actually you won't get the least bit of grief from me on that, since I'm the one who has been giving you hell all along about the 'must have a 7 seater' mantra. 2 kids! I was an only child but grew up with many friends in a 4 person family and they got along fine in sedans... even a pinto!
We really do not need a 7 seater. A wide platform that sat 5 people very comfortably would be fine.
Having said that the only 2nd row that comes to mind that meets that requirement is the Expedition's or Sienna's (3 individual seats and wide enough to fit them all).
Now that I have some experience with my 2005 Forester after coming from a 99 Chrysler T&C, I find the car generally enjoyable, but a bit more room would definitely be appreciated, especially in the rear seat legroom department and luggage area with the rear seats up.
A taller, boxier body a la the Forester style for the Legacy/Outback chassis would be a good interim step. And, if the comparative weights of the Impreza wagon/Forester are any indication, Subaru should be able to keep the weight gain down to around 200 lbs, which would give a vehicle that is much lighter than the Toyota Highlander built on the Camry chassis/drivetrain.
I would prefer to see the Subarus get just a bit wider before they get any longer, however. And a regular fuel version of the six cylinder engine with more torque than the four would be more useful to someone like me than the added cost and complexity (AND premium fuel requirements) of any turbo engine, especially with a five-speed auto.
And I heartily second all previous proposals for a telescoping steering wheel, along with any for a really useable arm rest!
The X3's wheelbase is longer than 110"! That's about the size we expect for the Tribeca.
Remember, BMWs all have long wheelbases, because they have to accomodate their (long) inline engines. I was thinking more in terms of length, width & height; not wheelbase.
I have a new 04 legacy wagon and have yet to find a comfortable seating position. The seat is not soft enough for me, and is just not great. I think the cab could be a bit wider, and create a wider seat and more legroom. Also, the wheel could tilt and telescope. When the seat is back in its rearmost position my arms fatigue quickly. This seems like an obvious and much documented problem. I would pay a grand premium for nice seats and better steering wheel ergonomics cause these are impossible to ignore on a daily basis. Otherwise, my car is lterally flawless. Sad to see these issues carry over to 05. Anyone listening?>> I don't want to buy a volvo but I will just for the seats. I mean VW can do it!!! -just ranting
I didn't mean to counter your suggestion, Bob, just pointing out that even small SUVs tend to have longer wheelbases than what Subaru uses.
Subaru is one of the last Asian marks to keep their US models the same size as their Japanese models. Accord, Camry, and Galant are all different here than they are in Japan, but Legacy is not.
Any how, competitors keep growing, so if Subaru keeps them small they'll eventually be competing with new models being introduce beneath its current competitors.
I'm talking about Forester vs. Santa Fe becoming Forester vs. Tucson.
As Subaru moves upmarket I think it will need to offer an automatic with more than 5 gears, at least in their top models, if for no other reason other than 'brag'n rights.'
More and more vehicles that Subaru will be going against will be offering 6-speed autos, and MB even has a 7-speed auto which they are spreading around.
How many gears does an AT need until it becomes a CVT? ;-)
I'd have been happy if they'd offered 5-speeds across the lineup this year. Of course I'll have to weigh that against the aforementioned "facelift" to see whether I should've waited another year.
Ed I agree, but in the premium market, that's the cost of entry if you want to be a player. You've got to match or better the competition, as you would in any market slot.
in regards to the CRV, it's playing catch-up, at least with the tranny. It won't be for another 10 months or so before the 5EAT makes it into the Forester—if in fact that even happens for '06...
Given the VDC is integrated into the VTD AWD, couldn't Subaru at least come up with a seperate ESC system for manual cars? It may not work anywhere as well but it would be useful. If VW can ofer it as an option for several hundred only it can't be that big a deal.
Like Jeep, Subaru offers several 4WD/AWD combos. Frankly, I think they need to simplify their AWD offerings (Continuous, Active, VDC, VTD, DCCD) to maybe just one or two.
I think switchable, on/off (VDC) & VTD should be on all Subarus (including those with manual trannys), with a front/rear power bias of 35/65 (or close to that). As to the Sti's DCCD, I'm not sure if it's really needed? The sense I get is most STi owners just leave it in the Auto mode.
Streamlining this should save money for Subaru, and the customers should benefit too.
the vast majority of the STi owner feedback in the motorsports forum on nabisco says that they leave DCCD in auto and do nothing else. the other modes' 50/50 bias are suited to rally. it seems to me you could get a lot of value out of simply doing a 35/65 split with no DCCD needed, since tarmac is all most sane people will ever do. ...so that's my suggestion for subaru.
amatuer rally is heinously expensive. they get beat up 10x worse than dirtbikes and have similar maintenance requirements and cost 10x as much. it's a sport for the wealthy, or soon to be poor!
I have to agree with Bob, give us just one basic system, VTD being the best candidate, and then make VDC a stand-alone option.
VDC will be more sought after by families shopping for safety than by enthusiasts that go to the track, which is why I think it should be sold as a stand-alone feature, not coupled to performance or luxury models.
"If you don't hit the track then you shouldn't own the STi, period."
Don't you think that's a bit extreme? I certainly don't agree with that statement.
Bob- Oh come on, you know better than to take the bait. That's a classic confrontational Mike statement. It may be true but ignores the reality of why people buy cars. Just like saying that 95% of trucks and SUVs on the road today don't belong there :-)
My point being that the STi is the premium/topoftheline/whatever you want to call it and should have all the bells and whistles/experimental stuff. Hence why I said it should retain the DCCD along with the top of the line Legacy having this as well.
Don't get mike started on his "everyone should be driving a full-size van with AWD" kick...
I've given up that fight! I'll soon be joining the masses of SUV owners who never take em off-road (cause they can't) when I buy a Denali XL, no way that thing will see more than a beach!
Tis true Brian. It will actually be my "least" used vehicle. Mostly it will sit with the trailer attached awaiting the next trip to the track or event. It will likely see about 10-12K miles a year which is a "lite" amount of travel for my vehicles.
Since this is the forum for suggestions to Subaru, I suggest that Subaru fix the marketing disaster that it has created with its maintenance coupons for the 2005 Outback and Legacy. I just mailed the coupon I had to someone who could use it. From the messages I received, it appears that the coupons have been made available to customers in a biased and unfair way.
What Subaru should have done as a promotion is to tell dealers and customers that everyone who purchases or leases an Outback or Legacy during some time period would be entitled to the free maintenance for the first three years. Instead, it chose to distribute the coupons in a way that has nothing to do with the purchase or lease of a new vehicle and to let dealers mislead customers on what they had to do to get a coupon. To me this is equivalent to Toyota's initial response to the engine sludge problem until the public relations backlash became so bad that it had to change its response.
I think less of Subaru because of the poor way it has treated its customers on this promotion, and I know others who feel the same. There is still time to step up to the plate and provide the benefit to everyone who meets the conditions for the coupon.
how were the coupons distributed? purely from the discussions here, it appeared to me that they were going to existing owners-- perhaps subscribers to Drive?
it was also a 'test' really. IIRC, it was sent to a small sample of existing owners. Most owners are subscribed to Drive too.
They had no idea of the pending response they'd get. I'm sure they've learned from their mistake.
I do know that the members here that didn't need them (me included, I got 3 coupons) kindly offered the coupons to those in need. How is that not fair? Those that had 'em and didn't need 'em could have simply thrown them away. Instead, we helped others out!
Giving your coupons to others has nothing to do with being fair. What about all of those other people who met the requirements for the free maintenance but never received a coupon?
I got a coupon, and I'm not an existing owner. Many people who got coupons gave them to others who had already purchased vehicles, so those coupons served no promotional purpose. I received 11 requests for my coupon from people who said they already owned or ordered a new Subaru. Some said their dealers told them that they didn't qualify for the free maintenance because they didn't finance the purchase through the dealer or because they leased rather than purchased their Subarus. So the dealers are compounding the mistake.
When other car makers began to offer free maintenance, they offered it to every new owner. If Subaru wanted to limit the offer, it could have done it in several ways that would have been fairer to all customers and that would have had more promotional effect.
I agree that Subaru could have managed the coupon marketing campaign a lot better. If they wanted a true picture of how much free maintenance plays in the purchasing decision, they should have either offered it to everyone or limited to the coupon's use to the original recipient (like they did with the test drive vouchers). Also, it appears they didn't take into account the capacity of the Internet to share info and serve as a coupon swapping forum :-)
Now that's a neat idea. Also note that the rear doors are sliding like those on vans. Not surprising really, as this concept is built on a MB euro-van, the Vito.
Look, we can at least agree that the promotion 'test' was not well planned and not 'fair'. My point was at least those that had the coupons and didn't need 'em allowed others (even if it was only to folks on Edmunds) to use them.
Interesting slide-out bed idea. I believe earlier I suggested a slide-out ramp for loading. Maybe it could serve both purposes somehow?
Let's leave the weight, cost, and complesity puzzle up to Subaru. ;-)
Our community was great about sharing coupons (I gave mine to Ken), but I agree that Subaru could have handled it better. Offer it for a period of time, not to "select customers".
By the way, they sent the coupon to my little brother, who is 19 and has a brand-new 2004 Legacy. Why would be even be interested at all? It didn't make sense...
IMHO, preventing scratches and dings *is* a valuable function. Like Saturn's plastic panels but without the wide panel gaps, LOL.
Any how, so long as they're not painted, I see them as offering protection from dings and scratches, so I'll still want them, at least on this type of vehicle.
Many SUVs; such as the Explorers, Grand Cherokee, etc.; have a rear lift-up glass that's incorporated into the rear liftgate.
I'd like to see a similar feature, but on the lower part of the liftgate, that folds out and down like a traditional pickup-like tailgate. This would be very useful for those times you have to carry long items, and don't want to drive with the liftgate open.
This could be especially useful on the new Tribeca if you need to carry sheets of 4x8 plywood, that's assuming there will be at least 48" between the rear wheelwells like the Honda Pilot. According to the '05 Pilot brochure, it can handle 4x6 sheets of plywood. Okay, try and find a 4x6 sheet of plywood!!! If it (or the Tribeca) had a drop-down tailgate like pass-through like what I'm suggesting, it would be no problem.
An additional benefit is that it could be useful at tailgate parties.
From what I've seen so far, the new Acura RL appears to have the best design and dash-integration of any NAV unit to date. Here's why:
• The NAV unit is mounted high on the center stack of the dash. This is much better than those mounted lower on the center stack.
• Because of this high location, it's easier to see than those mounted lower, as it's more in line with the driver's forward vision.
• Because of this high location, it's safer to use in that the driver has a better chance of much more peripheral vision to see the road ahead while glancing at the NAV unit.
• The NAV screen is very large, 8" across I think. Again, a larger screen is much easier to read than smaller units.
• The clock and outside temp gauge are incorporated into a separate small "eyebrow-like" window just above the NAV unit. Again, this is much easier to read than if that info were incorporated into the NAV screen (which is often done).
The NAV units currently used on overseas Legacys and Outbacks are not as good as this Acura unit. Here's why:
• These units are mounted slightly lower than the RL NAV unit, and don't benefit as much in terms of visibility and safety that I mentioned above.
• It appears to have a smaller screen than the RL, again hurting visibility somewhat.
• The clock and outside temp gauge are incorporated into the lower part of the screen, again not as good as the RL unit for the reasons I mentioned above.
I'm hoping that when US-spec Legacy/Outback NAV units arrive, the NAV unit and the upper dash shell will be redesigned more along the lines of that found in the new RL. It's not a major overhaul that I'm suggesting, but more of a v2.0 kind of upgrade.
As a related side note: The NAV units on the new MBs I drove Friday at the MB "Love Tour" are very poor in comparison to the RL NAV unit. The screens are much smaller, and located very low on the center stack. This means the driver to take their eyes completely off the road, and because of the smaller screen, more time is needed to "study" the screen—VERY BAD!
Many household consumers are against the lower drop gate idea. The old Suburbans were like that IIRC, and then when Subs went from work vehicles to Big SUV, they dropped it. If you are in your nice clothes, and have to drop the gate to put in or take out heavy object, you inevitably wind up smearing road grime on the thighs/waist of your nice clothes, because the dropped gate puts your stuff 20" farther away. The best solution IMHO is the lift-glass and lower barn door design. I can't remember what its name is (?Dutch doors?), but it was speced on the GMC Safari van, and later on the Excursion. We had one in a rental for 2 weeks, and found it very functional and convenient. It works for families and still allows cargo versatility. I was always surprised that Chevy didn't adopt it as an option on the Suburban/Yukon XL.
I was thinking the same thing... first Suburban I had was a 'tailgate' version .. I hated lifting the groceries over it ... the other 2 had the double doors ...
I'm not saying get rid of the liftgate. I too think that would be a mistake.
What I'm suggesting is to offer a drop-down tailgate that's incorporated into the the liftgate, much like the lift-up glass that's found on many SUV liftgates.
Comments
'05 Tacoma has an optional 115v/400w grounded outlet in the bed for power tools! Just what I've been asking for in the next Baja.
http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/2005/toyota/tacoma/firstdrive/pag- - e1.html
Bob
Just another benchmark for the Subaru Tribeca.
Don't disappoint me, Subaru, or I'll be sentenced to 7 years in a minivan. ;-)
-juice
~c
How 'bout Subaru just build the B9SC and I'll replace the Miata instead. Sandy is holding up quite well.
Actually, when I hinted to the wifey that we could replace the convertible first, she kinda liked the idea.
-juice
~c
We really do not need a 7 seater. A wide platform that sat 5 people very comfortably would be fine.
Having said that the only 2nd row that comes to mind that meets that requirement is the Expedition's or Sienna's (3 individual seats and wide enough to fit them all).
-juice
A taller, boxier body a la the Forester style for the Legacy/Outback chassis would be a good interim step. And, if the comparative weights of the Impreza wagon/Forester are any indication, Subaru should be able to keep the weight gain down to around 200 lbs, which would give a vehicle that is much lighter than the Toyota Highlander built on the Camry chassis/drivetrain.
I would prefer to see the Subarus get just a bit wider before they get any longer, however. And a regular fuel version of the six cylinder engine with more torque than the four would be more useful to someone like me than the added cost and complexity (AND premium fuel requirements) of any turbo engine, especially with a five-speed auto.
And I heartily second all previous proposals for a telescoping steering wheel, along with any for a really useable arm rest!
Bob
But the 2003 redesign kept the same wheelbase. I think a lot of people felt like it should have grown, even if slightly.
I honestly think 2" would make a world of difference, and quiet the critics of that smallish back seat.
The X3's wheelbase is longer than 110"! That's about the size we expect for the Tribeca.
-juice
Remember, BMWs all have long wheelbases, because they have to accomodate their (long) inline engines. I was thinking more in terms of length, width & height; not wheelbase.
Bob
-just ranting
Subaru is one of the last Asian marks to keep their US models the same size as their Japanese models. Accord, Camry, and Galant are all different here than they are in Japan, but Legacy is not.
Any how, competitors keep growing, so if Subaru keeps them small they'll eventually be competing with new models being introduce beneath its current competitors.
I'm talking about Forester vs. Santa Fe becoming Forester vs. Tucson.
-juice
Bob
More and more vehicles that Subaru will be going against will be offering 6-speed autos, and MB even has a 7-speed auto which they are spreading around.
Bob
I'd have been happy if they'd offered 5-speeds across the lineup this year. Of course I'll have to weigh that against the aforementioned "facelift" to see whether I should've waited another year.
Ed
Bob
Not that the turbo needs it, but still.
-juice
I'd much rather see them lead rather than follow.
bob
-juice
I think switchable, on/off (VDC) & VTD should be on all Subarus (including those with manual trannys), with a front/rear power bias of 35/65 (or close to that). As to the Sti's DCCD, I'm not sure if it's really needed? The sense I get is most STi owners just leave it in the Auto mode.
Streamlining this should save money for Subaru, and the customers should benefit too.
Bob
I agree they should have 2 systems for the "normal" cars 1 for ATs and one for MTs + the DCCD for the top-of-the line cars.
-mike
amatuer rally is heinously expensive. they get beat up 10x worse than dirtbikes and have similar maintenance requirements and cost 10x as much. it's a sport for the wealthy, or soon to be poor!
~
Don't you think that's a bit extreme? I certainly don't agree with that statement.
Bob
VDC will be more sought after by families shopping for safety than by enthusiasts that go to the track, which is why I think it should be sold as a stand-alone feature, not coupled to performance or luxury models.
-juice
Don't you think that's a bit extreme? I certainly don't agree with that statement.
Bob- Oh come on, you know better than to take the bait. That's a classic confrontational Mike statement. It may be true but ignores the reality of why people buy cars. Just like saying that 95% of trucks and SUVs on the road today don't belong there :-)
-Frank
Bob
LOL
-juice
My point being that the STi is the premium/topoftheline/whatever you want to call it and should have all the bells and whistles/experimental stuff. Hence why I said it should retain the DCCD along with the top of the line Legacy having this as well.
-mike
I've given up that fight!
-mike
-Brian
-mike
It'll be very interesting to see what Subaru AWD technology eventually makes its way into GM products, and expecially if they are scaled up.
Versatrak is very poor, IMO, GM ought to use Subaru technology to replace it.
-juice
No Diesels in the vans either
-mike
Rendezvous would be a good candidate, especially now that it gets the much better 3.6l engine from the CTS. Give it VTD and it's suddenly competitive.
-juice
What Subaru should have done as a promotion is to tell dealers and customers that everyone who purchases or leases an Outback or Legacy during some time period would be entitled to the free maintenance for the first three years. Instead, it chose to distribute the coupons in a way that has nothing to do with the purchase or lease of a new vehicle and to let dealers mislead customers on what they had to do to get a coupon. To me this is equivalent to Toyota's initial response to the engine sludge problem until the public relations backlash became so bad that it had to change its response.
I think less of Subaru because of the poor way it has treated its customers on this promotion, and I know others who feel the same. There is still time to step up to the plate and provide the benefit to everyone who meets the conditions for the coupon.
~Colin
They had no idea of the pending response they'd get. I'm sure they've learned from their mistake.
I do know that the members here that didn't need them (me included, I got 3 coupons) kindly offered the coupons to those in need. How is that not fair? Those that had 'em and didn't need 'em could have simply thrown them away. Instead, we helped others out!
-Brian
I got a coupon, and I'm not an existing owner. Many people who got coupons gave them to others who had already purchased vehicles, so those coupons served no promotional purpose. I received 11 requests for my coupon from people who said they already owned or ordered a new Subaru. Some said their dealers told them that they didn't qualify for the free maintenance because they didn't finance the purchase through the dealer or because they leased rather than purchased their Subarus. So the dealers are compounding the mistake.
When other car makers began to offer free maintenance, they offered it to every new owner. If Subaru wanted to limit the offer, it could have done it in several ways that would have been fairer to all customers and that would have had more promotional effect.
-Frank
Now that's a neat idea. Also note that the rear doors are sliding like those on vans. Not surprising really, as this concept is built on a MB euro-van, the Vito.
Bob
-Brian
Let's leave the weight, cost, and complesity puzzle up to Subaru. ;-)
Our community was great about sharing coupons (I gave mine to Ken), but I agree that Subaru could have handled it better. Offer it for a period of time, not to "select customers".
By the way, they sent the coupon to my little brother, who is 19 and has a brand-new 2004 Legacy. Why would be even be interested at all? It didn't make sense...
-juice
IMHO, preventing scratches and dings *is* a valuable function. Like Saturn's plastic panels but without the wide panel gaps, LOL.
Any how, so long as they're not painted, I see them as offering protection from dings and scratches, so I'll still want them, at least on this type of vehicle.
-juice
I'd like to see a similar feature, but on the lower part of the liftgate, that folds out and down like a traditional pickup-like tailgate. This would be very useful for those times you have to carry long items, and don't want to drive with the liftgate open.
This could be especially useful on the new Tribeca if you need to carry sheets of 4x8 plywood, that's assuming there will be at least 48" between the rear wheelwells like the Honda Pilot. According to the '05 Pilot brochure, it can handle 4x6 sheets of plywood. Okay, try and find a 4x6 sheet of plywood!!! If it (or the Tribeca) had a drop-down tailgate like pass-through like what I'm suggesting, it would be no problem.
An additional benefit is that it could be useful at tailgate parties.
Bob
From what I've seen so far, the new Acura RL appears to have the best design and dash-integration of any NAV unit to date. Here's why:
• The NAV unit is mounted high on the center stack of the dash. This is much better than those mounted lower on the center stack.
• Because of this high location, it's easier to see than those mounted lower, as it's more in line with the driver's forward vision.
• Because of this high location, it's safer to use in that the driver has a better chance of much more peripheral vision to see the road ahead while glancing at the NAV unit.
• The NAV screen is very large, 8" across I think. Again, a larger screen is much easier to read than smaller units.
• The clock and outside temp gauge are incorporated into a separate small "eyebrow-like" window just above the NAV unit. Again, this is much easier to read than if that info were incorporated into the NAV screen (which is often done).
The NAV units currently used on overseas Legacys and Outbacks are not as good as this Acura unit. Here's why:
• These units are mounted slightly lower than the RL NAV unit, and don't benefit as much in terms of visibility and safety that I mentioned above.
• It appears to have a smaller screen than the RL, again hurting visibility somewhat.
• The clock and outside temp gauge are incorporated into the lower part of the screen, again not as good as the RL unit for the reasons I mentioned above.
I'm hoping that when US-spec Legacy/Outback NAV units arrive, the NAV unit and the upper dash shell will be redesigned more along the lines of that found in the new RL. It's not a major overhaul that I'm suggesting, but more of a v2.0 kind of upgrade.
As a related side note: The NAV units on the new MBs I drove Friday at the MB "Love Tour" are very poor in comparison to the RL NAV unit. The screens are much smaller, and located very low on the center stack. This means the driver to take their eyes completely off the road, and because of the smaller screen, more time is needed to "study" the screen—VERY BAD!
Bob
Nicholas
What I'm suggesting is to offer a drop-down tailgate that's incorporated into the the liftgate, much like the lift-up glass that's found on many SUV liftgates.
Bob