Brief history of postwar Studebaker wagons, with links to pix:
An experimental woody wagon was built in 1947, but abandoned. It was recovered from the woods behind the South Bend proving ground and is being restored.
No production wagons built until 1953 - the Conestoga, a 2-door wagon available as a flathead 6 (Champion) or V8 (Commander). See one at:
From 1956-58 the styling changed in an effort to ape GM. It failed miserably. In 1957-58 the range included super-stripped-down "Scotsman" models with one sun visor and cardboard interior door panels. '57-58 Packard wagons were lightly, and poorly, facelifted Studes. See them at:
The Wagonaire came about for the 1963 model year, and was carried on through the bitter end in 1966. A great photo of a '63 featuring the sliding rear roof can be seen at:
Great links! This was a real trip down memory lane for me. Thanks a bunch! I've bookmarked the main Studebaker site.
My favorite years are the 1950 bullet-nosed, aircraft-inspired models, and the georgous 1953 coupes designed by Raymond Loewy. Talk about timeless design; they look as good today as they did in 1953. The '53 models, especially the coupes, were way ahead of their time. Another favorite of mine is the '62(?) Loewy-designed Avanti, with the round headlights. I never cared for the square headlight versions, and I hated it when they changed the body proportions of the Avanti a few years later. Every change that deviated from the Loewy original, made it worse, IMO. BTW, some guy down the street from me has an Avanti replica.
I wonder how many people know Studebaker started way back in the mid 1800s building Conestoga wagons. Many folks who crossed the western plains in the mid-1800s were riding in Studebaker "prairie schooners."
Yes - the name "Conestoga" was meant to honor the old prarie schooners. Studebaker was the only manufacturer to make the successful transition from horse-drawn to horseless carriages. I'm very surprised, Bob (and everyone), that with all the "retro" designs coming out no one has tried to use '53 Loewy coupe lines in their cars. Guess it's because the parent company no longer exists.
As you can see some of the Studes are of questionable styling appeal - in particular the '56-58 models - and are an acquired taste. However, they do have their fanatics, much as Subarus do.
Gotta run - have a plane to catch. Glad you liked them.
My first car memories are of a Studebaker, a 1950 bullet-nose model my folks were driving when I was a tad. It was green and had some kind of cloth interior. I'm not sure but I think it was a 2-door; I was a gearhead even then and if it had suicide doors I would have remembered.
My uncle ran a Studebaker dealership right up until they stopped building them. I remember him driving a bright red Lark with TWO Paxton superchargers hanging off its chrome-encrusted V-8. Front disk brakes too; wow, what a car that was.
Then there was the 60's Lark that a guy a few grades ahead of me in high school owned. He broke letters off the chrome "Studebaker" badges until they just said, "Stud". He was a real clown :-)
It's no wonder Studebakers continue to have a following; Studebakers were adventurous vehicles with lots of character. Thanks for the trip down memory lane!
One of the hallmarks/low points of 1950's automobile design was that it changed every year. It was change for the sake of change, not for the betterment of the product. It was planned obsolescence at its worst.
Virtually every car brand suffered from this. Whenever a "new" body style was introduced, the first year of that model run was almost always the best looking. The all-new '54 Caddy/Buick/ Olds models were much better looking than '55 or '56 models. The then all-new '57 Ford was much better looking than the '58 model. Name any brand from that era, and the same was true—including Studebaker.
Bob, the E, S, CL, CLK-class cars all have (as an option) what are called multi-contour orthopedic seats, and yes, you can adjust the side bolsters and a couple of other regions to fit you better. This comes in handy when you want a bit more support when driving long distances or when driving spiritedly on twisty roads. You can specify on the order sheet which front seat (left, right, or both) you want to have fitted with this option. People with back problems have found it soothing. In the S and CL-class, there is even a massage feature! Cost is CDN$610 per seat. However, because of the already excellent bolstering with all MB vehicles, not many people order this option.
The S-class also has optional climate comfort rear seats (with the little fans that draw away moisture from your back). The coolest thing about these powered rear seats, at least to me, is that when the rear head restraints are lowered, when you buckle up, the head restraint that is directly behind your head will automatically raise.
The MBzs that have the auto up windows/auto close moonroof have pinch sensors. Those without pinch sensors have only the auto down feature.
As for the first aid kit, it has been standard equipment on all MBzs for over 40 years. The Euros and Asians even get a large and very nice reflective warning triangle that fits to the underside of the trunk lid. I've been kicking myself for not taking the one in our family's E-class when we moved from Singapore to Canada many years ago.
Drew Host Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
some of those MB-type "hi-tech items" on premium Subarus than OnStar.
I guess I wouldn't be so against OnStar if you didn't have to renew your contract every year. From what I understand, most people who have OnStar, don't renew. If that's indeed the case, it seems like a big waste of money to me.
I hope to buy one of these hybrids in a year or so. If the STX is more than $26K we'll probably go the avalanche route because of the bang for the buck. I just can't see spending 30-32K on a vehicle that won't be able to tow much. Also they HAVE to put in the midgate PLEASE!
Interesting that he called the SG/X a sport utility and left off the wagon part.
I think the ST-X will be priced like the Outback line, more or less. So a 4 banger will cost less than that ($25k) but the H6 more ($28k).
I agree that they should keep trying to work out the Midgate. It's the Avalanche's best feature. GM remembers how their minivans didn't do well because Chrysler beat them to key features (dual sliding doors).
The PowerTrip was a lot of fun. They did a demo of the ESP which was cool. A CL500 ran through a slalom at 50mph with it off, and spun out. Then it did the same slalom again, at 60mph, with ESP on, and it made it through effortlessly.
Very impressive because some people complain that it reduces performance, but in this case it allowed for a better performance.
Though you can get a VDC for a lot less! ;-)
My favorite features that I'd like to see Subaru adopt? I loved the hatchback's dual moonroof. There are two, and the front one goes up and back, over the back one. Genius. Better than the Outback's because the front opens all the way.
Juice- I agree the C-230 hatchback's moonroof is a much better solution to the Outback's dual moonroof arrangement.
Avalanche- I saw one at a Chevy dealer yesterday. It's huge! Way too big for me. I really think Toyota has hit upon a happy medium in terms of size as to their Tundra. It's a bit smaller than their competition, which is good. On the other hand, I think their Sequoia is huge. It's way too tall, which is also my main complaint with the Avalanche.
It'll be both, most likely. They've got to amortize those costs.
I guess it doesn't matter that much to me - since I'd get the true Subie version anyway. Saturn and Saab are both getting SUVs soon, so I'm not sure how it would fit in either's line up.
I'm pretty sure they're north-south. Saabs have a long reputation for mondo torque steer and hard suspensions, especially on their sporty models. I'm not near the fan of them I used to be.
I'm not much of a fan of Saabs either. I had a then-new '86 '9000, and it was among most unreliable cars I've ever owned. On the other hand, my brother-in-law has had several Saabs, and is quite a fan of the brand.
The new Saabs just don't do a thing for me. I can't see where GM has helped them. I hope (pray) they do better with Subaru.
when it was running right (which was rare), was a great car. I agree the dash layout and interior were great. Mine suffered from classic v1.0 gremlins. I unloaded it at 30,000 miles.
Bob, why do you want all this gadgetry in your cars? It's just more crappola to break buddy. It would be nice to have them, but then you want them for a cheap price. I guess that's why you buy Fords though. They build great gadgetry, but then they break quickly, can't get quality and gadgetry for cheap. Have to choose one or the other and sometimes neither!
Bob must be a gadget-freak just like me! I like gadgets, especially all of the fun switches in the CL and S-class :-)
juice, how did you like the SLK's 6 speed in comparison to your Forester's 5 speed? When I first tried 6-speed (with the C240), I had a bit of problems finding the gears in the gate, but that soon passed.
Drew Host Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Oddly, when I bought my first Saab in 1978, I bought it from a combination Saab-Subaru dealer. They then dropped Subaru because the distributor forced them to take models that they didn't want and couldn't deliver those that they did.
I have since owned 3 more Saabs, but dumped the last to buy a Forester S. The new Saab 9-3 is really a re-badged new 900 and is actually SMALLER than the old 900 and with many downgraded features, such as a cargo floor that is 6 inches shorter and is no longer flat. The Forester has a flat cargo floor that is much easier to load bulky objects into.
Saab's reliability has taken a big fall since GM came into the picture. However, the 9-5 was unusually reliable for a new model. Then it went downhill. It also costs too much, and with a low pressure turbo producing 170 hp (now 185 hp but still the same torque at 194 ft. lbs.) for a 3500 pound vehicle in the luxury class, it was underpowered. A V-6 was available but only with auto. Now you can get a high pressure turbo with lots of power and torque. But it is not a good value. And heated seats are now not only optional, but you have to take them for both front and rear as a package. There are many other GM style marketing limitations also.
I have found that a few other recent Subaru purchasers are also former Saab owners who became fed up with either Saab or their dealers. Saab dumped many of their dealers a few years ago. Some states have NONE or one. Subaru has three times as many dealers.
I don't like gadgets for gadget's sake. If, however, a gadget improves the quality of life, I'm all for it.
As you know, I'm very interested in making cars better. All my comments about future product posted here and elsewhere, are geared to that eventuality. Always have been. Always will be. Sometimes gadgets are part of that picture.
I don't agree with you about more gadgets mean more problems. Look at the average 2001 car and compare it with a similar vehicle produced 30 years ago. Today's products are full of "gadgets" as compared with those built 30 years ago. And... today's vehicles are far better than those built 30 years ago.
can sometimes cause problems, especially when they have not gone through proper product testing and/or haven't been properly integrated into the overall package. Having said that, I must agree with Bob. Overall vehicle quality has improved drastically over the last 30-40 years. We make fun of the "poor reliability" of certain brands (GM, Ford, certain Korean makes, Jeep for example) but the worst of them would have been considered extremely reliable by the standards of the late '60s, early '70s. We now expect our cars to be flawless at purchase and problem free for at least the first 4-5 years. In the "good old days", people who could afford to traded in their cars after 2-3 years. In part this was a status thing, but they also expected problems to occur with their "aging vehicles". If you had suggested a 3 year bumper-to-bumper or 5-10 year powertrain warranty back then you would have been thought mad by most manufacturers.
This conversations sounds familiar ;-) I think we had it not long ago, discussing something about how Saab used to own the market that Subaru owns now; then for whatever reason Saab went up-scale, up-price, and abandoned the market, and now Subaru owns it. Saabs meanwhile are wedged in there with BMW, Volvo, Lexus, Acura.
Good luck to them I guess. But I do miss my old Saabs, quirky 95s, 96s and 97s with 2-stroke motors and freewheeling and mechanically raised pop-up headlights and windows that pivoted up and down rather than sliding in tracks. Those were fun, quirky cars; unreliable, expensive as all get-out to fix, but fun. The newer stuff (anything after the 99 actually) hasn't ever appealed to me the way those did.
Good points. I remember as a kid, the old "Monte Carlo" models with the 850cc 2-stroke free-wheeling engines, and wooden steering wheels (hope my memory is correct there). I was very impressed back then.
I'm another Saab-to-Subaru convert. I bought a '95 900 new, thinking the new model bugs would be worked out after the '94 redesign (NOT!). I liked the car, but it did have reliability issues. And, Saabs not being too popular in Nebraska, quality service was hard to find. I got some grief from some people about "downgrading" from a Saab to a Subaru. But I've had my Forester almost one year, and it's only been to the dealer once. And that was because the alignment was incorrect at delivery. I'm sure the Saab had been back to the dealer at least six times before its first birthday. I do miss having a few of the Saab gadgets, but the reliability has made it all worthwhile.
Drew: no problem with the Benz shifter. The gates weren't as hard to find as I thought they might be. The throws were shorter than a stock Forester, about equal to my STi shift lever, and not as short as my Miata's.
The clutch surprised me too. Very light. For some reason I expected a very mechanical feeling, stiff clutch. Not so. It actually felt a lot like our Subie.
I loved the feel of the wood shift knob and the steering wheel. The interior definitely felt "styled", perhaps in reaction to the TT's gorgeous interior.
The Power Trip actually taught me a bit about the value of the VDC model. I mean, you're getting a lot of that stuff for a whole lot less. Yes, it seems like a lot for a Subie, but it IS a lot of high-tech wizadry with some luxury sprinkled in.
Glad to hear that you liked the 6 speed manual. The older MB manually trannies were a bit clunky and the clutch was heavy (German feel, I guess). I think they improved on this for a more sporty feel.
I like how they wrapped the top half wooden part of the steering wheel with leather. This is so that the sunlight doesn't reflect off the wood and glare into your eyes.
Indeed, with the VDC you get many of the same features for a lot less.
Drew Host Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Yes, the 190E's had them, as well as the 300SL up to 1996, I think.
BTW, I guess you didn't get to play around with the recirculate feature on the S and CL. If your windows are open, pressing and holding down the recirculate climate control button will close them. Press and hold the button again to reverse the procedure. Another neat feature! Also, the S and CL's vanity mirrors have zit zoom. The 2nd level (behind) magnifies! ;-). A possible Subaru addition I wonder?
Just not at the expense of quality. I've had gadgetry cause too many problems in the past and would rather a solid car w/o gadgetry than an iffy car w/gadgetry. Now the MBs have both which is cool, but I don't think they can cram all that into the price of a subie (or else MB would have done that!) Just my 2 cents. Back to the boat for me.
True, but MB wouldn't have done it since it would've lowered the price of their vehicles too much and then that would degrade the brand name. I guess starting from the top down is a bit easier from the bottom up. Some insiders are already grumbling a little that the new C230K coupe's base price of about US$26K is too low.
Gadgets are nice, but making the car usable is better. I was very happy to see that the new WRX has the radio ABOVE the climate controls. People tend to adjust the entertainment equipment more often than the climate control. I liked the way the old Saab 900 had the radio at the very top of the dash.
BUT, the new WRX still has the fog light, security, and cruise arming switches on the lower left side of the dash where they are blocked by the steering wheel from the view of some drivers and hard to reach for most.
I do like some gadgets that make the vehicle more drivable. For example, I wish that the more expensive WRX would have the cold weather package and fully adjustable seats as supplied on the Forester. An outside temperature gauge with ice warning feature would also be useful in Northern climates. For pure gadgetry, how about a boost gauge? The optional auxillary gauge package could have instruments that MATCH the main ones in design, instead of the cheap looking ones that are grossly overpriced, and that some dealers inflate to even higher prices.
Some people seem to feel if the gadget is "comfort/convenience-oriented," rather than "performance-oriented," it has less value. At least that seems to be the case for people who value performance over comfort/convenience. To each his own. I myself like a good balance between comfort/convenience and performance, so therefore there are both performance and comfort/convenience gadgets that I like.
But, you have to realize that it costs money for every gadget and every change in the machinery. Would you all be against paying 10K more for your cars and getting all the gadgetry? Here is an example:
Sticker price on my 1988 Subaru XT6 was $20K.
Has lots of great things in it: Outside Temp guage, trip computer, full guages on the dash, nicely placed switches for lights, wipers etc.
Now...
What is $20K in today's money? I'm not sure what '88 $s are in today's economy, but I'd guess well over $30K. If you are willing to pay for it, no problem. But don't forget every single subaru buyer would need to be willing to pay the extra $ in order for it to work, since they can't afford to have 100s of options.
Drew - not enough time to play with the gadgets, unfortunately.
At the show they actually were bragging that the Coupe (Hatchback) started under $25k. But that dual moonroof is a must have and will probably bring the price up to $28k or so with freight. I bet most of the ones on the lot will be around that price.
M-B should hope people look at it as a bargain Benz, rather than an expensive hatchback. I think they will, but my money's on a WRX for a fun small car. Of course I'm not as image-conscious as some. I told Bob that it was a perfect first car for the son or daughter of very rich parents (given all the safety equipment and the prestigious label).
I too agree with Jeff - a boost guage should be standard on that type of vehicle. And yes they should match.
Ash: I think it's a 2.0l turbo, unless he brought the engine over from the US. Still, those have 215hp IIRC, definitely a sweet ride.
The expensive (MB-like) gadgets I mentioned are, IMO, intended for Subaru's premium models. So, yes, if I were in the market for a $30K+ vehicle, I'd be willing to pay for those items.
Yeah, but let's face it, the VDC had a lukewarm reception, while the WRX has become a cult car. So the low price/high performance equation worked for them far better than the luxury/gadgetry at a price.
My point being a VDC with HIDs and climate control may increase sales by 10%, but offering the H6 on base Outbacks with a manual transmission would likely increase sales by 30%.
I say Outback rather than Legacy because the Outback is and will remain the sales champ. A turbo Legacy would be sweet, but that's a different audience, another niche entirely.
Comments
An experimental woody wagon was built in 1947, but abandoned. It was recovered from the woods behind the South Bend proving ground and is being restored.
No production wagons built until 1953 - the Conestoga, a 2-door wagon available as a flathead 6 (Champion) or V8 (Commander). See one at:
http://130.11.52.153:8088/Photos/Archive/54SW/54sw.jpg
There was a slight restyle in 1955. See a junked one at:
http://home1.swipnet.se/~w-85663/project/weed55.htm
From 1956-58 the styling changed in an effort to ape GM. It failed miserably. In 1957-58 the range included super-stripped-down "Scotsman" models with one sun visor and cardboard interior door panels. '57-58 Packard wagons were lightly, and poorly, facelifted Studes. See them at:
http://130.11.52.153:8088/Photos/Archive/56PV/pv1.jpg - '56
http://www.stude.com/Parkview.htm - '57
http://home8.swipnet.se/~w-85663/project/1958_2.htm - '58
1959 saw the intro of the Lark, with flathead 6 or V8. The first Lark wagons were 2-doors. See one at:
http://home8.swipnet.se/~w-85663/project/1959_2.htm
2-door and 4-door Lark wagons were available in 1960-61. Check them out at:
http://home8.swipnet.se/~w-85663/project/1960.htm - '60
http://home8.swipnet.se/~w-85663/project/1961_2.htm - '61
1962 was a one-year-only model with unique styling. See it at:
http://home8.swipnet.se/~w-85663/project/1962_2.htm
The Wagonaire came about for the 1963 model year, and was carried on through the bitter end in 1966. A great photo of a '63 featuring the sliding rear roof can be seen at:
http://www.carlover.com/bigcar.asp?carpicid=10640-1.jpg
The '64 Wagonaire was made into a popular Matchbox toy. I had one. Here's a mint one with its hunter and hounds attachments:
http://www.angelfire.com/va/billjack/images/swag.jpg
For good factory and current pix of Studes generally go to
http://home8.swipnet.se/~w-85663/main.htm
Okay, Stude rant off. Back to Subarus. Thanks for humoring me.
Ed
My favorite years are the 1950 bullet-nosed, aircraft-inspired models, and the georgous 1953 coupes designed by Raymond Loewy. Talk about timeless design; they look as good today as they did in 1953. The '53 models, especially the coupes, were way ahead of their time. Another favorite of mine is the '62(?) Loewy-designed Avanti, with the round headlights. I never cared for the square headlight versions, and I hated it when they changed the body proportions of the Avanti a few years later. Every change that deviated from the Loewy original, made it worse, IMO. BTW, some guy down the street from me has an Avanti replica.
I wonder how many people know Studebaker started way back in the mid 1800s building Conestoga wagons. Many folks who crossed the western plains in the mid-1800s were riding in Studebaker "prairie schooners."
Again, thanks.
Bob
As you can see some of the Studes are of questionable styling appeal - in particular the '56-58 models - and are an acquired taste. However, they do have their fanatics, much as Subarus do.
Gotta run - have a plane to catch. Glad you liked them.
Ed
My uncle ran a Studebaker dealership right up until they stopped building them. I remember him driving a bright red Lark with TWO Paxton superchargers hanging off its chrome-encrusted V-8. Front disk brakes too; wow, what a car that was.
Then there was the 60's Lark that a guy a few grades ahead of me in high school owned. He broke letters off the chrome "Studebaker" badges until they just said, "Stud". He was a real clown :-)
It's no wonder Studebakers continue to have a following; Studebakers were adventurous vehicles with lots of character. Thanks for the trip down memory lane!
Cheers,
-wdb
Virtually every car brand suffered from this. Whenever a "new" body style was introduced, the first year of that model run was almost always the best looking. The all-new '54 Caddy/Buick/ Olds models were much better looking than '55 or '56 models. The then all-new '57 Ford was much better looking than the '58 model. Name any brand from that era, and the same was true—including Studebaker.
Bob
The S-class also has optional climate comfort rear seats (with the little fans that draw away moisture from your back). The coolest thing about these powered rear seats, at least to me, is that when the rear head restraints are lowered, when you buckle up, the head restraint that is directly behind your head will automatically raise.
The MBzs that have the auto up windows/auto close moonroof have pinch sensors. Those without pinch sensors have only the auto down feature.
As for the first aid kit, it has been standard equipment on all MBzs for over 40 years. The Euros and Asians even get a large and very nice reflective warning triangle that fits to the underside of the trunk lid. I've been kicking myself for not taking the one in our family's E-class when we moved from Singapore to Canada many years ago.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
I guess I wouldn't be so against OnStar if you didn't have to renew your contract every year. From what I understand, most people who have OnStar, don't renew. If that's indeed the case, it seems like a big waste of money to me.
Bob
http://www.autonews.com/html/main/stories0702/qa702.htm
Bob
Bob
I think the ST-X will be priced like the Outback line, more or less. So a 4 banger will cost less than that ($25k) but the H6 more ($28k).
I agree that they should keep trying to work out the Midgate. It's the Avalanche's best feature. GM remembers how their minivans didn't do well because Chrysler beat them to key features (dual sliding doors).
The PowerTrip was a lot of fun. They did a demo of the ESP which was cool. A CL500 ran through a slalom at 50mph with it off, and spun out. Then it did the same slalom again, at 60mph, with ESP on, and it made it through effortlessly.
Very impressive because some people complain that it reduces performance, but in this case it allowed for a better performance.
Though you can get a VDC for a lot less! ;-)
My favorite features that I'd like to see Subaru adopt? I loved the hatchback's dual moonroof. There are two, and the front one goes up and back, over the back one. Genius. Better than the Outback's because the front opens all the way.
-juice
Avalanche- I saw one at a Chevy dealer yesterday. It's huge! Way too big for me. I really think Toyota has hit upon a happy medium in terms of size as to their Tundra. It's a bit smaller than their competition, which is good. On the other hand, I think their Sequoia is huge. It's way too tall, which is also my main complaint with the Avalanche.
Bob
Bob
What's wrong with naming it a Subaru?
-Brian
I guess it doesn't matter that much to me - since I'd get the true Subie version anyway. Saturn and Saab are both getting SUVs soon, so I'm not sure how it would fit in either's line up.
-juice
Bob
Regards,
-wdb
-juice
The new Saabs just don't do a thing for me. I can't see where GM has helped them. I hope (pray) they do better with Subaru.
Bob
Thing is, GM didn't go far enough to distinguish them. They're too Opel-ish. A key hole in the center console isn't enough.
At least the 9-5 got good reviews, though I haven't driven one.
-juice
If you haven't sat in one you should.
-Colin
-juice
-Colin
Bob
-juice
-mike
juice, how did you like the SLK's 6 speed in comparison to your Forester's 5 speed? When I first tried 6-speed (with the C240), I had a bit of problems finding the gears in the gate, but that soon passed.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
I have since owned 3 more Saabs, but dumped the last to buy a Forester S. The new Saab 9-3 is really a re-badged new 900 and is actually SMALLER than the old 900 and with many downgraded features, such as a cargo floor that is 6 inches shorter and is no longer flat. The Forester has a flat cargo floor that is much easier to load bulky objects into.
Saab's reliability has taken a big fall since GM came into the picture. However, the 9-5 was unusually reliable for a new model. Then it went downhill. It also costs too much, and with a low pressure turbo producing 170 hp (now 185 hp but still the same torque at 194 ft. lbs.) for a 3500 pound vehicle in the luxury class, it was underpowered. A V-6 was available but only with auto. Now you can get a high pressure turbo with lots of power and torque. But it is not a good value. And heated seats are now not only optional, but you have to take them for both front and rear as a package. There are many other GM style marketing limitations also.
I have found that a few other recent Subaru purchasers are also former Saab owners who became fed up with either Saab or their dealers. Saab dumped many of their dealers a few years ago. Some states have NONE or one. Subaru has three times as many dealers.
As you know, I'm very interested in making cars better. All my comments about future product posted here and elsewhere, are geared to that eventuality. Always have been. Always will be. Sometimes gadgets are part of that picture.
I don't agree with you about more gadgets mean more problems. Look at the average 2001 car and compare it with a similar vehicle produced 30 years ago. Today's products are full of "gadgets" as compared with those built 30 years ago. And... today's vehicles are far better than those built 30 years ago.
Bob
Ross
Good luck to them I guess. But I do miss my old Saabs, quirky 95s, 96s and 97s with 2-stroke motors and freewheeling and mechanically raised pop-up headlights and windows that pivoted up and down rather than sliding in tracks. Those were fun, quirky cars; unreliable, expensive as all get-out to fix, but fun. The newer stuff (anything after the 99 actually) hasn't ever appealed to me the way those did.
My 2 cents,
-wdb
Bob
Faye
The clutch surprised me too. Very light. For some reason I expected a very mechanical feeling, stiff clutch. Not so. It actually felt a lot like our Subie.
I loved the feel of the wood shift knob and the steering wheel. The interior definitely felt "styled", perhaps in reaction to the TT's gorgeous interior.
The Power Trip actually taught me a bit about the value of the VDC model. I mean, you're getting a lot of that stuff for a whole lot less. Yes, it seems like a lot for a Subie, but it IS a lot of high-tech wizadry with some luxury sprinkled in.
-juice
I like how they wrapped the top half wooden part of the steering wheel with leather. This is so that the sunlight doesn't reflect off the wood and glare into your eyes.
Indeed, with the VDC you get many of the same features for a lot less.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
-juice
BTW, I guess you didn't get to play around with the recirculate feature on the S and CL. If your windows are open, pressing and holding down the recirculate climate control button will close them. Press and hold the button again to reverse the procedure. Another neat feature! Also, the S and CL's vanity mirrors have zit zoom. The 2nd level (behind) magnifies! ;-). A possible Subaru addition I wonder?
-mike
Topic: July 3rd: "Ford & Firestone - Major Malfunction... or Media Monster?"
BUT, the new WRX still has the fog light, security, and cruise arming switches on the lower left side of the dash where they are blocked by the steering wheel from the view of some drivers and hard to reach for most.
I do like some gadgets that make the vehicle more drivable. For example, I wish that the more expensive WRX would have the cold weather package and fully adjustable seats as supplied on the Forester. An outside temperature gauge with ice warning feature would also be useful in Northern climates. For pure gadgetry, how about a boost gauge? The optional auxillary gauge package could have instruments that MATCH the main ones in design, instead of the cheap looking ones that are grossly overpriced, and that some dealers inflate to even higher prices.
Some people seem to feel if the gadget is "comfort/convenience-oriented," rather than "performance-oriented," it has less value. At least that seems to be the case for people who value performance over comfort/convenience. To each his own. I myself like a good balance between comfort/convenience and performance, so therefore there are both performance and comfort/convenience gadgets that I like.
Bob
Sticker price on my 1988 Subaru XT6 was $20K.
Has lots of great things in it: Outside Temp guage, trip computer, full guages on the dash, nicely placed switches for lights, wipers etc.
Now...
What is $20K in today's money? I'm not sure what '88 $s are in today's economy, but I'd guess well over $30K. If you are willing to pay for it, no problem. But don't forget every single subaru buyer would need to be willing to pay the extra $ in order for it to work, since they can't afford to have 100s of options.
-mike
https://ssl.autocenter.net/webparts/acatalog/Online_Catalog_Utility___Convenience_625.html
I got to drive a 2.5 Turbo Forester over here in London, and d_mn that was one fast machine!
The clutch and stick are different too. The handling wasn't bad, but not as good as say an Impreza, but the engine is definitely sweeeeet.
-- ash
At the show they actually were bragging that the Coupe (Hatchback) started under $25k. But that dual moonroof is a must have and will probably bring the price up to $28k or so with freight. I bet most of the ones on the lot will be around that price.
M-B should hope people look at it as a bargain Benz, rather than an expensive hatchback. I think they will, but my money's on a WRX for a fun small car. Of course I'm not as image-conscious as some. I told Bob that it was a perfect first car for the son or daughter of very rich parents (given all the safety equipment and the prestigious label).
I too agree with Jeff - a boost guage should be standard on that type of vehicle. And yes they should match.
Ash: I think it's a 2.0l turbo, unless he brought the engine over from the US. Still, those have 215hp IIRC, definitely a sweet ride.
-juice
Bob
My point being a VDC with HIDs and climate control may increase sales by 10%, but offering the H6 on base Outbacks with a manual transmission would likely increase sales by 30%.
I say Outback rather than Legacy because the Outback is and will remain the sales champ. A turbo Legacy would be sweet, but that's a different audience, another niche entirely.
-juice