Bob- I must admit my first reaction was "that'll never happen" but since that's not exactly constructive, I gave it some thought and I'm having a hard time envisioning how it would work. Since the liftgate will still be hinged at the top, there'd have to be a 2nd set of hinges (or 3rd if you count the lift-up glass) which would have to be self-contained in the bottom of the liftgate yet still be able to support a very heavy load (like Juice and Paisan sitting side by side) :(o)
Since the liftgate will still be hinged at the top, there'd have to be a 2nd set of hinges (or 3rd if you count the lift-up glass)
I don't think I would include a lift-up window with this set up.
As to feasibility, with the extra hinges and potential added weight, you bring up a good point. I think it's possible, but not being an engineer, I can't say for sure. At any rate, maybe it'll stir up some other possible ideas.
That's one thing I miss from my 93 GMC Jimmy. It made it easy to grab my dogs leash through the window part before I lower the gate to let him jump out.
Will only ever be attractive to buyers looking for a true utility vehicle. Very negative vibe from female consumers with short arms. Have any of you used a vehicle with the Dutch doors? Lift glass for convenience of small objects(aka grabbing the leash)or stacking things to the ceiling with the danger of everything falling out like when you open a full rear lift door. Plus the bottom doors can be open to let long stuff hang out, without putting the trunk out of reach. Very nice compromise, and the only thing it gives up is the ability to extend the cargo support area.
Yup dutch doors like the safari work for me. Heck even a lift-glass with aliftgate works for me too, mostly so I can stick 2x4s out the back if necessary.
This probably applies to all manufacturers, not just subaru, but why aren't removable second row seats and a flat load floor available? The Element, Rav 4, and PT Cruiser have them, and it makes SUV's as truly versatile, if not more so, than minivans, which many people would not be caught decomposing in. A Tribeca or Pilot sized SUV with no back seats could hold almost every toy in my arsenal at the same time. I think manufacturers don't consider the needs of SINKS and DINKS in their strategies. Not everyone needs a third row of seats to waste valuable cargo space in a 4X4.
Where do you put the seats once you remove them, though? They take up space and that requires planning ahead.
If you're at Home Depot or Costco and want to buy something spontaneously, you can't - you'd have to go home, remove the seats, drive back, etc.
I prefer the simple fold-flat designs.
In general people are moving away from that removeable-seat strategy. Look at all the magic 3rd row seats, now a pre-requisite for a minivan. Even the 2nd rows are starting to disappear.
There are other compromises - the RAV4 has the spare tire outside, blocking the view. The Element has a donut, as does the PT Cruiser.
Also, removable seats requires frame to set on. That adds weight and raises the roof line. So, for those often times that you not require cargo space, you'll be driving a heavier car with higher CG.
They do come in handy. They are a great place to stow breakable items that you might not want to include with the bulks. I've stowed my GF there with the OB
Well, there were three of us [Mom, GF, and myself]. We were out window shopping and Mom came across a set of dining chairs (6) on sale that she couldn't pass up. The only way to fit all six chairs into the OB is laying the rear seat flat. Slide the front passenger seat forward and GF still gets to seat.
I've noticed here at Edmunds, and at nasioc, folks tend to use abrevations when referring to various models, such as F-XT for the Forester 2.5XT. Maybe Subaru should offically adopt this naming policy?
Juice- there's upscale and then there's so exotic you can't pronounce the names, let alone spell them! Even MB dumped the alphanumeric system for the Maybach. When you have a rich accent you need a name so you can say it in a snobby way to your other rich friends. You don't get the same effect with 'S600'. Try it. Pinch your nose and say it out loud (preferably when no one's around). It's not the same as "RRRRoollllsss RRRoyycccee CCoorrnniiicchhee" The same people say "Porsche" is a 2 syllable word. ;-)
Somehow, I don't think Subaru is quite there yet. ;-)
and satellite radio are teamed together as a package on some cars. I know Honda uses this ploy, and I'm sure there are others too. I hope and pray that Subaru does NOT bundle these two items together when NAV becomes available.
If Subaru wants to offer both these features, fine, but offer them as separate stand-alone options.
The new Tribeca is bound to generate spin-offs in the coming years. We've already mentioned a Tribeca-based Baja and larger sedan, but what about a full-fledged minivan? Something like the Odyessy, but with AWD? Seems like a natural to me...
I would definitely consider buying an AWD minivan over an SUV (having owned several of each). It's funny how the Odyssey turned into the Pilot, so why not turn the Tribeca into a minivan? It would need a big 6cyl engine to compete with the Odyssey-Quest-Sienna, with AWD being a big advantage. Although there is an AWD Sienna, I think it's severly FWD biased.
Much to my disappointment, it looks like the all-new and "larger" mid-sized Frontier, Tacoma and Dakota STILL won't offer 48+" between the rear wheelwells to lay plywood flat on the pickup bed floor. I was really surprised at the Dakota, as its SUV brethren, the Durango, can.
It will be interesting to see what Honda does with its upcoming SUT. Like the Durango, both the Pilot and MDX have slightly more than 48" across between the rear wheelwells. So the question is: will the Honda SUT have 48+" between the wheelwells? My guess is yes, but the problem with the Honda is it's short bed, and a lack of a 48+" wide midgate. Even with the tailgate down, a 4' x 8' sheet of plywood will extend probably a good 2' beyond the end of the tailgate; not a great solution.
I know there are those here who question a small or mid-size pickup's ability to handle sheets of plywood. I don't, and never have. I feel especially strong about this now having seen pictures of hurricane-ravaged Florida, with every house having full sheets of plywood protecting the windows.
I really think the first car-truckmaker that offers a mid-sized pickup, with a car-like driving experience, like the Baja, and still be 4' x 8'-friendly, will be a marketing success.
It's ironic that Subaru first targeted the beach crowd with the Baja. Yet many who live at the beach, or near it—and who are also in the sunbelt, a market Subaru desperately wants to make larger inroads in—could have really benefited from a larger (Tribeca-based) 4' x 8' capable Baja, if it were available.
the numbers are in and there were 316 new 9-2x owners in September, up from 226 in August.
the numbers seem to be getting closer to their target yearly rate of around 6000 units.
Interesting that Saab's projected (and actual) sales are less than 1/2 that of the Baja's actual sales. This suggests to me that Saab is making money on the lower volume 9-2x.
The obvious question that comes to mind is: Can/could Subaru make money on the Baja selling at 600 vehicles per month? Would the Baja have to be priced and contented like the 9-2x to do so? Many here have been saying that the Baja, as it now stands is too expensive. Perhaps for the vehicle now being sold, that's true. But if the next Baja, assuming it's built off the (more expensive) Tribeca platform, and is priced at ~ $30K—still selling at 600 or so per month, could it be a money-maker for Subaru? Think about it, most family/lifestyle pickups sold here are in the $30+K range.
VW's marketers are probably more in tune to the fact that surfing has a huge demographic. The current issue of Surfer has a feature about age and shows surfers from 12 to 83.
In NJ it's not usual to be surfing alongside doctors, lawyers, mayors, etc. :-)
I just found this link. The last paragraph is especially telling, in that it states that the market for fully loaded mid-sized crew-cab lifestyle/family trucks* is bigger than expected. I fully agree with that, judging by what I see on the roads today.
* = Author is speaking about the the mid-size Colorado specifically, but is also referring to this class of vehicle in general.
tom: talk like you have marbles in your mouth. That makes you sound sophisticated.
Subaru minivan would get my attention. Let's see the Tribeca first, though.
9-2x costs almost nothing because it's a clone. So the volumes required for profitability are much lower. It actually helps the WRX amortize costs, if you think about it.
Baja would be a new vehicle with plenty of new engineering, crash testing, and certification required. So it would need more volume to be profitable.
Any how, the Blackwood failed miserably yet Lincoln is giving a lux-pickup another shot.
Baja could go in two directions - simplify it, or move it up in size and price.
The first option could move it to the 2005 Outback platform, but delete things like leather and the moonroof. Keep it as close to the regular Outback as possible to keep production costs down, and price it low.
That's risky, though, and could hurt any effort to move upscale.
Putting it on the Tribeca platform is risky, too, though. And why spend money on a new Baja when a full-size sedan would likely do 10 times the volume?
The first option could move it to the 2005 Outback platform, but delete things like leather and the moonroof. Keep it as close to the regular Outback as possible to keep production costs down, and price it low.
That's risky, though, and could hurt any effort to move upscale.
That doesn't answer the essential problem of lack of capability. Small trucks are going the way of the dinosaur. It's even a bigger problem with smaller-still car based trucks like the Baja.
Putting it on the Tribeca platform is risky, too, though. And why spend money on a new Baja when a full-size sedan would likely do 10 times the volume?
This is far less risky IMO. This is where the profits are, in mid-sized (or larger) pickups. This would better fit into Subaru's upscale image too. The Lincoln Blackwood failed, but upscale Cadillac (and GMC) pickups are selling well. So the "concept" of a "premium pickup" can work—if the product is right.
It's not an either/or question in terms of sedan and pickup. They should do both. The question which comes first? I say the pickup.
the small trucks are getting bigger is because that's what "that" market wants. Nobody's buying small trucks.
Yeah, Subaru could make it work with the right product (and maybe even be profitable, with adjusted and more realistic expectations), but I think that's more of a risk than going with the flow of larger trucks.
I do think another Outback-based pickup, rather than a Tribeca-based pickup, will be counter-productive to their upscale image. If not counter-productive, certainly harder to deal with.
Not true...best seller is still the Ranger, the only truck that has remained small, ironically.
I'm sure there are more customers in the mid-size arena, but there will also be more competition.
Put it this way, if Subaru decides to keep the budget small, stay small. Take a page from Honda's book on the Element. Control costs and you might have a sleeper hit, priced right.
If they go after mid-sizers they'd better fund the effort properly and come up with some innovative ideas. If I were Subaru I think I'd wait and see how the Honda SUT does.
The truck segment is brutal. There is more owner loyalty, domestic bias, and of course Subaru has zero experience.
Meantime, competition in the market for full-size pickups has made bigger trucks more affordable. Partly as a result, some automakers believe sales of compact trucks will remain weak. Ford Motor Co., maker of the best-selling compact pickup, the Ford Ranger, recently shut down one of two U.S. plants that built the Ranger.
The Ranger is clearly on the down side of slope, and will continue to to see see fewer sales as time goes on.
Still, if full-size trucks drop in price, and Baja goes into the middle with all the former compacts, it'll be competing with almost everyone in terms of price, at least.
So like I said, it had better deliver, no excuses.
This is where Subaru has to find a niche, offer something unique. It absolutely has to innovate, more so than the SUT, for instance.
MMeehhbbeee wwhhaaaatt zzee Sssuubbaaarruuu forget it, I'll never be rich, I can't talk with these marbles in my mouth! ;-)
Maybe what Subaru needs is a ultra practical econobox like the Scion xB? Nissan is considering bringing over their Cube. Could they make an ultra cheap Baja? It just seems going upmarket in a very crowded segment with low volumes is a losing proposition for a small company like Subaru.
The Baja is not very popular up here, but maybe if they made it a lot less expensive like Juice was saying, it would be a hit. Give it an interior you can spray out with a hose, make the styling a little more conservative, and it would be a great alternative to a small pickup. But it's no match for the big boys, or even the larger compact pickups.
They need an all-new product. The current Baja just doesn't cut it. The question is, which way do they go? Larger or smaller? Bare-bones or upscale?
Juice is absolutely right in that whatever they do it has to be unique from what's out there. I will also add (and have been saying all along) that whatever they offer has to have features and utility that makes sense—and must have a "must-have" aspect to them. I really think Subaru needs to sell on "feature value" and not just price to be successful.
I think they need to decide who they are going to market to. They are certainly not going to sell work duty trucks, those guys will never buy a small Subaru over they're ford-gm-dodge home grown stuff. Those willing to buy foreign will get a toyota or nissan. They're already trying to move upmarket, but they're not going to steal a whole lot of BMW or MB buyers. Where does that leave?
There's a big gap beneath Subaru- less expensive cars and utility vehicles that younger buyers would want and could move up in the Subaru lineup. Offer value, utility, safety, and some fun. A much less expensive Baja could do that, the factory is already tooled up, it would be a lot less than developing a whole new car/truck, why not? I would love an inexpensive utility vehicle like that I could feel free to abuse.
Of course it's the opposite direction Subaru is trying to go. . .
Comments
-Frank
I don't think I would include a lift-up window with this set up.
As to feasibility, with the extra hinges and potential added weight, you bring up a good point. I think it's possible, but not being an engineer, I can't say for sure. At any rate, maybe it'll stir up some other possible ideas.
Bob
Alan
98 OBW Ltd
-mike
Have any of you used a vehicle with the Dutch doors? Lift glass for convenience of small objects(aka grabbing the leash)or stacking things to the ceiling with the danger of everything falling out like when you open a full rear lift door. Plus the bottom doors can be open to let long stuff hang out, without putting the trunk out of reach. Very nice compromise, and the only thing it gives up is the ability to extend the cargo support area.
-mike
If you're at Home Depot or Costco and want to buy something spontaneously, you can't - you'd have to go home, remove the seats, drive back, etc.
I prefer the simple fold-flat designs.
In general people are moving away from that removeable-seat strategy. Look at all the magic 3rd row seats, now a pre-requisite for a minivan. Even the 2nd rows are starting to disappear.
There are other compromises - the RAV4 has the spare tire outside, blocking the view. The Element has a donut, as does the PT Cruiser.
-juice
-Dave
I suspect Subaru's Tribeca will function like the MDX/Pilot, i.e. 2nd and 3rd rows that fold flat.
-juice
Mark
Get creative, Subaru!
-juice
Well, there were three of us [Mom, GF, and myself]. We were out window shopping and Mom came across a set of dining chairs (6) on sale that she couldn't pass up. The only way to fit all six chairs into the OB is laying the rear seat flat. Slide the front passenger seat forward and GF still gets to seat.
-Dave
:oO
-juice
The wheelbase is supposed to be a little longer, so it might have an inch more room here or there, but don't expect miracles.
-juice
juice now your talking my way. always thought they should drop cu ft as the measurement and go to the NJ bodies measurement standard.
Hmmm...is that flat or folded?
-juice
If they do, the (current) models could be named:
L-GT
L-i
O-3.0R
O-LL Bean
O-XT
O-i
F-XT
F-LL Bean
F-XS
F-X
I-Sti-WRX
I-WRX
I-RS
I-OS
Anyway, food for thought...
Bob
I didn't know that.
~c
Bob
Bob - most people say OB for Outback, OBLtd for the Limited package, etc.
I dunno about the whole alphanumeric game, I prefer Legend over RL and Integra over RSX.
-juice
Then look at full names- Avalon, Matrix, Corolla (part of a flower?), Accord, Malibu, Taurus, Phaeton, etc.
Some of these names are just lame (I wonder how long it takes to come up with a good name?)
Although maybe the alphanumeric names are upscale because the companies using them? Chicken and egg thing?
tom
Countache, Diablo, Murcielago.
I just think a name gives them more character.
Remember the Pontiac T1000, J2000, all that junk?
Having said that, Tribeca is lacking something.
I like Impreza, Forester, Legacy, and Outback. I thought Surveyor was a little better but still not as good as the others.
Alphanumeric is easier, at least.
-juice
Somehow, I don't think Subaru is quite there yet. ;-)
tom
;-)
-juice
Bob: You forgot the Limited trims (ie. LGTL).
juice: You say it like a native. The Japanese "L/R" is similar to the Latin rolled "R".
Ken
I'll remember that after I have made it to the billionaire's club! ;-)
tom
If Subaru wants to offer both these features, fine, but offer them as separate stand-alone options.
Bob
Bob
tom
Eric
It will be interesting to see what Honda does with its upcoming SUT. Like the Durango, both the Pilot and MDX have slightly more than 48" across between the rear wheelwells. So the question is: will the Honda SUT have 48+" between the wheelwells? My guess is yes, but the problem with the Honda is it's short bed, and a lack of a 48+" wide midgate. Even with the tailgate down, a 4' x 8' sheet of plywood will extend probably a good 2' beyond the end of the tailgate; not a great solution.
I know there are those here who question a small or mid-size pickup's ability to handle sheets of plywood. I don't, and never have. I feel especially strong about this now having seen pictures of hurricane-ravaged Florida, with every house having full sheets of plywood protecting the windows.
I really think the first car-truckmaker that offers a mid-sized pickup, with a car-like driving experience, like the Baja, and still be 4' x 8'-friendly, will be a marketing success.
It's ironic that Subaru first targeted the beach crowd with the Baja. Yet many who live at the beach, or near it—and who are also in the sunbelt, a market Subaru desperately wants to make larger inroads in—could have really benefited from a larger (Tribeca-based) 4' x 8' capable Baja, if it were available.
Are you listening Subaru? Hint... Hint...
Bob
Hey, how about a Tribeca with an off-road package?
-Dennis
Really Dennis? That's surprising, given that the Touareg is so much more expensive than the Baja.
BTW, I "second" the Tribeca off-road package idea.
Bob
the numbers are in and there were 316 new 9-2x owners in September, up from 226 in August.
the numbers seem to be getting closer to their target yearly rate of around 6000 units.
Interesting that Saab's projected (and actual) sales are less than 1/2 that of the Baja's actual sales. This suggests to me that Saab is making money on the lower volume 9-2x.
The obvious question that comes to mind is: Can/could Subaru make money on the Baja selling at 600 vehicles per month? Would the Baja have to be priced and contented like the 9-2x to do so? Many here have been saying that the Baja, as it now stands is too expensive. Perhaps for the vehicle now being sold, that's true. But if the next Baja, assuming it's built off the (more expensive) Tribeca platform, and is priced at ~ $30K—still selling at 600 or so per month, could it be a money-maker for Subaru? Think about it, most family/lifestyle pickups sold here are in the $30+K range.
Bob
In NJ it's not usual to be surfing alongside doctors, lawyers, mayors, etc. :-)
-Dennis
I just found this link. The last paragraph is especially telling, in that it states that the market for fully loaded mid-sized crew-cab lifestyle/family trucks* is bigger than expected. I fully agree with that, judging by what I see on the roads today.
* = Author is speaking about the the mid-size Colorado specifically, but is also referring to this class of vehicle in general.
Bob
Subaru minivan would get my attention. Let's see the Tribeca first, though.
9-2x costs almost nothing because it's a clone. So the volumes required for profitability are much lower. It actually helps the WRX amortize costs, if you think about it.
Baja would be a new vehicle with plenty of new engineering, crash testing, and certification required. So it would need more volume to be profitable.
Any how, the Blackwood failed miserably yet Lincoln is giving a lux-pickup another shot.
Baja could go in two directions - simplify it, or move it up in size and price.
The first option could move it to the 2005 Outback platform, but delete things like leather and the moonroof. Keep it as close to the regular Outback as possible to keep production costs down, and price it low.
That's risky, though, and could hurt any effort to move upscale.
Putting it on the Tribeca platform is risky, too, though. And why spend money on a new Baja when a full-size sedan would likely do 10 times the volume?
-juice
That's risky, though, and could hurt any effort to move upscale.
That doesn't answer the essential problem of lack of capability. Small trucks are going the way of the dinosaur. It's even a bigger problem with smaller-still car based trucks like the Baja.
Putting it on the Tribeca platform is risky, too, though. And why spend money on a new Baja when a full-size sedan would likely do 10 times the volume?
This is far less risky IMO. This is where the profits are, in mid-sized (or larger) pickups. This would better fit into Subaru's upscale image too. The Lincoln Blackwood failed, but upscale Cadillac (and GMC) pickups are selling well. So the "concept" of a "premium pickup" can work—if the product is right.
It's not an either/or question in terms of sedan and pickup. They should do both. The question which comes first? I say the pickup.
Bob
What I'm saying is that is not necessarily bad. They would just have to value price it, below the mid-size competition.
Subaru needs vehicles for current owners to step up to, Tribeca will make Outback/Forester owners happy, but what about Legacy owners?
There are far more of those than there are Baja and BRAT owners.
Baja could potentially give them more conquest sales, i.e. folks that previously bought other brands.
-juice
Yeah, Subaru could make it work with the right product (and maybe even be profitable, with adjusted and more realistic expectations), but I think that's more of a risk than going with the flow of larger trucks.
I do think another Outback-based pickup, rather than a Tribeca-based pickup, will be counter-productive to their upscale image. If not counter-productive, certainly harder to deal with.
Bob
I'm sure there are more customers in the mid-size arena, but there will also be more competition.
Put it this way, if Subaru decides to keep the budget small, stay small. Take a page from Honda's book on the Element. Control costs and you might have a sleeper hit, priced right.
If they go after mid-sizers they'd better fund the effort properly and come up with some innovative ideas. If I were Subaru I think I'd wait and see how the Honda SUT does.
The truck segment is brutal. There is more owner loyalty, domestic bias, and of course Subaru has zero experience.
-juice
The Ranger is clearly on the down side of slope, and will continue to to see see fewer sales as time goes on.
Bob
Still, if full-size trucks drop in price, and Baja goes into the middle with all the former compacts, it'll be competing with almost everyone in terms of price, at least.
So like I said, it had better deliver, no excuses.
This is where Subaru has to find a niche, offer something unique. It absolutely has to innovate, more so than the SUT, for instance.
-juice
Maybe what Subaru needs is a ultra practical econobox like the Scion xB? Nissan is considering bringing over their Cube. Could they make an ultra cheap Baja? It just seems going upmarket in a very crowded segment with low volumes is a losing proposition for a small company like Subaru.
The Baja is not very popular up here, but maybe if they made it a lot less expensive like Juice was saying, it would be a hit. Give it an interior you can spray out with a hose, make the styling a little more conservative, and it would be a great alternative to a small pickup. But it's no match for the big boys, or even the larger compact pickups.
tom
Juice is absolutely right in that whatever they do it has to be unique from what's out there. I will also add (and have been saying all along) that whatever they offer has to have features and utility that makes sense—and must have a "must-have" aspect to them. I really think Subaru needs to sell on "feature value" and not just price to be successful.
Bob
There's a big gap beneath Subaru- less expensive cars and utility vehicles that younger buyers would want and could move up in the Subaru lineup. Offer value, utility, safety, and some fun. A much less expensive Baja could do that, the factory is already tooled up, it would be a lot less than developing a whole new car/truck, why not? I would love an inexpensive utility vehicle like that I could feel free to abuse.
Of course it's the opposite direction Subaru is trying to go. . .
tom