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
Or do you mean 200?
Those Chryslers don't have the fender flares, and that's what stands out most to me.
YMMV
I think so too, but also disappointed in the changes that can be noticed from the concept. That concept was just amazing.
I'm wondering how they achieved the 36. I'm hoping that it is through engine improvements rather than a combination of mating to a CVT. If so, an Impreza 5MT may be in my future!
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that rakish roofline from the Impreza Concept makes it on to the WRX/STI when they're announced. I think Subaru really wants to separate the WRX/STI from the econo-box image that the Impreza imparts. This would be a good way to do so.
Bob
Power-wise, I'm sure the 2.0L will result in a car that performs at least as well as my Escort (which also has a 2.0L engine making something like 110 horse), but with AWD instead of 1-FWD.
I sure would love to get a WRX though.
I honestly hadn't considered this being a base model vehicle. The one shot indeed does look like a base model, though. The WRX and STi probably will get the bigger wheel arches and various swoopy bulges. Surely a wing, as well.
Similar but soooo much better. The devil is in the details.
Bob
To my eyes, anyway.
Bob
The wheels are even similar, heh. Funny.
I confirmed that the 36 mpg estimate is with the 2.0L mated to a CVT. Maybe if they put direct injection in these things, they'll hit that mark with the manual. I don't care what kind of fuel economy I get, I won't settle for a CVT.
As to trannys, I'm expecting a 6-speed (guessing) and CVT (for sure) choices. I've driven several Outbacks with the CVT, and they were fine.
Bob
An Altima I test didn't bother me, but I've not driven a CVT Subaru.
However, if the manual tranny keeps the same fuel economy numbers as the current gen, I'll pass and go with another compact/sub-compact with FWD and a manual that will deliver 35+. I don't need AWD; I'm competent enough to get around in anything. The AWD is just more fun for the six months of the year that we have snow and ice on the roads!
By the way, we still have ice on the roads. Hopefully that will be but a memory (for a little while) within the next couple of weeks.
Not likely, but I can dream...
Understanding changes that had to be made, they still sucked out too much character from the concept. Hope some those elements show up in the WRX/STI as some have posited. Coupe-like roof that cramps the back is less of an issue for those, but that's a relatively big change to make production-wise, no?
The STI 22B was lovely, but take a peek at a base model, how tame it was.
We're used to looking at rally footage of airborne cars mid-jump, of course that's exciting. Base cars aren't.
Bob
Or put another way, how is going from 'wow' to 'meh' a good thing, even for 'the masses'
But I'll withhold judgement until I see one in person. Also, the color of the car in the photo probably dulls things too a bit
Never said it was a good thing, but it happens all the time.
Also, not so sure I agree with your "meh" assessment. Yeah, maybe not as much "wow," but "meh?" I think that's a bit harsh.
Bob
I'd call those designs polarizing, to be honest.
I happen to like both, but I think they turn off a lot of people, too.
Subaru has always been polarizing, and that didn't do much good for them. Look at the Baja, Tribeca, SVX. None were hits.
Give me clean functional design over the latest trends any day. That's why the 1990-93 Accords still look good today, although the were criticized as "too bland" when they first came out.
I think polarizing is too strong a word, I would just say they're not at all anonymous and both come from manufacturers much larger than Subaru who you'd think might be more inclined toward bland. They have less need to stand out. Whatever the word, I think the Elantra makes a statement (as did the Sonata), and I think it'll sell like crazy. Will it look dated in 10 years? Who cares. Cars don't last forever.
As for the Baja, Tribeca (which I own), and SVX, don't know that any of them (SVX excepted maybe?), came from a head turning concept. So less disappointment anyway.
On the plus side, I think the ad agency that took over Subaru in the last year and a half or so has done a great job w/the brand.
That applies to the Sonata, Elantra, and Tucson, at least.
Note how Kias look very different. Smart - they appeal to different people.
Back to Subaru...
I think the Legacy/Outback took some risks, while the Forester was conservative. That worked - both Outback and Forester sales are up, and both at the same time. No cannibalization.
Legacy sedan is not what I'd consider conservative. With the oversized fender flares and the odd headlights...
Maybe they wanted the Impreza to play it's tamer little brother, again hoping for no cannibalization?
Why not, if it worked for the Forester? They are breaking records year and after year with that handsome/conservative design.
Given that the Outback and Forester probably have the strongest brand ID among the general public (ie, not the STI crowd), those are the ones you'd want to be most evolutionary/conservative in changing.
They keep hinting the new Impreza will be bigger, so there is potentially a lot of overlap. I'd go with an Impreza 2.0l over a base Legacy for the 36mpg alone, especially if it's cheaper and looks better (IMHO it does).
But I'd want the 5 door anyway. Let's see more pics! More angles, a better color, and the hatch/wagon!
I feel like I see more new Legacy sedans around than I did when the old model was out.
I went with my brother to test drive a base model with the manual transmission, but to keep a manual Kia forces you in to a stripped version with almost no options. No moonroof my brother wanted, not even AWD, IIRC.
It was actually a fun ride, the biggest negative being (very) poor rear visibility. And I agree about the numb steering.
Still, 260hp on 87 octane, with better mileage to boot. They complain a bit about lag, so the 2.5 XT may be better in that regard.
Subaru needs to get that 265hp engine in the XT now, and how about brining back the manual so it offers something Kia doesn't?
Bob
Bob
A two liter turbo from Subaru is probably coming soon......but with what fuel requirement and how much power?
The huge moonroof on the Forester was more attractive, so he picked one up in Paprika Red Pearl. But it was close.
If I got a Kia I'd be more interested in the V6 Sorento with the 3rd row.
I like the new Focus more, the 5-door looks good.
I don't think I am ready for my OBS to already be the "old model" come this fall. It will only be 2-1/2 years old at that point. I missed the memo where Subaru was moving to 4-year product cycles.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
No worry - Subarus hold their value well regardless.
Not that happy with the front - the concept looked so much better there. It just seems tall/narrow.
Profile and rear shots look fine to me.
Juice, I'm sure the tall/narrow appearance will be mitigated somewhat by properly offset tires. It is difficult to ignore the effect of the skinny steelies that are on it in the photos.
I'm not concerned. In person I'm sure it will look fine. I still think it's better looking than the outgoing model. From the rear it reminds me of the last-gen Legacy, at least the rear deck does. The front and profile look like a toned-down current Legacy, which is good.
Bob
Happily, it is not a hack job like the Outback appearance from 2009 to 2010. But, it also is not a genesis; it is more a refresh than anything. The concept for the 2010 Legacy was not a stark departure from the production model (at least not on the outside). The Impreza concept, on the other hand, bears very little resemblance to the production model, so that has created a level of disappointment. It's not the car that caused this - it is my expectation.
• The camera lens used in the spy shot was a 500 mm telephoto lens.* That's a very powerful lens, and really compresses the image making the car look squat, fat and short.
• It was a base model with steel wheels.
• It was black car on a miserable rainy and depressing day when those shots were taken.
They really couldn't have picked a worse day, situation, or a duller model to shoot if they tried. So yeah, the car comes off looking pretty bad.
* = data from image says focal length 500 , shutter speed 1/600 canon 50D
Bob
Hello all.....
Say all you want about the new Impreza, but Subaru now has pretty much unified the line with a common grill and design elements (wheel arches. )
A new brand identity - something they started in '05 with the Tribeca. We all know how that turned out.
Charlie
The hood also looks like it's partially open. There is a noticeable gap there, which spoils the front end.
The tucked in mirrors also make it appear more narrow than it is.
Hope we see better pics soon. In fact if Subaru is paying attention, now would be a good time...
Bob
Hope we get it here.
FYI: Subaru already sells an Impreza XV in other markets. It's sort of a "butched up" Outback Sport.
http://www.subaru-global.com/11impreza_xv20r_5d.html
Bob