around?" #1487, 23 Dec 2005 7:20 pm
I think Subaru would be coming a good deal closer.
For my part, I don't think the 1½ box shape is the problem. There are several other vehicles with a small front clip... MDX, RX330, M-Class... So, the shape is fine... or, at least, inoffensive. The offending styling ques are in the details, not the shape.
I agree with Bob that the engine is merely adequate. I disagree that the Tribeca is priced too high for what you get. The content and options are fine. The interior is great. With the exception of the engine, performance is on par or better than most. Utility is fine. Fuel economy is good. None of the cross-overs has a respectable 3rd row seat. Subaru's reputation is fine.
That leaves the styling.
With styling closer to that of the Outback (which is quite good), I don't see why Subaru couldn't capture 60K Tribeca sales per year. That would be competitive (sales-wise) with vehicles like the Freestyle or Pacifica.
We'd be in a Forester now (still in the running) if:
1) It looked more like a truck/SUV
2) Was a few inches taller
3) A few inckes wider
4) a few inches longer.
We are considering the OB because it has a different look to most everything else out there BUT you really do not get much more for your money than the Forester in the size category....and I'd only really use the heated seats and mirrors and wipers during a small portion of the year....to bad that was not a 1K option!
I think if Subaru wants to move more cars it needs to forget about the B9 and put its efforts into the next generation Forester and Outback. Tweaking those few attributes would add up to a Subaru that could kick some you know what...in my opinion. Maybe they are looking to corner the small wagon/SUV market. Maybe they have it all figured out. Maybe all the other brand are wrong in going bigger. Do we really need those extra inches all around? Do we need the truck-like look? Like the dude said, its all about image and thats how us humans are. We are also real good at following the leader and the leaders are getting bigger. For those who disagree, it will be interesting to see the next generation of the Forester. I bet it will grow taller and fatter and get a useless 3rd seat. UNLESS....there are enough practical folks out there who take advantage of the current saftey and price. I am trying to be practical...but we are a dying breed---especially when others offer more for about the same price.
still on the fence.....new RAV and V are on the way...we'll see
Nowhere have I said that you can't have opinions, or that you can't express your opinions. Nor have I said that we all can't have have differing opinions.
What I have tried to say is that—contrary to public opinion—the Tribeca is NOT ugly, or badly designed. It is "different," and nothing more.
Yes, it is controversial, only because it is so different from what people have come expect from Subaru. Yes, it is pushing the limits as to what many find acceptable—and that's fine.
If Subaru is to be criticized, IMO, it's trying to do too much too soon—trying to force a new look upon a public that's reluctant to accept a new look, or a new look that is so radical from what they're used to.
Much to my disappointment, I've heard pretty strong rumors that Subaru may indeed be bowing to public pressure and will be throwing in the towel, as a facelifted Tribeca is reportedly in the works. Will it be for '07? I don't know, but as I understand it, it won't be too long.
Is that an indication that the public was right, and that I and others were wrong? Not one bit. It simply means that Subaru needs to survive before it needs to stand on principal. While a strong supporter of the brand, I've long been a critic of how Subaru goes about its business. This is just one more example.
Bob