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
It looks like the who front end is too small for the rest of it. And it doesn't look sleek like the illustration suggests. from the windshield back it looks nice....
But then can't I just buy another Murano???
Given that it appears it will also be underwhelming in terms of performance and value, I fail to see how Subaru is going to do much better with this car then they did with the Baja. At least the Baja is original and priced well.
Sly
~alpha
I think the incentives are simply because the design fails to meet people's needs, not because it is too expensive for what it is.
It is also more original then the B9, whether you find it orginal or not.
Sly
I already thought Subarus had a somewhat unique and recognizable look, and a family resemblance.
I do not know why Subaru felt they had to go off in a totally new and unfortunate direction. The other thing that bothers me about the B9 is that it has this jarring face, and then the rest of the vehicle is just a rounded any-car, that looks like it could have come from any Japanese builder. It just does not make sense to me. If the B9 had a unique advantage in power, economy, or something else, it might stand a chance. But although we know Subaru makes good AWD systems, having AWD in a crossover SUV is par for the course, and while the general public will clearly notice the new nose on the car, they will not know, understand or care about the boxer engine or symmetrical AWD, which the leadership of Subaru laughably thinks will somehow magically transform the B9 into a premium vehicle competitive in the $40k class, ignoring the fact that a less than $20k Impreza has the exact same features.
Bob
my kids loved the baja at least but said 'no way' on the triazteca.
Catching up here - swampy you had my kidneys in pain from laughing.
Blitzen? Am I the only one that did not like it? All they did was make the current grille too big. No real design to it, just super-sized the plain grille.
-juice
The design sketch they released had a black grille with only the Subaru logo visible. Who knows, maybe that is a fake grille? They could photochop it out of the ad photos even if that was a real photo shoot.
I think the sketch's grille looks better, black. Lose the chrome.
Go back to 1997 for a minute, though, the Forester had a big chrome grille, on the S model, remember? And everyone here is asking for a bigger Forester. I just found that a little ironic.
Also, the L model had a black grille, sans chrome, that I prefered from the start. Who knows what grilles will be available, possibly even more than one?
Minus the chrome, and that ugly paint color, I think it would look good in a dark color with a black mesh grille. The aftermarket could even provide one, $150 or so, dirt cheap.
Dunno, I like it. And the models that are selling are the wilder designs like the RX and MDX so what do we know?
-juice
"TOOTHY CHROME GRILLE"
Deja vu, no?
-juice
What does the TriAzteca offer to make up for it's ugly design?
Sly
I really like the styling on the new Foresters, if that says anything. But, I guess my garage is filled with 2 boxy vehicles...
-Brian
Interesting point about the Forester S! I owned one and I completely forgot about the chrome grille. I even was debating early on if I should swap it out with a black L grille too. But then again, the original Forester had a very simple box design that was carried out all over the vehicle. I even recall reading something about how Subaru tried to capture some styling cues of the then best-selling Ford Explorer. The B9X is pushing a little more of the styling envelope, IMO.
Ken
And I'm not being hostile, I'm just saying I don't like the nose. Of course I'll consider the whole package once we get details (like howsabout a hybrid, fer instance?). If it drives like a Subaru is supposed to and has innovative design (as differentiated from styling) I will likely buy one when the time comes. Vocalizing an opinion, albeit negative, about the car's unflattering olfactory apparatus shouldn't be interpreted as hostile towards Subaru or the overall package.
Unless of course someone's going native on us. ;-)
I agree. I know most of the vehicles that I have bought over the years were not impulse buys. They had been on the market for some time before I took the plunge.
Bob
not all things that grow on people are nice like cancer.
is growing on someone just a submission. i look at a 911 or legacy gt sedan or a Z and dont have to worry about it growing. i love it. why design something that requires a 37k submission?
Bob <blue Subie voter>
is my black favorite ralph nader?
Bob
~c
if they put the right motor in it, it's still gonna sell
Bob, my 96 Outback was one. My wife would have never considered a Subaru, much less a station wagon. I brought my 92 Loyale wagon in for an oil change, took one look at the Outback on the showroom floor, and factory ordered one on the spot. Rob M.
I agree with Loosh. Some of the comments here remind me of the first bug-eye Rex pictures taken on a dock in China/Hong Kong, and at a track in Europe. Folks on nabisco were saying, "No way that is the real car!". Hello bug-eyes.
-Dennis
Craig
Sly
And who wants to bet against the V6 becoming Porsche's best selling model? Any takers? Come on, a beer at the Philly Show. Chickens. BAAAAAWK!
;-)
start scrounging a JDM source for grilles now
Now you're talking. Mesh with an STi logo. If that's not the OE design.
-juice
Craig
OB XT is 1400 below MSRP.
http://www.kbb.com/kb/ki.dll/kw.kc.ncb?kbb.MA;868206;MA017&01- - 803;wag&6;Subaru;2005%20Outback&M34M3A6;;M34M3&&3- - &&nyrnc
Let's face it Porsche is a legendary brand that people sometimes buy just for the badge. That's not the case for Subaru.
In any case, it's not because someone else was successful with an ugly car that Subaru should try to pull the same feat. Two wrongs do not make a right.
Sly
As for the Tribeca, I think if it's judged to be a great SUV based on its merits, then it'll succeed in the market place. I mean performance value for the money.
-juice
Sly
-juice
Bob
It doesn't look muscular or rugged, like a proper SUV should.
Sly
CRaig
do you know the price?
how does it beat the 7 passenger pilot for 27k?
Or the award winning and very safe and comfortable XC-90 at $36K with a 5000lbs towing capacity.
36 thousand..Yeah right for a 5 seater with FWD and a way wimpy-er engine...
Try more like $40,000 plus for a comparable model to a Tribeca even one at $35,000.
-Brian
Also folks, don't forget - we don't even know what a 35K Tribeca is.
I just don't see anything in this car, certainly not the styling, that would differentiate it enough, or make it desirable enough, or competitive enough on value or features.
It might please the Subaritsis who have been wanting a 7 passenger car, but who else?
Sly
Craig
MDX, RX drive minivanish owing to its size. MDX suspension doesn;t even compare to my 21k OB, RX is too smooth & doesn;t grip well. I rate my 20k OB above these 2 vehicles.
Tell me one SUV that comfortably seats 7 (most SUVs lose out here) & doesn't drive minivanish ?
Asking Tribeca to drive like OB & still compete in width, space with MDX, odysessy etc. Isn't it too much to ask for ?
Interesingly we make illogical comparisons. Tribeca is a family vehicle......with car-like ride VS truck like ride, seating 7, luggage space, DVD, navigation etc. Why in the world do we bring up X5, cayenne & highlander, RX ? Don't we also compare these with OB ?
All sport enthusiasts need look at GT, XT etc.
Folks, let us give subaru a break !!! I think Tribeca will surprise many pleasantly.....though many raised concerns about looks.