Subaru Crew - Future Models II

rochcom

I agree that the cladding does look ugly on three of the colors, but look at the the web site:

http://www.subarubaja.com/index.html

Select "Get Baja Details"

The select "Prodcut Features"

Click on the silver box. You will see an almost monotone version that looks much better.

bluesubie

Biggest surprise to me is the engine. I thought for sure there would be an H6 option. Maybe SOA is just testing the waters. We've still got a while for the production date.

-Dennis

subearu

ditto on the surprise of the H4 offering on the Baja. maybe the H6 will be optional by production time.

glad to see the mid gate made it.

I too will lower my expectations for the '03 Legacy debut at Chicago. Probably nothing more than trim and facelift and freshening. no blitzen

-Brian

c_hunter

Well, this may be due to the fact that I'm a gen-X'er, but I think the Baja is cool. Based on my experience with the Outback, this vehicle will be fine with the H4/5-spd. Those of you that are commenting about the towing and lack of H6, bear in mind that this is NOT a truck. As someone mentioned, it is an El Camino version of the Outback that pushes the styling envelope.

While I am not going to line up to buy a Baja, I still think it's a cool vehicle. We should give it a chance -- I mean, nobody has even seen one in person or driven one yet!!

Craig

rsholland

sort of made it. It's not the mid-gate we saw on the concept ST-X. It's more of just a large pass-through. The rear window remains in place. So forget about putting large items through it.

Craig: Yeah, it's cool, but it could have been sooo much more...

Bob

paisan

What's so special about that? I thought they just did a face-lift on the front end.

-mike

rsholland

the '03 Expedition and Navigator both get IRS, a new frame, and a host of interior and under the skin improvements.

Bob

rsholland

I feel a bit better. I finally, FINALLY(!) got Flash to work, and I was able to visit the Baja site.

Aside from my concern about a lack of anything new (better!), from a technological standpoint, it looks pretty neat.

Still can't believe they aren't going to offer it with the H-6.

Bob

paisan

IRS. Cross that one off the towing/off-roading list then! I guess they have the Excursion for that though.

-mike

cb70

I was hoping that it would get a switchback similar to the Avalanche or the STX, instead Subaru gives us something near useless. H4, what will that tow? Long overhang in the rear looks dorky, overdone cladding (one of the few things that held true from the STX unfortunately) and stupid silver 'Sports bars' on the bed rails. Looks like with those dumb bars might even keep owners from being able to put on a bedcap or topper. Very disappointing.

bblacha

Those silver bars between the bed and the cab seem to be structural reinforcement bars. This vehicle is based on a unibody car, and with no D-pillars and with C-pillars far forward, the structure might be too weak to resist bending at the bed/cab juncture.

I read an article somewhere (C&D?) that the Avalanche has those "flying buttresses" for the same reason, as it is wagon-based (Suburban.) That one does have a frame though.

I'm not sure. But it makes sense to me. At least it's sleek and metallic, and not just more ugly fat plastic a la Avalanche. That's one design element of the Baja I actually like, and I'm sure bed cap manufacturers will find a way around it.

--Bart

bblacha

One last rant on the Baja design from me, promise. At a time when even Pontiac is becoming sleek and plastic-free (Vibe, Solstice,) Subaru got swept by the wave of grotesque plastic cladding that culminated in, as Lutz said, the "angry kitchen applicances" of recent GM trucks. It was a brief and quickly abandoned trend. The Aztec got decladded in a hurry. Let's hope Subaru realizes that before the new models (Baja and especially the others) hit production.

--Bart

odd1

....we can take an Outback to a chop shop and get a Baja. All that hype and attempt at secrecy for nothing.

I agreed that this doesn't bode well for the '03 Forester that I'm waiting for. Maybe, I can get a deal on a left over '02 when they come out.

paisan

Oh well, like I said... welcome to the age of GM...

-mike

rsholland

I'm sure the new Expedition will out-tow your Trooper any day of the week. Why do you *automatically* assume it will be bad?

Bob

paisan

Are always better for handling towing loads. That is a fact pretty well known in the towing community. I'm sure it will out-tow the trooper but that is more due to the fact that it's larger heavier and with a v8 or v10 engine. If you compare it to an equivilent F150 with solid rear axle the F150 will be a better tow vehicle given other factors are equal. Even if the F150 has the same tow rating, it will be stabler than the IRS for towing.

-mike

rsholland

the tow ratings yet, but I'm sure it will be more than able to tow good size trailers.

BTW, it doesn't have a V-10. Never did.

Still, all things considered, it's a better vehicle than the old Expedition. The 3rd row rear seats now fold flat, like the Explorer's do. In addition, the third row seating now has a 1/3 - 2/3 split. Considering its "mission," I'm sure most customers will be much happier with the '03 model.

Bob

bluesubie

I haven't seen one in person (I can't even see subarubaja.com!) and looks aren't that big of a deal to me. Function is the most important thing in my book, and the Baja's function would probably suit my needs just fine (not that I'm getting one in the fall).

When I first saw the redesigned Outback Sport at the NY Auto Show, I thought it was ugly. I hated the hood scoop and the awful psychedlic interior. I eventually fell in love with it's function though. How many cars out there come with AWD, can haul over 60 cu. ft. of cargo, can handle some light off-roading and cost under 20K? Similar situation with the Baja.

As for towing, I don't think the H6 would make that much difference. Subaru never said they're building a ladder framed vehicle, they're just chopping the OB.

I do light off-roading in the Pine Barrens of NJ and love to surf and fish. The Baja would be perfect for driving in the deep sand at Island Beach State Park in NJ. I've driven my OBS there and have never wished for a lo-range. Only a couple of inches of more clearance. My wife doesn't want to get her leather-clad OB Ltd. seats sandy. :-)

What else out there will have the Baja's ground clearance, utility, AWD, and gas mileage?

-Dennis

paisan

<- just hates ford! Never liked em, never will.

There is only one component that I like(d) in fords and I think they stopped using it. They apparently used a borg-warner TOD-like Transfer case in the last year of the last generation explorer for it's 4wd system.

-mike

paisan

Dennis you'd be better off with your OBS than than the Baja for off-roading. Nothing about it is any different than a regular OB, except that it's roof is chopped in the back... It isn't bad, but it's isn't ground breaking at all IMHO.

-mike

rsholland

I don't think anybody's complaining about the car, per say. It's more a matter that many of us were expecting or hoping for more. The fact that the H-6 is not available, even as an option, caught us totally by surprise. It was almost like a sucker punch. Nobody was expecting that. And, that's a real disappointment.

Bob

fernieguy

There are alot of negative posts regarding this vehicle, more so than most other cars out there.

Positive
Impressive list of standard options
Silver colour looks very nice
Bed ex tender looks good

Failings
No Dual Range tranny (BIG mistake)
No H-6 option (ouch)
That smooth finish in the box looks pretty slippery
Pass through rear gate is a poor attempt at a mid gate to say the least, I think its pretty hokey.

My conclusion, I'm keeping my 98 forester S since this vehicle will do next to nothing better than it, plus I have a better power to weight ratio than this thing will have.

Thats what I think

Stephen

rsholland

over on the I-Club just posted a picture of the ST-X concept. I noticed that the production Baja has a larger rear door than the ST-X. It appears to be the size of the Outback's rear door.

The good news about that is the rear passenger room is probably at least equal to that of the Outback. That wasn't the case with the ST-X. So that's good.

The bad news about that, is that the increased passenger space came at the expense of a smaller bed.

BTW, most of the comments over at the I-Club are pretty negative. Again, mainly do to the lack of a more powerful engine choice.

Bob

bluesubie

doesn't concern me that much. I would just stick to the sand and trails, instead of things like that huge berm at Hidden Lakes.

http://www.isuzu-suvs.com/subaru/pinebarrens.html

rsholland

that they (Subaru) kept about 90% of the ST-X. Well, that may be true, but the 10% they got rid of is what we're objecting to. I wished that had selected a "different" 10% of items to remove...

Bob

bluesubie

That's no surprise. If the STi comes here and has 258 h.p., they'll be freaking out. :-)

I have a feeling they'll add more power in the Baja one way or another though.

-Dennis

miksmi

paisan> jetski on the back makes it squat pretty badly in the back! That is horrible!

mike, I saw it too but hoped I was seeing things. Not a good photo to extol towing.

Everyone missed the most exciting feature -- the stylized alloy fuel door.. ;-p

..Mike

rsholland

I'm guessing, since it is "contented" much like the Outback Limited (moonroof and leather), that it will be priced in that neighborhood. Perhaps(?) a bit less.

Bob

lark6

Just catching up on press and posts and I think Bart and Bob covered most of what I would have said. The R&D money apparently went into developing the midgate and body tooling; since the drivetrain is a parts bin exercise I'm guessing the rest of the money went into market research to determine who would buy the vehicle. That lack of a beefier drivetrain to back up the looks is the Baja's big disappointment. I'm a bit surprised at the reaction to its looks, really; was everyone expecting it to look radically different from the ST-X concept?

The bed extender reminds me of the one in the Nissan Frontier crew cab, a vehicle I shopped and dismissed en route to the Forester. I fear that many consumers will look at the Baja as another "me-too" vehicle and, given its similarities to the Avalanche, will perceive (rightly or wrongly) the Baja as evidence of GM's growing influence on Subaru's product line.

Ed

rsholland

I think it looks "slightly" better than the ST-X.

Funny that you mention the bed extender. When the ST-X was introduced two years ago, I distinctly remember Subaru (with the "real" Switchback) saying that a bed extender was a bad idea, because it put more weight aft the rear axle, thus upsetting the weight distribution. And now look&#151;it's an option!

I agree with you, it's the same generic-looking bed extender found on other pickups. Nothing unique. Nothing special. It's almost as if Pep Boys was there supplier.

Bob

cb70

I was interested in cross-shopping it against the Frontier also but now I wish I wouldn't have gotten my hopes up. I was looking for a vehicle to camp out of but the pass-thru (sorry that is not a switchback imho) is hokey. I guess SOA listened to some of the possible buyers but in the end they didn't give us what we wanted. So now I guess I'm back to looking at the Nissan again. I just wish that the Frontier had a few more ponies under the hood. Either way the Baja would be barely capable of pulling a pop-up trailer through the mountains anyway. Ugghh.

rsholland

from day one of its production announcement, that the Baja needs to offer more in terms of capability than an Outback or Forester.

It needs more power, more towing capability, more off-road capability. All this could have been done without turning it into a traditional truck. The Baja, as it stands, just doesn't deliver on any of those issues.

Anybody remember the funny TV hamburger commercials from a few years ago, which asked: "Where's the beef?" That pretty much sums it up for me.

Bob

paisan

In fact I think that an outback might be more useful other than for high items you can actually load stuff into the passenger section easily on an outback, doesn't look that way on the Baja. I really hate that the back sags with a measly jetski on it!

-mike

rsholland

There's much more rear overhang, which could account for that sag. The photo I saw of it at the auto show had several bikes in the bed. That also looked like it was sagging.

Bob

goldencouple1

I think this all this negativity about the Baja is a case of getting one's panties all in a wad. It is what it is -- an Outback with a pickup bed. Which is what it was intended to be. It will not be all things to all people. I think it is great! If it had existed a couple of years ago, I'd have one now. The opportunity to put bikes in the back fully assembled -- Great! To stuff lots of stuff in the back that won't fit in a station wagon -- Great! The body cladding -- Great! My Mazda pickup had ugly little dings from pebbles and sand and stuff right where the Baja's cladding is. If you want to tow a big trailer, for God's sake, get a truck. If you want a Frontier, with it's poor handling and high roll-over quotient, for God's sake, get one! The Baja looks to be a great run-about with some pickup capability -- just what I wanted instead of my Mazda B4000. The Baja will handle better than a truck and will be safer on the road and go most places most people will want to take it. If you need a Jeep to go where you want to go, get a Jeep -- and pay the price of a less than reliable vehicle that handles badly. And as far as all the out-of-the-parts-bin stuff on the Baja: that is reliability at work: it is available, it's tested, it works and Subaru knows it works. That is the trend of the future: all-new means quirks and mistakes and recalls. And it is cheaper for Subaru and for the buyer.

Look at the Baja and see what it is, not what it is not. If you want a Suburban, go get one. If you want a Subaru (a reliable, all-wheel drive that handles very well, and is distinctive and well-designed), you have the Baja as an option: a fun run-about, a sports vehicle that will do some things that the other Subaru's can't and everything that all the other Subarus can do. Subaru has been the leader in this segment and will continue to be. You can get other manufacture's vehicles to fill certain functions better, but Subaru fills all the functions reasonably well. Yes, if you try to do everything, you will not fulfill every function well -- but you still can do everything pretty well.

VIVA LA BAJA!

beachfish

Oooookay. This forum (in southern speak that'd be all y'all) had me thinking I should have waited instead of buying the '02 Forester. Nope. Not a chance. Love it.

My old '86 part-time 4wd GL wagon was much more user friendly, on the beach and off, than the OutBrat...oops, sorry, Baja appears to be. And where in the world do you lock up large goods in the Baja without a cap on the bed? I'm not leaving the $200 and $300 rods and reels out in the open.

The GL had a good approach angle, steel front skid plate, armored exhaust pipe, dual-range transmission(which was NEVER needed), manually adjustable rear shocks and it would float, too

It occurs to me that my first reaction to the Baja sounds a little harsh.

Maybe so, but after 14 years with the GL and 4 months with the '02 Forester-S-Premium-Leather-whatever-it's-really-called, I see Subaru getting away from FUNCTION and spending too much time messing with the tacky stuff like cladding and foglights.

Yo, Subaru. Remember your roots. The skinny 4wd wagon with the boxer 4 that you built for the Japanese forestry service. Form follows function.

Here's hoping they sell a bunch of Bajas (not to me) and learn to give the rest of us what we need.

John

lark6

IIRC the base Frontier has 170hp and the supercharged version has 210. Non-H6 Outbacks, Foresters and the new Baja have 165, so I can't imagine 170 is really enough to pull the Frontier around. The H6 Outbacks with 212hp have more than the s/c Frontier (and the idea of a Forester w/210hp is droolworthy), but either Frontier has a far higher towing capacity than any Subaru.

What are your intentions for "camping out"? To use the vehicle to tow and haul, or to have the option of sleeping inside the vehicle (hence your interest in the Baja's pass-thru)? If the latter then you may be able to sleep inside the Outback. With the rear seats folded and headrests removed, the front seats pushed all the way forward, completely reclined and headrests removed, the Forester provides a nearly flat surface that I can sleep on - but then again I'm only 5' 7" ;-) .

Ed

edit: beachfish - your post got in before mine. Your logic sounds very similar to the process I went through, at least when it came to deciding on the Forester. I'm becoming more certain by the day that I made the best choice given my current needs.

fernieguy

The people complaining don't want to re-invent the Baja, its a very good attempt but the STX promised alot more than what is being delivered.

We wanted
Dual Range (subaru uses dual range trannies in the Aussie sub's so why can't they use it here). The Subaru Brat even had a dual range in it.

H-6 Subaru already has an H-6 and it is build at the Indianna plant, so why not use it.

As for the Switch back, I'll give you that one, its new and untested, plus I don't really need it.

Stephen

cb70

Yeah we've toyed with the idea of spending a night or two inside a Forester and wanted to see what the Outbrat would bring. Thought it would be so cool to have the option of putting a mini topper on the back and having the midgate open up so we could sleep on nights between our home and our destination (Iowa is a long ways from anywhere!) I also wanted to have enough torque to pull our family popup camper. As it is, I think I will go towards the Frontier with the new long box.

I just thought it would be cool to have a car like vehicle with AWD that we would be able to camp in and also be able to load a tall item that wouldn't be able to fit in a wagon into the bed of the Outbrat. The STX had a lot more going for it than the Baja in my opinion.

lark6

cb70: Then I understand your point. Wanting or needing that towing capacity rules out the current Subaru line altogether (even if Subaru wises up and makes the H6 available in the Baja).

When I began shopping in summer-fall '99 I started with a mid-range Chevy Sliverado 4x4, standard cab, short bed, then migrated to the Frontier and the Xterra, then to the usual Audi/Volvo/Subaru AWD wagon comparo. I don't tow anything but occasionally carry a sea kayak up top; I do haul a wide range of things from home improvement materials to antique furniture to antique car parts. I never test drove either Nissan after the salesman told me that I was too old (36 at the time) to be considering either and tried to steer me into a Pathfinder. I later drove a friend's Xterra and can say that again, for my current needs, I made the right choice with the Forester.

Good luck with the Frontier should you end up with one. I'll be checking for your comments.

Ed

fernieguy

I too had an 87 GL wagon with part time 4wd and a dual range tranny. It was a very good car to me, but I had to sell her before the salt ate it. I didn't know they would float...thats a story you should post. I switched to the Forester as well, mines a 98. and I love it. I sure hope Subaru looks in the parts bin and starts to pull out the good functional stuff that they have build their reputation on, and not their young and hip image.

tincup47

The vast majority of small ute customers want AWD that works without any input. Heck, most full size sport ute owners with AWD or permanent 4WD have never used their low range. All content addition is looked at with cost/benefit in mind. These costs include what the importer (SOA in this case) has to carry in parts stocks, and additional service training for new components. With the size of Subaru, and given the lack of demand by the average customer, I'm not surprised at all by the lack of dual range.
I find the vehicle a nice addition to Subaru's lineup, although I think the cladding is a bit overboard (Did they ask for Pontiacs design input?).

paisan

It would be useful, but I'd think higher towing capacity should be on their list before the dual range. Imagine this vehicle filled with camping gear in the back, 4 or 5 guys, and a 2000lb boat trailer. How on earth will they get to the camping spot loaded up like that it wouldn't make it out of the driveway, let alone up the boat ramp!

-mike

rsholland

true, but the dual-range tranny is one of the features that separate Subaru from the others out there. Even thought I'm disappointed by the lack of the low range, I'm not totally surprised by it. I'm much more disappointed by the lack of the H-6, or some sort of performance engine.

Bob

rsholland

it sounds like they should offer the self-leveling rear suspension, even though I know you don't care for that set up.

Bob

paisan

Yeah I don't care for it, but I care even less for a tail-sagging vehicle! The 4-runner and Explorers of the late 90s/00s always suffered from tail-sag even w/o having a trailer on it, that always rubbed me wrong. After putting in the Old Man Emu springs from Australia in my Trooper which are progressive rate I put on a 5500lb trailer and it is still near level, and having a level load when trailering adds to safety.

-mike

tincup47

None of the Subaru's sold in the US presently have dual range, so they aren't a hallmark of the brand. I agree that the H-6 should be standard, but they may have capacity issues. I feel they need the H-6 in the GT Legacies more than the Baja, and that may be in Subaru's plans.

rsholland

Mike: I agree. I've got that problem with my Explorer when I load it up.

Chuck: I also agree. However, the competition for AWDs is heating up very quickly over here. The dual-range would give them an additional edge, as well something more to talk about.

Bob

rsholland

had the H-6 and Class 2 towing, you would hear very few complaints from me. I can live with the styling, and the lack of low range.

Bob

paisan

Put me on the same page as bob. Class 2 towing and H6 and I'd be satisfied. Looks don't do anything for me, function over form for me.

-mike