AWD market is likely to split into to segments: premium segment is likely to use different versions of full-time AWD systems and lower market is likely to use on demand systems.
Subaru's problem is that in customer's minds they still hangs out more with Honda/Toyota/Ford than with Benz/BMW or even Acura/Volvo. In this regard the infamous upmarket move attempt was legitimate. However, for obvious reasons it is easier said than done, as they misplaced their aim (rather than claiming that "Germany is mourning", they should go after Acura/Volvo/Saab people.
Subaru's chance is to occupy a high 20s/low-mid 30s, which they actually do right now with their midsize/SUV. The key is in offering feature content of 40-something car in mid-30s package, or high-30s in high-20s. No more skimping on HIDs, telescopic steering wheel, etc. If they match Acura RSX pricing and content but add AWD, they win. If not, they're likely to go Saab-like oblivion, as they become too expensive for Honda/Ford people, still irrelevant to "pure premium" buyers, and "value premium" buyers may not be compelled enough.
I'm not sure, because they're on X-Drive version 2, or something like that. They keep revising it.
Infiniti uses VDC for its stability control system, which is confusing because Subaru uses the same name for its top AWD system.
But both systems are capable of sending power forward before there is any slip, i.e. they have throttle position sensors and know when you floor it, to shift power forward.
I think what's giving everyone a hard time is trying to integrate mechanical AWD systems with electronic stability control.
Part-time systems make it easy, you can just disable the AWD system under braking, or when ABS or VSC is engaged. Just turn it off. I know for instance that Hyundai's AWD system is disabled completely when the traction control kicks in. But that makes it feel a little clunky.
It's harder for full-time systems. A viscous coupling is mechanical, and basically oblivious as to what any traction control program might be doing. ABS, too. So it's tricky to "tune" the AWD to allows the ABS and traction control to do its job and not interfere with the AWD mechanism. Which do you trigger first? Do they work well together?
That's why the most sophisticated AWD systems are controlled by their own ECU. Computers basically decide what should act first (usually AWD) and what should kick in once a certain threshold is exceeded (stability control).
The catch? These systems are expensive. You need yaw sensors, throttle position sensors, steering angle sensors, etc. All these inputs help the computer decide what to do, but they add cost and complexity.
Subaru's VC is remarkably simple, it's basically a center differential filled with a viscous fluid. Cheap, light, and effective even in zero traction scenarios.
Lamborghini and Porsche both used VC AWD, though they've recently had to make the switch, my guess is to be able to incorporate more sophisticated forms of stability control.
the center VC is very old school, and with all the systems available today, has a whiff of cheap about it too. Nothing much to boast about in the sales brochures with that one. I like it however, for its simple effectiveness, and of course my old manual-shift OBS used it.
I think the day may come when most people will prefer computerized stability and traction control to AWD of any stripe, except for performance objectives, as Bob always loves to point out, and in the snow belt, where Subaru already has a lock that won't loosen in the foreseeable future. And that's not good news for Subaru, as the performance market in general is a limited one, and that of performance AWD that much more so. And the places where Subaru needs to expand if it is going to maintain market share in the long term (God forbid it should aim to grow! :-P) are not in the snow belt.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I have to agree. It was elegent, light, and cost effective, but it's now becoming an obstacle to technological progress, the VC in particular, that is.
Early '02 WRXs had a freak ABS issue where the VC and ABS would interfere with each other. It remains a mystery to this day, as it did not affect later WRXs, nor did it affect any other Subarus, and plenty of them have the VC system.
What would happen was on a bumpy road, on a hard/short stop, the ABS was basically being fooled into thinking the wheels were locked up, and it would release the brakes, and the car would not stop. Reports vary but some describe it as if the pedal basically sunk to the ground and they had to pump the brakes to get it to work at all.
Hutch had this issue with his '02, and he basically pulled the ABS fuse, because he was freaked out about it. Subaru may have had a recall, I don't remember, but they must have re-tuned the ABS system because it hasn't been a problem since.
Weird. Noone could explain it, either.
Any how, I suspect Subaru fears they might have similar issues trying to get stability control to work. Basically the VC doesn't think, it's just fluid that thickens up when the axles move at different speeds. There is no way to have the ABS or stabiliity control to communicate with the VC to tell it when to act. At best, the stability control could monitor the temperature of the fluid to try to predict what it will do.
I have '03 and received a letter saying that they'd reprogram ABS for free as a "customer satisfaction" program. They claim no evidence was found of that behavior in their tests, but they changed the program anyway. The dealer did it for me and I see no difference in behavior. Granted I don't really break hard and ride rough roads so can't tell either way.
Subaru scored below the average score in the most recent JD Power Initial Quality Study as reported in today's newspapers. This result is similar to Subars's scoring last year. I'm disappointed by the apparent lack of improvement in initial quality and I don't see how this will help Subaru meet its sales targets. Just my initial opinion. Martin
Good point. There is always a discussion about methodology of those surveys. Subaru is one of those brands seem to be "off": CR put the on top spot in 2004 (I think), while JD Power put them in below average on both initial or long-term dependability study. Go figure, especially that other brands seemed to be more correlated, whether good or bad.
Generally JD seem to hate Subaru: 2005 APEAL near bottom, 2006 GT Legacy gets mostly 3 out of five (2.5 on performance just cracks me up - probably derived from 2.5i and lumped together), I remember seing same numbers for Impreza WRX. Even their owner satisfaction surveys show just moderate satisfaction of owners. Please oh please tell me how many unhappy WRX owners have you seen lately (or EVER).
I usually do not like questioning those companies and certainly do not smell any anti-Subaru conspiracy, but by all the feedback on forums and around I just cannot believe some of those numbers. Call it what you want - denial, or whatever.
There is too much contradiction to me to take all these numbers as a gospel. Some probably don't lie (like number of reported defects), but all those subjective measurements seem to be totally off the general perception.
JDP is looking at different things, in fact I would not call it a measure of "quality" at all.
For instance, the Hummer was knocked down for poor gas mileage, but that's not a quality/reliability issue. The Mini took a hit because the cup holders were hard to use, again, not really a quality problem, maybe a design issue?
They should change the name from Initial Quality to maybe something like Customer Satisfaction or something like that.
I put more weight on their APEAL study, which measure how much people actually like their cars, and especially the Vehicle Dependability study.
I mean, who cares if the chrome is nicley polished for the first 90 days when you have 4 ignition coil failures in the 3rd year of ownership (cough - Audi - cough)?
The IQ study might be useful for those that lease and keep their cars short-term, 2 years or less.
The IQ study might be useful for those that lease and keep their cars short-term, 2 years or less.
I think it is only useful for JDPowers revenue, and for car company advertising... Really, who makes a decision on reliability off of the first three months?
I guess for new models, that is the only evidence there is on how things might be going...
Anyone that was considering purchasing an '02 Land Rover Freelander would have been really happy to find out the IQS rating before signing up, I'm sure...
But, to look at it as a dependable way of judging an entire marque... that just seems silly..
I don't know...lamborghini still uses the vc in their awd--you can't get much more performance oriented than that. Just because vc is physical rather than electronic isn't necessarily bad. I actually prefer something that a computer glitch can't screw up.. to resolve the communication issue with the abs/stability control: couldn't there be sensors associated with the multiplate clutches to talk to the abs and stability control. I don't know since I'm not an automotive engineer, but I think vc has not outlived its usefulness yet. Eric
Juice, and others: My point is not that we should bow to or make our buying decisions on the JD Power Initial Quality Study or on their APEAL Study or their longer term dependability study, none of which as I recall are favorable to Subaru. Making fun of JD Power or its studies, even if warranted, doesn't make their results vis a vis Subaru any more positive.
And, while I personally rely often on what CR has to say, I have to take their report in 2005 on the reliability of 2004 models (where Subaru did so well) with a grain of salt. That review was essentially an "initial quality" review as it went out less than one year and not much longer than does the JD Powers Initial Quality study. There are a number of Subaru models and years which are only of "average reliability' if my recollection of the CR auto issue is correct.
My point is simply that whether or not JD Powers reports measure things in a way we'd like, it would be better for Subaru sales, again my opinion, if Subaru did better in those JD Powers studies.
Finally, my bias is pro Subaru as we own two and traded one in for a newer one. It remains my impression that Subaru is not quite at the same reliability level as some other Asian names.
too dismissive - what the JDP IQS DOES measure pretty well is how people feel about their cars 90 days in. It seems to me the main result is that Subaru owners don't feel as good about the design and flawlessness of build of their cars as people who buy other brands. You can talk about the disparity in level of expectations between brands and all that, but at the end of the day, Subaru owners don't feel as good about their cars, and that can't be very good for brand loyalty, which is already on the decline industrywide as it is.
And Subaru owners have HISTORICALLY been some of the most loyal. This may be a bad sign for that trend. Apparently the actual survey has more than 200 questions on it which are available to subscribing carmakers, so they should be able to get a finely honed handle on the specific things Subaru owners feel are wrong with the cars.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
But they also hate Subaru on long-term dependability study, too. And APEAL. Who is filling those forms for them? Or are those based mainly on 2.5i trims?
VC - Lamborghini probably uses a pretty high treshold for their stability control system, plus at that price they can engineer an expensive solution and actually use it.
There are no clutches in a viscous coupling, but the auto-AWD uses those.
none of which as I recall are favorable to Subaru
Forester won the APEAL study for its class a couple of times, but it lost the crown to (gulp) the Aztek. I guess you have to love an Aztek to actually go out and buy one.
CR rates Subaru well. All models except the Baja are used car Best Bets. I'm not sure why, but in terms of forecasts, all the '06 models beat any and every Acura, too. Go figure.
Source: the best/worst of each brand chart in the April '06 CR Car Issue.
nippononly: don't make me break out the RL Polk data. :P
Forester absolutely owns that award. 6 or 8 times it has won.
"too dismissive - what the JDP IQS DOES measure pretty well is how people feel about their cars 90 days in."
I for one don't believe people can make a rational judgement about a car until the drive it for a year. Same as a marriage . What I ignored about the Subie (about 3/4 sticking points) in the first 90 days, is now a major annoyance. So mucn so, I wouldn't buy the same car again. Heck, even a Civic has steering wheel controls for the radio.
However, Subarus are pretty much bullet-proof, so from that regard, I wasn't to worried about the quality aspect. Multiple people I know drove them to hundreds of thousands of miles without any major issues.
I guess I'd be fine with JDP if they just called it something else.
The lack of those buttons isn't a Quality issue. It's a design decision, content, options, whatever you want to call it. But not Quality. That's not what it measures!
Other example - the H2 was hit hard for fuel economy. Not a Quality problem! It's actually pretty great at consuming fuel, TOO good. :surprise:
that Subaru lowered the Outback's base price by $2800 for '07? Unless my local dealer has them priced wrongly on his website, but they are all consistent with each other.
I always thought that $25K for the base Outback was a bit overpriced, considering it had as much power and less legroom than a 4-cyl Camry which had about the same features at $20K (figuring a $2K differential for the AWD was the max the market would bear).
Now it is a lot more competitive at $22,8 (for the stick) including destination. Of course, I don't know how that makes the folks feel that bought before Subaru put the $2000 cash rebate on.
Could this be an admission by Sube that they also think the Outback was overpriced? Or have they extensively decontented it in ways I didn't notice, in an effort to get the price down? And does this mean they might reduce Impreza prices a bit for '07? The '06 Outback Sport goes for $20,375 - that's only $2500 less than the new price for the big Outback, which is more comprehensively equipped.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
For 2007 Subaru is offering a de-contented Outback 2.5i Basic.
It has steel wheels from the Forester X and the following items have been removed: Heated seats, heated outside mirrors, windshield deicer, roof rack cross bars, and the rubber cargo mat.
Actually, they have taken out a whole bunch of needless frippery, IMO. Good riddance. The only part I don't like is the very ugly rims - I wonder if there is a stand-alone 16" alloy option.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yeah, and I like the name Brighton better than Basic.
The thing to realize is that the former "base" Outback was sort of equivalent to a Camry SE with cloth, or an Accord EX. Sort of. It was very well equipped, and they didn't really market a budget model.
The Outback Basic is now closer to a Camry LE or an Accord LX. It still has all the power goodies, ABS, AWD, etc.
Another thing - a Legacy wagon is cheaper than an Outback, and arguably closer to a Camry or Accord. On top of that, a Legacy sedan is price lower than a wagon. The price drops by a few grand.
So for an apples-to-apples comparison, look at a Legacy 2.5i sedan and a Camry LE or Accord LX.
Better yet, look at a Legacy SE, that's the real bargain in the lineup. You get a moonroof and power seats, so it's like an Accord EX for less, and the AWD is just gravy. You'd have to add several options to a Camry LE to get it to be a rough equivalent.
The reason I bring that up is because I was pricing real-world models in that range. I was thinking about trading in my wife's wagon for an automatic sedan, since that's what she wants.
Any how, the prices came out as follows, all from local no-haggle dealers:
Accord LX-SE: $19,379 Legacy 2.5i SE: $19,557 (Herb Gordon had one for 18847) Camry LE: $19,842
Equipment varied a bit. The Accord had a 6CD changer, while the Subie had a moonroof and AWD. The Camry had none of the above, and to add 6CD+M/R put the price at $22k, so it represented the worst value of the trio, to me at least.
In the end, I was very close to jumping on that 18847 price that Herb Gordon Subaru had on a Legacy SE, but we backed out of that strategy since my wife's car is actually the newest in the fleet and there's nothing wrong with it.
But there you go, the Legacy was by far the best value. And that is before I even factored in the 0% financing for 2 years.
If it were a choice between the steel rims and what you call "frippery," I'd take the frippery any day of the week. That stuff is useful, and not just a feel-good styling gimmick.
juice: very good point about the non-Outback Legacy models, as a basis for comparison to Camry/Accord. It just makes my head whirl that Subaru reshuffles the options packaging so often on the Legacy/Outback models.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Subaru's OE alloys are overpriced, anyway. I'd go aftermarket or shop for a take-off set. For a while there, Tire Rack was selling take-off WRX rims for next to nothing. Under $100, IIRC, while Subaru wants something like $250 a pop. :sick:
For the options shuffling...
Go buy Consumer Guide Car & Truck Test Monthly. Their reviews are lame, but the way they lay out prices and feature content is the best I've seen, bar none. They tell you what is standard, what each model has, and what each option costs, retail and invoice. That's what I use to spec out any vehicle I'm shopping for.
In the back they also list specs and NHTSA crash test results. It's about $10 and worth every penny as a handy reference.
Edmunds is great, but I like having a print reference for the little gritty details.
Example: everyone says the Fit it too close in price to a Civic, but to get ABS on a Civic you have to jump up to an EX to get ABS, and that's actually a whopping $4410 more than the base Fit (ABS standard).
Ummm, $1000 a set plus the cost of tires (they are a different size)? I don't think so.
juice: I thought ABS was standard across the Civic line, part of their new safety first theme? I believe it has been beginning with MY '06 for the Civic?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If so I should call Consumer Guide with the correction. :confuse:
Bob - he's hoping for a factory option, because in that case you pay for the cost of the alloys minus the cost of the steelies, or usually about $3-400.
However, offering that feature sort of defeats the purpose of this model, no? It's aimed at those who don't want anything that suggests "excess," and who want something larger than a Forester or Impreza.
they couldn't sell all the Forester X's they wanted, and ended up with tons of leftover Forester X rims. So they figured, make an Outback Brighton and use up those rims! Once they are all gone, so will be the Brighton model. :-P
These rims do to the Outback what the puny little 15" steelies with covers did to the last model Camry before they went to 16" across the line - makes the side of the car and wheel well look huge, while making the rim look tinier than it is. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Short memory Nip? All 2.5i Outbacks had 16" rims until last year. The overall tire diameter is roughly the same as those with the current 17" rims (225/60x16 tires vs. 225/55x17 tires).
I disagree on the too many 16" steel rim theory too. I think Subaru realized that an Outback at this pricepoint would be a good thing, and cheaper steel wheels help make their case.
but you know how some rims just look smaller than they are? These rims from the base Forester are like that. They actually don't look as small on the Forester. There is some kind of visual trick going on there, what with the differing dimensions of the two models.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It might not mean anything as far as Subaru's overall fortunes are concerned, but it looks as if the dealership where I bought my Forester last October may be dropping its Subaru franchise. It is one of the higher-volume Subaru dealers in the region and has been selling them for around 25 years. The dealership has two separate showrooms, separated by the driveway to the service area, with one for Chryslers and Jeeps and the other for Subarus. While the Subaru sign is still up, there are new, temporary Dodge signs all over the Subaru showroom, and all of the vehicles in the showroom and on display in front of it are Dodges. What's more, there are new, colorful banner signs hung from lightpoles all along the front of the lot. These signs advertise Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge, but not (you guessed it) Subaru. The lot is set up in such a way that it's very difficult to see what new vehicles are in inventory, so I don't know how many (if any) Subarus are on the lot. If indeed the dealership is dropping the Subaru franchise it certainly can't be a good sign for how well the vehicles are selling, at least in my area. I'm also rather surprised that it's picking up a Dodge franchise as there's an established Dodge dealership just up the road, and with its relatively thin model line Dodges don't seem to sell in volumes sufficient to merit two dealerships in close proximity.
No no, Dodges sell well. They will certainly be higher-volume sales than Subaru. Plus, it makes sense since he is already a Chrysler Group dealer. My local dealer is also a combo Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep.
My local dealership is advertising $4000 off all '06 Legacys and Outbacks in stock (a bunch are still sitting there). That will make the price lower than a new '07 Outback Brighton. What is interesting to me is that for now he has only stocked '07 Brightons, none of the more pricy 2.5i's. He does have turbos though.
There must be some reason why Subaru has chosen to offer a barer-bones Outback, and it can only be sales. Which makes me wonder how Forester sales will fare once the 'X' trim goes away.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Might they not be opening a new stand-alone Subaru dealership somewhere else nearby?
Doesn't seem likely. It's along a busy road with about ten new car dealerships (and several used car lots) in the space of a couple miles. I don't see anything resembling a dealership under construction along the road and there really isn't much room available. There is a former Saturn dealership not far away that closed recently, but there are no signs of any work being done on the building. If the dealership is going to open up a stand-alone Subaru facility, it'll probably have to be some distance away, probably in another town. As far as I know dealerships don't usually like to relocate too far.
Why do some older (and I mean like 3-5 year old) Subarus sound like a quiet lawnmower or like they have an exhaust leak? Is it part of that engine design? I've noticed many clattery 00-04 Outbacks and Foresters around here. They also smell hot. Am I missing something?
steel wheels and bare exhaust pipes do undermine the "premium" brand push
They appear to have (thankfully) abandoned that strategy. The Outback Basic pretty much proves that.
Dealers: there is more and more pressure for single-brand outlets, i.e. manufacturers only offer certain privileges to dealerships that give their brand their own building.
That would indeed hurt a low volume brand like Subaru, but most get around it. Fitzgerald Toyota in MD split the store so that both sides have their own "front". They sell Toyotas on one side, Subarus on the other. Same building, even though they appear to be different.
Think of an air cooled Beetle, or a Porsche 911, especially the air cooled ones. You can hear those from a mile away.
Water cooled boxers are a bit more mellow, turbos even more so (surprisingly turbos make less exhaust noise, not more).
So inherently, they just sound different than anything else.
Boxers have an inherent 2nd order balance, and therefore eschew the use of balance shafts. It may sound noisier but it's also a lot less reciprocating mass and wasted energy.
The H4s are noisiest, the H4 turbos less so, and finally the H6 is actually very quiet.
they have abandoned their "premium push", if in fact they have. If there was anything that threatened the future of the Subaru brand in the U.S. more than that, I don't know what it was. Brands can evolve slowly upmarket on their own (with nudges here and there from the manufacturer, of course), but the VW approach doesn't work - just look at their results: Phaeton dead in the U.S., Jetta reintroduced $2000 cheaper (and proportionally stripped) one year after redesign after it failed to boost profits the way they hoped, the new Rabbit introduced to replace the outgoing Golf, again $2000 cheaper in some trims, and slightly cheaper but much better equipped in others. VW saw the writing on the wall - if they had stuck to their previous plan they would have been gone from the U.S. by 2010.
The same would have happened to Subaru if it had stuck to the "premium" plan. Tribeca sales never took off (did they achieve the sales forecast on that one? I don't think so, but I haven't checked recently). People STILL mostly don't buy the Sube cars over $30K, magazine reviews STILL say "great driver's car, but not quite up to the standards of the $30K set" every time they review one of the more expensive models. The $25-30K turbo range seems to be Subaru's best idea since the WRX early in the decade. They should expand that niche in every way they can think of to stop other folks (like Mazda, Acura, and others) from stealing all their sales with newer entries. I imagine it is very profitable for Subaru too, since a lot of the components are shared over several models.
I do wish they would call the new strippo model the Outback Brighton though - Outback Basic is a silly name, and indeed, the car isn't so basic in its price class - it has all the doodads of the Camry LE, Accord LX, and Fusion SE, which are all midline trims.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Comments
Bob
Subaru's problem is that in customer's minds they still hangs out more with Honda/Toyota/Ford than with Benz/BMW or even Acura/Volvo. In this regard the infamous upmarket move attempt was legitimate. However, for obvious reasons it is easier said than done, as they misplaced their aim (rather than claiming that "Germany is mourning", they should go after Acura/Volvo/Saab people.
Subaru's chance is to occupy a high 20s/low-mid 30s, which they actually do right now with their midsize/SUV. The key is in offering feature content of 40-something car in mid-30s package, or high-30s in high-20s. No more skimping on HIDs, telescopic steering wheel, etc. If they match Acura RSX pricing and content but add AWD, they win. If not, they're likely to go Saab-like oblivion, as they become too expensive for Honda/Ford people, still irrelevant to "pure premium" buyers, and "value premium" buyers may not be compelled enough.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Infiniti uses VDC for its stability control system, which is confusing because Subaru uses the same name for its top AWD system.
But both systems are capable of sending power forward before there is any slip, i.e. they have throttle position sensors and know when you floor it, to shift power forward.
-juice
2018 430i Gran Coupe
I have a PDF describing VDC from Subaru and most of it is dedicated to descriving the AWD system.
Basically VTD + stability control = VDC. But VDC is both.
-juice
VTD = Variable Torque Distribution
Part-time systems make it easy, you can just disable the AWD system under braking, or when ABS or VSC is engaged. Just turn it off. I know for instance that Hyundai's AWD system is disabled completely when the traction control kicks in. But that makes it feel a little clunky.
It's harder for full-time systems. A viscous coupling is mechanical, and basically oblivious as to what any traction control program might be doing. ABS, too. So it's tricky to "tune" the AWD to allows the ABS and traction control to do its job and not interfere with the AWD mechanism. Which do you trigger first? Do they work well together?
That's why the most sophisticated AWD systems are controlled by their own ECU. Computers basically decide what should act first (usually AWD) and what should kick in once a certain threshold is exceeded (stability control).
The catch? These systems are expensive. You need yaw sensors, throttle position sensors, steering angle sensors, etc. All these inputs help the computer decide what to do, but they add cost and complexity.
Subaru's VC is remarkably simple, it's basically a center differential filled with a viscous fluid. Cheap, light, and effective even in zero traction scenarios.
Lamborghini and Porsche both used VC AWD, though they've recently had to make the switch, my guess is to be able to incorporate more sophisticated forms of stability control.
-juice
I think the day may come when most people will prefer computerized stability and traction control to AWD of any stripe, except for performance objectives, as Bob always loves to point out, and in the snow belt, where Subaru already has a lock that won't loosen in the foreseeable future. And that's not good news for Subaru, as the performance market in general is a limited one, and that of performance AWD that much more so. And the places where Subaru needs to expand if it is going to maintain market share in the long term (God forbid it should aim to grow! :-P) are not in the snow belt.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Early '02 WRXs had a freak ABS issue where the VC and ABS would interfere with each other. It remains a mystery to this day, as it did not affect later WRXs, nor did it affect any other Subarus, and plenty of them have the VC system.
What would happen was on a bumpy road, on a hard/short stop, the ABS was basically being fooled into thinking the wheels were locked up, and it would release the brakes, and the car would not stop. Reports vary but some describe it as if the pedal basically sunk to the ground and they had to pump the brakes to get it to work at all.
Hutch had this issue with his '02, and he basically pulled the ABS fuse, because he was freaked out about it. Subaru may have had a recall, I don't remember, but they must have re-tuned the ABS system because it hasn't been a problem since.
Weird. Noone could explain it, either.
Any how, I suspect Subaru fears they might have similar issues trying to get stability control to work. Basically the VC doesn't think, it's just fluid that thickens up when the axles move at different speeds. There is no way to have the ABS or stabiliity control to communicate with the VC to tell it when to act. At best, the stability control could monitor the temperature of the fluid to try to predict what it will do.
-juice
2018 430i Gran Coupe
-juice
Generally JD seem to hate Subaru: 2005 APEAL near bottom, 2006 GT Legacy gets mostly 3 out of five (2.5 on performance just cracks me up - probably derived from 2.5i and lumped together), I remember seing same numbers for Impreza WRX. Even their owner satisfaction surveys show just moderate satisfaction of owners. Please oh please tell me how many unhappy WRX owners have you seen lately (or EVER).
I usually do not like questioning those companies and certainly do not smell any anti-Subaru conspiracy, but by all the feedback on forums and around I just cannot believe some of those numbers. Call it what you want - denial, or whatever.
There is too much contradiction to me to take all these numbers as a gospel. Some probably don't lie (like number of reported defects), but all those subjective measurements seem to be totally off the general perception.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Correct. Source: April 2005 issue.
JDP is looking at different things, in fact I would not call it a measure of "quality" at all.
For instance, the Hummer was knocked down for poor gas mileage, but that's not a quality/reliability issue. The Mini took a hit because the cup holders were hard to use, again, not really a quality problem, maybe a design issue?
They should change the name from Initial Quality to maybe something like Customer Satisfaction or something like that.
I put more weight on their APEAL study, which measure how much people actually like their cars, and especially the Vehicle Dependability study.
I mean, who cares if the chrome is nicley polished for the first 90 days when you have 4 ignition coil failures in the 3rd year of ownership (cough - Audi - cough)?
The IQ study might be useful for those that lease and keep their cars short-term, 2 years or less.
-juice
I think it is only useful for JDPowers revenue, and for car company advertising... Really, who makes a decision on reliability off of the first three months?
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
So they have an audience of about ... 1 people.
-juice
Anyone that was considering purchasing an '02 Land Rover Freelander would have been really happy to find out the IQS rating before signing up, I'm sure...
But, to look at it as a dependable way of judging an entire marque... that just seems silly..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
And, while I personally rely often on what CR has to say, I have to take their report in 2005 on the reliability of 2004 models (where Subaru did so well) with a grain of salt. That review was essentially an "initial quality" review as it went out less than one year and not much longer than does the JD Powers Initial Quality study. There are a number of Subaru models and years which are only of "average reliability' if my recollection of the CR auto issue is correct.
My point is simply that whether or not JD Powers reports measure things in a way we'd like, it would be better for Subaru sales, again my opinion, if Subaru did better in those JD Powers studies.
Finally, my bias is pro Subaru as we own two and traded one in for a newer one. It remains my impression that Subaru is not quite at the same reliability level as some other Asian names.
Martin
And Subaru owners have HISTORICALLY been some of the most loyal. This may be a bad sign for that trend. Apparently the actual survey has more than 200 questions on it which are available to subscribing carmakers, so they should be able to get a finely honed handle on the specific things Subaru owners feel are wrong with the cars.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2018 430i Gran Coupe
There are no clutches in a viscous coupling, but the auto-AWD uses those.
none of which as I recall are favorable to Subaru
Forester won the APEAL study for its class a couple of times, but it lost the crown to (gulp) the Aztek. I guess you have to love an Aztek to actually go out and buy one.
CR rates Subaru well. All models except the Baja are used car Best Bets. I'm not sure why, but in terms of forecasts, all the '06 models beat any and every Acura, too. Go figure.
Source: the best/worst of each brand chart in the April '06 CR Car Issue.
nippononly: don't make me break out the RL Polk data. :P
Forester absolutely owns that award. 6 or 8 times it has won.
-juice
I for one don't believe people can make a rational judgement about a car until the drive it for a year. Same as a marriage
However, Subarus are pretty much bullet-proof, so from that regard, I wasn't to worried about the quality aspect. Multiple people I know drove them to hundreds of thousands of miles without any major issues.
The lack of those buttons isn't a Quality issue. It's a design decision, content, options, whatever you want to call it. But not Quality. That's not what it measures!
Other example - the H2 was hit hard for fuel economy. Not a Quality problem! It's actually pretty great at consuming fuel, TOO good. :surprise:
-juice
I always thought that $25K for the base Outback was a bit overpriced, considering it had as much power and less legroom than a 4-cyl Camry which had about the same features at $20K (figuring a $2K differential for the AWD was the max the market would bear).
Now it is a lot more competitive at $22,8 (for the stick) including destination. Of course, I don't know how that makes the folks feel that bought before Subaru put the $2000 cash rebate on.
Could this be an admission by Sube that they also think the Outback was overpriced? Or have they extensively decontented it in ways I didn't notice, in an effort to get the price down? And does this mean they might reduce Impreza prices a bit for '07? The '06 Outback Sport goes for $20,375 - that's only $2500 less than the new price for the big Outback, which is more comprehensively equipped.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It has steel wheels from the Forester X and the following items have been removed: Heated seats, heated outside mirrors, windshield deicer, roof rack cross bars, and the rubber cargo mat.
See pix and specs on this link:
http://www.cars101.com/subaru/outback/outback2007.html
For people looking for an Outback without all the frills, this is an excellent choice.
Bob
Actually, they have taken out a whole bunch of needless frippery, IMO. Good riddance. The only part I don't like is the very ugly rims - I wonder if there is a stand-alone 16" alloy option.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The thing to realize is that the former "base" Outback was sort of equivalent to a Camry SE with cloth, or an Accord EX. Sort of. It was very well equipped, and they didn't really market a budget model.
The Outback Basic is now closer to a Camry LE or an Accord LX. It still has all the power goodies, ABS, AWD, etc.
Another thing - a Legacy wagon is cheaper than an Outback, and arguably closer to a Camry or Accord. On top of that, a Legacy sedan is price lower than a wagon. The price drops by a few grand.
So for an apples-to-apples comparison, look at a Legacy 2.5i sedan and a Camry LE or Accord LX.
Better yet, look at a Legacy SE, that's the real bargain in the lineup. You get a moonroof and power seats, so it's like an Accord EX for less, and the AWD is just gravy. You'd have to add several options to a Camry LE to get it to be a rough equivalent.
The reason I bring that up is because I was pricing real-world models in that range. I was thinking about trading in my wife's wagon for an automatic sedan, since that's what she wants.
Any how, the prices came out as follows, all from local no-haggle dealers:
Accord LX-SE: $19,379
Legacy 2.5i SE: $19,557 (Herb Gordon had one for 18847)
Camry LE: $19,842
Equipment varied a bit. The Accord had a 6CD changer, while the Subie had a moonroof and AWD. The Camry had none of the above, and to add 6CD+M/R put the price at $22k, so it represented the worst value of the trio, to me at least.
In the end, I was very close to jumping on that 18847 price that Herb Gordon Subaru had on a Legacy SE, but we backed out of that strategy since my wife's car is actually the newest in the fleet and there's nothing wrong with it.
But there you go, the Legacy was by far the best value. And that is before I even factored in the 0% financing for 2 years.
-juice
If it were a choice between the steel rims and what you call "frippery," I'd take the frippery any day of the week. That stuff is useful, and not just a feel-good styling gimmick.
Bob
-juice
juice: very good point about the non-Outback Legacy models, as a basis for comparison to Camry/Accord. It just makes my head whirl that Subaru reshuffles the options packaging so often on the Legacy/Outback models.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
For the options shuffling...
Go buy Consumer Guide Car & Truck Test Monthly. Their reviews are lame, but the way they lay out prices and feature content is the best I've seen, bar none. They tell you what is standard, what each model has, and what each option costs, retail and invoice. That's what I use to spec out any vehicle I'm shopping for.
In the back they also list specs and NHTSA crash test results. It's about $10 and worth every penny as a handy reference.
Edmunds is great, but I like having a print reference for the little gritty details.
Example: everyone says the Fit it too close in price to a Civic, but to get ABS on a Civic you have to jump up to an EX to get ABS, and that's actually a whopping $4410 more than the base Fit (ABS standard).
For quick comparisons like that, I love it.
-juice
Bob
juice: I thought ABS was standard across the Civic line, part of their new safety first theme? I believe it has been beginning with MY '06 for the Civic?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Here ya go. 16x6.5 OEM alloys, $700.00 for 4.
http://theserviceadvisor.com/part/alloyrimbestsubaru/index.html
Bob
Bob - he's hoping for a factory option, because in that case you pay for the cost of the alloys minus the cost of the steelies, or usually about $3-400.
-juice
However, offering that feature sort of defeats the purpose of this model, no? It's aimed at those who don't want anything that suggests "excess," and who want something larger than a Forester or Impreza.
Bob
-juice
These rims do to the Outback what the puny little 15" steelies with covers did to the last model Camry before they went to 16" across the line - makes the side of the car and wheel well look huge, while making the rim look tinier than it is. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I disagree on the too many 16" steel rim theory too. I think Subaru realized that an Outback at this pricepoint would be a good thing, and cheaper steel wheels help make their case.
Bob
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
FWIW... I say the more options the better, but steel wheels and bare exhaust pipes do undermine the "premium" brand push.
The dealership has two separate showrooms, separated by the driveway to the service area, with one for Chryslers and Jeeps and the other for Subarus. While the Subaru sign is still up, there are new, temporary Dodge signs all over the Subaru showroom, and all of the vehicles in the showroom and on display in front of it are Dodges. What's more, there are new, colorful banner signs hung from lightpoles all along the front of the lot. These signs advertise Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge, but not (you guessed it) Subaru. The lot is set up in such a way that it's very difficult to see what new vehicles are in inventory, so I don't know how many (if any) Subarus are on the lot.
If indeed the dealership is dropping the Subaru franchise it certainly can't be a good sign for how well the vehicles are selling, at least in my area. I'm also rather surprised that it's picking up a Dodge franchise as there's an established Dodge dealership just up the road, and with its relatively thin model line Dodges don't seem to sell in volumes sufficient to merit two dealerships in close proximity.
Bob
My local dealership is advertising $4000 off all '06 Legacys and Outbacks in stock (a bunch are still sitting there). That will make the price lower than a new '07 Outback Brighton. What is interesting to me is that for now he has only stocked '07 Brightons, none of the more pricy 2.5i's. He does have turbos though.
There must be some reason why Subaru has chosen to offer a barer-bones Outback, and it can only be sales. Which makes me wonder how Forester sales will fare once the 'X' trim goes away.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Yep, that's it. Sales!
Which makes me wonder how Forester sales will fare once the 'X' trim goes away.
What makes you think it's going away?
Bob
Doesn't seem likely. It's along a busy road with about ten new car dealerships (and several used car lots) in the space of a couple miles. I don't see anything resembling a dealership under construction along the road and there really isn't much room available. There is a former Saturn dealership not far away that closed recently, but there are no signs of any work being done on the building.
If the dealership is going to open up a stand-alone Subaru facility, it'll probably have to be some distance away, probably in another town. As far as I know dealerships don't usually like to relocate too far.
They appear to have (thankfully) abandoned that strategy. The Outback Basic pretty much proves that.
Dealers: there is more and more pressure for single-brand outlets, i.e. manufacturers only offer certain privileges to dealerships that give their brand their own building.
That would indeed hurt a low volume brand like Subaru, but most get around it. Fitzgerald Toyota in MD split the store so that both sides have their own "front". They sell Toyotas on one side, Subarus on the other. Same building, even though they appear to be different.
-juice
Think of an air cooled Beetle, or a Porsche 911, especially the air cooled ones. You can hear those from a mile away.
Water cooled boxers are a bit more mellow, turbos even more so (surprisingly turbos make less exhaust noise, not more).
So inherently, they just sound different than anything else.
Boxers have an inherent 2nd order balance, and therefore eschew the use of balance shafts. It may sound noisier but it's also a lot less reciprocating mass and wasted energy.
The H4s are noisiest, the H4 turbos less so, and finally the H6 is actually very quiet.
-juice
The same would have happened to Subaru if it had stuck to the "premium" plan. Tribeca sales never took off (did they achieve the sales forecast on that one? I don't think so, but I haven't checked recently). People STILL mostly don't buy the Sube cars over $30K, magazine reviews STILL say "great driver's car, but not quite up to the standards of the $30K set" every time they review one of the more expensive models. The $25-30K turbo range seems to be Subaru's best idea since the WRX early in the decade. They should expand that niche in every way they can think of to stop other folks (like Mazda, Acura, and others) from stealing all their sales with newer entries. I imagine it is very profitable for Subaru too, since a lot of the components are shared over several models.
I do wish they would call the new strippo model the Outback Brighton though - Outback Basic is a silly name, and indeed, the car isn't so basic in its price class - it has all the doodads of the Camry LE, Accord LX, and Fusion SE, which are all midline trims.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)