By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
BTW, I believe we already have low-sulfur diesel in California. I know we have had low-sulfur gas for quite some time now, and it's only going to be mandated in the rest of the states at the end of this year.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The Escape hybrid is high 20s, $29k or so IIRC. The Saturn Vue Greenline really tosses a wrench in to the segment with a price under $23k.
Subaru would probably be best off coming out with a hybrid off a volume model, so Outback would make most sense. They could price it at $30k (assuming it's a 2.5i + hybrid) and sell it easily, the interior is much nicer than the Escape's.
Tribeca would be too low-volume. A niche within a niche is just too small. Forester? Might get too pricey and be compared to the Vue Greenline.
-juice
Sure the NA version is a bit pokey in the heavier Legacy and Outback base models, but makes the base Impreza and Forester the most powerful 4 cylinder models in their respective classes.
As for the 2.5L turbo... I think we can assume you weren't even considering it when you made your "underpowered" assessment. :confuse:
As for the Impreza line, the flip side is that the 2.5 makes that model very fast but gives it really bad fuel economy among other cars in its size class. Much faster cars make better mpg than Impreza! LESS EXPENSIVE cars that make more power make better mpgs (using FWD, of course, so it is not apples to apples, but again we run into the age-old dilemma with Subaru - how many buyers need or want the AWD enough to ante up the $2000 extra for it?)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Whaaaat? :confuse:
The 2.5l makes 173-175hp and pretty much is the opposite of underpowered for an engine of that displacement. Honda and Toyota have similar sized engines that make less power, and the Subie motor actually matches some lesser V6s.
They don't want to accept that? Is that why every single model that offers the 2.5l also offers a turbo upgrade? Baja, Impreza, Forester, Legacy, and Outback. All of them.
Your statement could not be further from the truth.
Perhaps what you're trying to say is that the base Outback is underpowered, well then, get the H6. Or the turbo. Subaru offers not one but TWO upgrade engines for you.
-juice
Camry 4 cyl: 158 hp 161 ft/lbs torque
Accord 4 cyl: 166/160
Outback 4 cyl: 175/169
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee L Limited Velvet Red over Wicker Beige
2024 Audi Q5 Premium Plus Daytona Gray over Beige
2017 BMW X1 Jet Black over Mocha
As the base engine in their other vehicles, it is perfectly adequate in terms of power output.
Only Nissan matches Subaru, with 175hp from the same displacement, 2.5l.
You know who needs works? The Suzuki Verona, with just 155hp from a 2.5l in-line six.
-juice
My fear is that Subaru is going to get lost in the rush to AWD that all the other automakers will execute in the next dozen years. It should start to build more quirky models like days past to regain peoples' attention. No, the Baja clearly was not it. But the Brat did catch peoples' eye back in the day, so that was a good try. Now for something new...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
About 70s manual - perhaps, I don't know. As I recall, 5-speed in 70s was quite rare. My WRX feels allright in that area. Short-throw shifter combinced with heavy duty clutch require some force or you may miss it, but rewards you with nice sporty shifts.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
http://www.autospectator.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=4557
although it turns out while May was a big boost vs last May, YTD sales are up only 3% (which is still better than being down! ;-))
What caught my eye was Tribeca sales, called "strong" at 1481 in May. If they can hold that pace, that would still only amount to maybe 18K for the whole year, which is way below all hopes and dreams and forecasts for this model, isn't it? And WAY below pretty much every competing model I can think of offhand.
I wish they had held off on the Tribeca a year or two and updated the Impreza and Forester first...which by the way are the two models with the biggest increases in sales in May. What does this tell you, eh?
Oh yeah, and they sold 416 Bajas! :-P
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
May was good, but 1481 sales for the Tribeca is not. They've had much better months than that. Didn't they get near 3000 once? :confuse:
-juice
Annually, I'd heard both 40k and 35k forecasts. Call it 3000 per month. They're not even close to sustaining that level of sales.
The 07 will get more content and hopefully a small price drop (which the 07 Forester got). $3 gas isn't helping, I'm sure some of those shoppers are driving off with Foresters. That would explain an older model being up 18% in sales. :confuse:
-juice
That honor goes to the new RAV 4, and the CRV remains in the 2nd spot. The reason the Forester dropped seems to be simply the lack of available stability control.
I wouldn't imagine this will hurt the core NE/mountain state sales, and I think a lot of Forester shoppers aren't looking for something as big as the new RAV (it's pretty much apples and oranges imo), but it stinks not having that recommendation.
I'm not sure I want to see the Forester get too much bigger, but as juice and Bob have said all along, the next redesign of the model is critical. If it stays at the same size, it has to load in even more content and either freeze or lower the sticker.
Increased size would be the obvious choice, but Soob might come up with something truly different. The first small SUV/hovercraft or something like that. :shades:
To be fair, they tested an X model, and if you factor in the rebates it's cheaper than the others.
They should have at least tested an X Limited (adds EBD, rear disc brakes, limited-slip, and the all-weather package).
Two wheelbases would be my ideal scenario for the next Forester.
Rumor has it the Impreza might get a wheelbase stretch to where the Legacy is now, at least the B5-TPH concept did. That would be a big jump - almost 6" longer...
Maybe too big for some.
-juice
Going to a longer wheelbase does not mean it will lose its "tossability." The EVO has a wheelbase of ~ 104" and it handles like a slot car. So I'm not concerned if the wheelbase grows, that it will be less fun to drive.
Bob
The CRV was PACKED! There's no way that our '01 Forester could have held the same amount of stuff that went into the CRV. That's what Subaru needs to aim for, something with CRV-like packability.
Bob
Bob
http://www.vw.com/passat/passat_mini_landing/minisite/vw_passat_06.html?ic_id=pa- ssat_mini
Bob
If the Forester was built on the OB/Leg chassis it would really an attractive option with good usuable room in it.
BTW, I'm happy with the 2.5i power. I can go highway speeds, exceed when necessary and get a solid 24mpg. So far the OB has excelled on the fuel economy and reliability compared to my former 1.8T VW
Let's see what they do with the next CR-V. Subaru does at least have the benefit of seeing what Toyota did with the RAV4, and will at least get a peek at the CR-V, though it may be too late to change much of the Forester design. I'm sure the hard points will be set in stone.
The catch is, if they keep the Forester small, it's going to end up competing with new, smaller entries like the Suzuki SX4 and the Jeep Patriot, both lower priced but close in terms of size.
I've been calling for the OB's rear multi-link suspension way back since the '03 redesign. The shock towers of the strut suspension do intrude, in fact that's why they could not move the seat farther back.
One trade-off will be the underside, though. The struts do allow for a completely clean, flat bottom. Look under a Forester at the rear axle and you'll see .... nothing! On an Outback you'll see the lateral links sticking down. Same with a RAV4 or CR-V for that matter.
But I think that the interior should take priority over the underside in this segment, so that's a sacrifice they'll just have to make.
Here's a pic of my Forester, note how there is nothing at all to snag on an obstacle on the rear axle. The lowest point is the front cross member, basically the cradle that holds up the engine and tranny. It'll high center before anything breaks.
-juice
Bob
The last Passat was based on the Audi A4, so it had a longitudinal layout and Torsen. They called it 4Motion for marketing, but it was really Quattro.
Conversely, the Audi TT is a VW platform, so it has a Haldex (VW 4Motion), but they call it Quattro. :confuse: Same with the Audi A3 (Golf chassis).
Any how, now that VW put the Passat on a stretched Jetta platform, it's back to transverse layouts and a Haldex.
-juice
Forester has a bit more payload, and that roof can carry 150 lbs.
I drove 7 hours to the Outer Banks and carried everything you see in this picture plus 4 passengers and a dog. :surprise:
-juice
PS including the 2 bikes...
Bob
-juice
I will say that the improved better fuel economy and lower costs for on-demand systems sort of provide a win-win for both the buyer and the manufacturer.
Microsoft's products were never best in the market, yet they prevailed over some really superior software packages. I can almost see car market being steered towards technologically inferior solutions, as they offer other advantages, not as essential to an average buyer.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
I hope Subaru never gives in to the on-demand popularity.
Bob
I think what Subaru can do is to focus on having fewer AWD drivetrains, and try to reduce weight and improve space efficiency of their AWD drivetrains. They can thus still maintain better winter traction than the on-demand systems. IIRC, the 4matic system in many MB sedans/wagons is space-efficient, light, and very effective.
Bob
I'd challenge that. When the differences are explained to them, they'll glaze over.
To add to what Wmquan wrote, I also think stability control systems may have stolen some of the appeal of permanent AWD. Most buyers looking for AWD have done so for its foul weather benefits. While stability control doesn't offer the same benefits, it does have significant advantages in the slick stuff. That may be enough for a large percentage of buyers.
Back to Subaru, though, I think the real issue is they're promoting "Symmetrical AWD", and while the powertrains are indeed symmetrical, they're still talking about at least 3 types of systems (VC, auto AWD, and VTD/VDC). They're all full-time, but even some Subaru fans get confused by the plethora of options once you add the rear LSDs, and traction and stability control, you have:
Viscous Coupling, open diffs
VC, rear LSD
Auto AWD, open rear diff
Auto AWD, rear LSD,
VTD
VTD + rear LSD
VTD + Torsen rear LSD (spec.B)
VDC
DCCD (STI)
And so on. I consider myself and expert and even I'm not sure if I listed all the choices.
Plus, "Symmetrical AWD" isn't catchy like "Quattro" is. Or even "4Motion" for that matter.
They have to consolidate. That would make it easier for consumers to understand, and easier to market, as well.
-juice
No argument there.
I just prefer the approach that AWD can also be used as a driving enhancement 24/7, and not just something to get you up a snowy hill. Porsche, Audi, Mercedes, Subaru and now Acura follow this line of thinking. I'm not sure about BMW and Infiniti, but I suspect their systems are on-demand—but very good on-demand AWD systems.
Bob
-juice