Subaru's fortunes sinking - can they turn it around?

rsholland

No argument there. It's all in the execution—which is what you and I have been saying, The devil is indeed in the details, A tug here, a push there, and before you know it you take a design that is 85% there (my opinion), and it becomes 100% successful.

Most here have been saying (or implying) that this direction needs to be tossed out. I'm saying (and have been saying from Day 1), that just a few minor judicious tweaks here and there will make a HUGE improvement. Don't toss the baby out with the bathwater, is all I'm saying.

A good example of this is take any car line: Look at the base model, then look at the top trim level. The top model almost always look the best—but there is usually very little difference visually between the two, if you analyze them closely. Alloy wheels vs. full wheel covers. Perhaps lower profile tires? Maybe some very subtle badge changing—all-in-all, very subtle changes that can make a world of difference on how a vehicle looks and is perceived.

Bob

kyfdx

I can agree with that... As you've mentioned, the look isn't nearly as jarring on the Impreza..

The headlights being out of line with the grill might have something to do with it..

But, 85% pretty doesn't equal pretty.... It either looks good or it doesn't.. It might only need a little tweaking, but until it gets it, the front view is pretty darned ugly..

regards,
kyfdx

rsholland

Well, I sorta see it that Subaru released the beta version of the design. I too wish it had been refined a bit more, but I honestly don't think it's ugly.

As varmint mentioned you only get one chance to make a first impression. I agree with that—but I still don't believe it's as bad as everyone is making it out to be. Not by a long shot.

Keep in mind I'm used to this, as this is what I've doing for a living for over three decades. I'm used to seeing how (design) projects evolve from an idea, to rough concepts, and through various stages of refinement, until it becomes a finished and polished product. So that's where I'm coming from.

As with genius and idiocy, there's just a very fine line between beauty and ugly.

Bob

varmint

But, 85% pretty doesn't equal pretty.... It either looks good or it doesn't.. It might only need a little tweaking, but until it gets it, the front view is pretty darned ugly...

Well, I've seen plenty of vehicles which have some good styling and some lousy styling, all on the same chassis. So, I don't accept the notion of good or bad, with no in between.

In the case of the Tribeca there are several things which I do like. It's just that the cues I don't like over-power them.

It's hard for me to comment on Bob's 85% remark because I'm not clear what 100% means. Is 100% an acceptable design, or is it Miura-level styling?

I would probably give the Tribeca a 4 on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best SUV built to date and 1 being the Aztek. Bland inoffensive designs like the Highlander would probably get a 6 or 7, while something like the X5 or RX would be at or near the top. Another in the same position as the Tribeca would be the Endeavor.

fintail

I suppose I can see that, but I see the snout as screaming "this is where Subaru is going" - it doesn't say "Subaru" to me yet as it is just too reminiscent of Saabs from 15 years before I was born.

I will admit though, introducing the new look on the new model is a good ploy, as it will make the rest seem newer when they get it.

rsholland

I would probably give the Tribeca a 4 on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best SUV built to date and 1 being the Aztek. Bland inoffensive designs like the Highlander would probably get a 6 or 7, while something like the X5 or RX would be at or near the top. Another in the same position as the Tribeca would be the Endeavor.

Well, to nobody's surprise, I'm sure, I like the Tribeca's styling better than you. On a 1 – 10 scale, I rate it an 8.5 (I said it was about 85% there, therefore an 8.5).

The other crossovers: The Highlander a 6. The RX a 5. The Endeavor a 4. The Pilot a 8. The MDX a 7. The X5 a 9.5. The X3 a 8. The ML a 9. The XC90 a 10. The Murano a 9.

Bob

rsholland

http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051230/BUSINESS/512300331/1- 152

zman3

The Pilot a 8. :confuse: :confuse:

Wow. I find that one extremely boring looking vehicle.

I won't argue your other ratings though.

rsholland

It may be boring to look at, but it is extremely functional and very well thought out. The (exterior) design reflects that kind of thinking.

Remember, I look at the total package, as I see beauty is more being than skin deep.

Bob

jeffmc

I'll second your "10" on the XC90, Bob. If I were to choose from the list based on what appeals most to me visually, it'd be the Volvo. It says solid, it says refined, it says capable (and it certainly says "Volvo"). I think Volvo's been the most successful automaker at creating a visual brand identity, but as other makers have begun using similar styling cues, it's watered down just a little.

That's the problem when you're a smaller car company. I think the new Civic sedan is somewhat "Volvo-ey" (like that word?), but because Honda's so much more mainstream, the folks who see Civics on every block and just the occasional Volvo, will eventually think it's the Volvo that looks like Civic. That can force smaller manufacturers to be more extreme to stand out longer (i.e. Tribeca?).

Unfortunately, what Volvo's design says doesn't override what Consumer Reports has to say about dependability. Personally, I think that's the same issue that hurt VW the most in its upscale attempt. It's a deal killer. You can charge more if you go upmarket and keep the quality/reliability good, as Subaru has done so far.

rsholland

Poor reliability seems to be a "European disease," as it afflicts just about every auto from across the pond.

I've been burned twice by Euro-cars (Saab & VW). So while I have a lot of admiration for some of them, it's unlikely that I will ever purchase another one; or at least not until there is solid evidence that they've addressed that issue, and can match the Japanese brands.

Bob

prosa

I like the Tribeca's styling better than you. On a 1 – 10 scale, I rate it an 8.5 (I said it was about 85% there, therefore an 8.5).
The other crossovers: The Highlander a 6. The RX a 5. The Endeavor a 4. The Pilot a 8. The MDX a 7. The X5 a 9.5. The X3 a 8. The ML a 9. The XC90 a 10. The Murano a 9.

I'd give the Endeavor (is it really a crossover?) better than just a 4, given its clean, uncluttered lines. Maybe a 6 or even a 7. The Pilot's too dull to merit an 8, I'd give it a 6 and even that's a bit charitable. As for the Murano, well, I can't quite figure out whether it should get a very high score on styling or a very low score ... it's definitely at one extreme or the other, it's choosing the extreme that's hard

bobny11580

Here are my ratings:

Highlander 10
Forester 10
BMW X3 9
Tribeca 8
Pilot & MDX 8
BMW X5 7
Murano 4
RX330 4
ML 3

And don't anyone throw stones at me.

Bob from Long Island

bobny11580

The whole group of SUV's give me a panic attack when I think of the high center of gravity. That's why I bought my OB. So I don't have a dog in this fight.

boaz47

that Subaru people are every bit as loyal as the old Saab drivers were. I can't remember Pontiac people filling in to defend that Aztec as something bold and new but when Subaru puts the face of a monster on one of their cars it becomes a lesson in art? I'm sorry, I didn't find Maplethorp much of an artist either. Wishing they would have smoothed something out and planning on an early upgrade still leaves us with a fashion miss. It is not enthusiasts that keep a car company going it is the mainstream and if you slap the mainstream in the face you should not expect them to dig into their pockets and pay for your product. The Customer may not always be right but they pay the bills. When the designers start paying Subaru to make their cars then they will be in a better position to tell the public what is good looking. But as long as they are being paid to design products that sell they better darn well take some interest into what the public likes, or start looking for a new company when the one they are working for folds. We can only hope Subaru knows this.

jeffmc

Yah, but Tribeca actually did better in Motor Trend's slalom than Outback did... wider stance and fatter tires to more than compensate for the slightly higher COG.

rsholland

Jon [from CT] posted over at nabisco:

Although Tribeca sales aren't yet at planned levels, it still out-sells every other Subaru in the US except for the Forester and the Legacy/Outback wagon. Which is to say it out-sells Impreza sedans, Impreza wagons, Legacy/Outback sedans and the Baja. Given that its MSRP is north of $30K, it's not doing too bad.

That pretty much sums it up for me. Yeah, not what they hoped for, but it's not the disaster all the naysayers are claiming either.

My guess is that Subaru's sales projections for this vehicle have been unrealistic from the first day. Now you can spin that any way you want, but I just think they did a faulty job predicting sales—and, as a result, it comes back to haunt them. BTW, Subaru has long had this problem, witness the Baja and Outback sedan.

Bob

zman3

BTW, Subaru has long had this problem, witness the Baja and Outback sedan.

I think the Tribeca is a fine concept that needs to be refined a bit. I always thought the Baja was just a stupid idea, and looking back now, I'd say I was right.

Karl

bobny11580

Jeff,

Thanks for pointing out the Tribeca's slalom results. I wasnt' aware of them.

Bob from Long Island

ateixeira

OK, you got me, Freestyle, Freestar, "Freebies" ... they're so bland they all blend together.

The basic point still stands, however. Fords have lousy residuals. If you save up front on the price, you'll give that up come time for trade-in.

The Freestyle will be discontinued soon, that will only make things worse.

The only thing "unfair" about that is the wholesale price quote you'll get on trade-in day.

-juice

ateixeira

You guys compared it to the MDX, but I think it's actually much closer overall to the Porsche Cayenne in terms of styling. The lights are high, but there's no grille between them, the grille lies beneath in the bumper itself, on the Tribeca and on the Cayenne.



MDX has blocky design cues and a grille between the headlights. It looks quite different.

Tribeca looks more like the RX, especially in the attempt to look futuristic.

-juice

jeffmc

It seems Subaru did a surprisingly good job keeping Tribeca's center of gravity low. Like Outback and Forester, there's probably plenty of body roll due to the suspension setup, but it'll stick to the road.

rsholland

It seems Subaru did a surprisingly good job keeping Tribeca's center of gravity low.

You can thank the boxer engine for that. All Subarus with boxer engines have a low center of gravity.

Bob

jeffmc

Amen! One of these days, I'd like to see Subaru build a super low-slung, wide-stance sports car to really show off the built-in advantage of the boxer. Scrambler probably would've been good for that.
One of us just needs to buddy up with Richard Branson and get some startup money for Subaru to produce more exciting products. Oooo - here's a thought... instead of spinning off a luxury brand as some have suggested, what if Subaru started a sports car brand? That could be fun. Subaru keeps the mainstream and upscale AWD models, and the WRX, STi and GT models move to the new division, where they'd receive a more rakish body style and a new badge.
But maybe that'd take some of the fun out of Subaru. No more surprising folks at stoplights when your sedate-looking family hauler takes off. That's half the point of owning a Subie for some folks... it's the anti-image brand. Hmm... maybe the spinoff brand could have all their designs look like garbage trucks or Zambonis or something. Imagine getting smoked by a Zamboni. :surprise:

kyfdx

It doesn't look good on the Cayenne, either... The Touareg has a much more pleasing look to me...

ateixeira

The only transverse mounted engine I've seen with a satisfying low position is the Mitsubishi Endeavor's 3.8l V6. Impressive packaging, though it makes you wonder how many right angles occur between the engine and the wheels.

Cayenne is a Porsche, so perhaps that's how it gets away with the look, but it outsold all other Porsche models combined. Somebody must like it.

As to the idea of a Sports brand for Subaru - STI would be it. But I see it more along the lines of AMG with Mercedes.

-juice

varmint

Yeah, that's why I mentioned the MDX. I was looking for a vehicle which used high-mounted lights and pulled it off. Whether or not these lights work on the Cayenne is up for debate.

So, even though it looks more like the Tribeca, it's not a good example for the point I was making.

ateixeira

When the spy pics were out, that yellow one looked a lot like a Touareg shape overall, but with a Cayenne nose. I could not find that pic, sadly.

-juice

rsholland

I was looking for a vehicle which used high-mounted lights and pulled it off

Pulled it off? Really? I don't think the front of the MDX is anything to write home about. it may be popular "mainstream" styling, but nothing more IMO.

Bob

ateixeira

I don't dislike the styling, but it sort of looks like a woman that had too many face lifts, with all her skin pulled up too far. And there wasn't anything wrong with her to begin with.

varmint owns one now so of course he likes it.

-juice

rsholland

It's safe and typical bland Honda/Acura styling. I think there are many other vehicles in this niche that are far more attractive; the Volvo XC90, for one.

Bob

rsholland

http://vocuspr.vocus.com/VocusPR30/...28-37389c9fc5c8:

That makes it 3 years in a row. Also best ever December.

Bob

zman3

Bob:

I get a file not found error.

Karl

rsholland

Okay. Go here. It's the top story.

http://www.media.subaru.com./

Bob

varmint

Very strong month for the Tribeca. If I'm not mistaken that's the best month yet. It's pretty much responsible for all the growth YTD.

ateixeira

That's still not good enough to appease the toughest critics in this thread.

Interesting that the shift towards more Legacy sales has made the Forester vs. Outback race very close. Forester has a great year, some years have had just 45k sales or so, so that model is doing supremely well for its age.

-juice

robr2

That's still not good enough to appease the toughest critics in this thread.

Hey - that remark resembles me!!

Thank goodness for the Tribeca (although it's numbers aren't on the chart). Legacy sales down (total including Outback), Forester sales down, Baja sales down (imagine). One could read the numbers as Subaru is cannabilizing its own sales more than drawing in new sales with the Tribeca.

Remember, you can prove anything with numbers if you are creative enough.

varmint

Aka... Half Full Remark of the Day.

http://www.onwheelsinc.com/pressreleases/05112105.asp

Subaru's Tribeca was a runner up for an urban truck award.

ateixeira

Aren't those the 26" chrome things with SPINNNNAZZZ (or however you pronounce it)?



-juice

jeffmc

Indeed a good month. If only every month were December... we'd have 32,760 Tribecas for the year and 239,028 annual sales for Subaru. Oh, and lots of snow to drive them in.

Thanks for the link, Bob.

rsholland

My pleasure.

Bob

ateixeira

That's really strange, actually, because December is usually a slow month for car sales. The weather must have helped Subaru. But even with AWD, it's not a month that has stood out before.

-juice

varmint

How does the month look if you remove Tribeca sales? It may be that the addition of the B9 was the only thing that lifted overall sales.

(Yes, I'm too lazy to check myself.) :P

ateixeira

They did not segregate Tribeca sales this month...

It's a cryptic press release, they include Outback sales in the Legacy total, which throws people off.

-juice

robr2

It's a cryptic press release, they include Outback sales in the Legacy total, which throws people off.

IIRC, they've always lumped Outback numbers in with the Legacy.

ateixeira

Yeah, that's what I meant. They always put the PR spin on those releases.

Sales could be down 20%, but they'd point to a segment with sales down more than 20% and brag about increased market share in that segment. :surprise:

My wife's a Spin Doctor, I can say that.

-juice

varmint

Okay, so I had to go look it up.

The press release states that they sold 19,919 units in 12/05. 2,703 of them were Tribecas.

Last year (without the Tribeca) they sold 19324.

So, I think it's safe to say the Tribeca was responsible for the 3% gain in December's sales. Actually, it prevented a drop for the month. Somebody else is going to have to figure out the YTD sales... that's more math than I have time for at the moment.

kyfdx

My WAG is that the Tribeca is mainly cannibalizing sales from the Outback..

At least.. that is my in-depth analysis of these statistics.. :surprise:

ateixeira

2,703 of them were Tribecas

DA-HA-HAAAA...NG.

That's almost the target pace. Talk about a great month!

They had some incentives for dealers that met sales targets, but they weren't that big, and I think they were in effect in November.

I can't explain it, to be honest. It ain't advertising, the "Dust in the Wind" ad is old and tired.

-juice

robr2

2,703 of them were Tribecas

DA-HA-HAAAA...NG.

That's almost the target pace. Talk about a great month!

I wonder if that includes the tornado damaged units that were sent through auction?