Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
I've been traveling for awhile and I am now catching up on some of the messages. This base H6 model would be great for me. Where did you hear this info and can you point me to any links with info?
Thanks.
Karl
OTOH, where my troubles lie is in the engine compartment and the suspension. All the marketing I'd seen up to now touted the luxury aspects of the B9-Tribeca. That may well be true, but in my opinion, it doesn't ride like a luxury SUV. My Outback has a smoother ride than this SUV, and I can't help but think that Subaru followed Infiniti's poor-example of how NOT to have a Luxury SUV ride as in the Infiniti FX series. I know it's supposed to be a mix of sport and luxury, but an SUV such as the Acura MDX handles well, and rides smoothly too (I've owned two, a 2001 and a 2003). Subaru missed the mark here.
This vehicle uses the same engine as my Outback, the legendary 3.0L Boxer, horizontally-opposed engine. The 219 Ft/lbs of torque this engine provides in my Outback gives me some nice off-the-line acceleration, while it's 250 Horsepower gives much passing pleasure highway speeds. OTOH, popping this same engine in a vehicle that weighs greater than 400 lbs more than my Outback results in predictable performance. What's missing is the low-end grunt that this SUV's weight cannot get from the 3.0L Boxer engine. Highway speeds are OK, as with the Outback.
The schnozolla on the Tribeca has always given me pause, I cannot decide if I like it or don't like it. I would much rather love it. If you're used to the pretty front-end of an '05 Outback (like me), you can understand why I think Subaru should have restrained the ego of their imported-designer from Alfa-Romeo just a little bit, and go with the new nose design that's on the Outback.
When I sit in a Tribeca, it's interior speaks to me - little nothings in my ear, to entice, to lure - I'm basically helpless. If my affection for the Exterior matched my zeal for the Interior, I'd be owning a Tribeca TONIGHT.
SteveMitchell
Nav also.
Steve: you like the lighter/smaller Outback, I don't find that surprising at all. Add mass and you have a lot of things to overcome to get the same handling, braking, and acceleration.
-juice
I thought Subaru altered the gearing on the Tribeca to make up for it's weight. But you're right -- 400lbs is quite a bit more to ask from the H6.
I bet you won't be the only OB onwer (or potential owner) that cross-shops the Tribeca.
Ken
Thanks.
Too much!
H6 35th Ann. = 27,095 MSRP + dest.
H4 base 4EAT = 24,145 MSRP + dest
H6 premium = 2,950 MSRP
Granted, the 35th Ann. had a few extras besides the H6 but IMO $2,950 was too large of a price premium.
http://media.subaru.com/ - select Outback, then Subaru Announces Pricing on 2004MY Legacy and Outback Models
DaveM
-juice
Do you have additional information on this H6 cloth? I would love to have this car with the larger H6 wheels and a sunroof.
Matthew
Finally, i bought my OB XT Ltd, auto, gold opal. I paid 28,000 even for MSRP of 32,600. Bought from Singer Subaru, NH who was awesome, awesome. No tension whatsoever, gave the price right away & i reduced by $400 & the deal was done. The entire deal incl. my trade-in took 30 min to complete the deal.
I added remote start which seems to be approved by SoA & will NOT void warranty. Hopefully, i will get such a good deal on my Tribeca next year.
-juice
If its an option that that is great. I like the cloth turbo but the sunroof is not an option with this car. Would pay extra for the sunroof on the H6 with cloth. Can you go anywhere on the web to get information on the 06 Outback models?
Regards,
MC
-juice
Karl
-juice
Any changes from 2005 that you can spill?
DaveM
Navigation system
3.0 H6 Cloth Outback Model....No confirmation if sunroof is part of package
Special Value Package added to 2.5i which adds sunroof and automatic climate control to cloth models.
As yet to be released exact specs for 500 unit limited edition sedan this summer with special color sport seats (leather only)
Gotta try out the cloth turbos, maybe this weekend.
-juice
Like you, for some time I felt frustration with my VDC wagon's gas mileage. Was doing somewhat better than you, both city and highway, but was concerned. At some point, though, things settled down to more acceptable levels. I would guess it happened around 10,000 mi (am at 30,000 now). During the winter I was averaging around 20 (mostly highway, but with a good amount of local roads in WMass and VT) and on Dunlop Wintersports. Now, back on the OEM Potenzas - which do not 'handle' as well and are not as quiet as the winter tires (I'm thinking of putting on Turanzas) - I'm averaging 21-22, with this being primarily highway. Not great, but not that bad either.
On the other hand, my driving experience continues to be outstanding. Fast/quick, pretty quiet, great handling. I would hope/guess that you are enjoying everything else about your OBXT. Was at the dealer this morning and, I've got to say, the OBs continue to strike me as damn fine looking vehicles. A couple of OBXTs were prominently dislpayed (red and black) and they looked very nice. While I am very ahppy with the VDC, just a twang of regret that I didn't heed my 14 year old's desire for the turbo XT.
Peace.
You've had your car for two months and only have 1200 miles. This tells me that you don't drive a lot, and that most of your mileage is probably in town. Also, with that low of mileage, it seems almost impossible to have a full tank of "highway mileage" to even check.
Also, do you fill up every week (like most people)? If so, you are probably only using half of a tank or less each time.. The less gas pumped on each fill-up, the greater the variation on the MPG calculation... Outside factors can change when the pump shuts off, etc.. 1/2 gallon difference on a 12 gallon fillup is 4%.. On a 3 gallon fillup, the difference is 17%.
Also, your engine is barely broken in by 1200 miles.. Mileage usually improves slightly up until 10K miles.
Assuming any or all of the above is correct or not... 15-18 MPG is not unusual for mainly city driving.
"WHAT SHOULD I DO?
Relax, and give it some time..
regards,
kyfdx
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
Actually, deviations from the EPA estimated fuel economy is not the manufacturer's fault but really the EPA testing methods themselves. The EPA has an outdated method to calculate city and highway milage.
From http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/info.shtml:
The test used to determine the city fuel economy estimate simulates an 11-mile, stop-and-go trip with an average speed of 20 miles per hour (mph). The trip takes 31 minutes and has 23 stops. About 18 percent of the time is spent idling, as in waiting at traffic lights or in rush hour traffic. The maximum speed is 56 mph. The engine is initially started after being parked overnight. Vehicles are tested at 68 F to 86 F ambient temperature.
The test to determine the highway fuel economy estimate represents a mixture of "non-city" driving. Segments corresponding to different kinds of rural roads and interstate highways are included. The test simulates a 10-mile trip and averages 48 mph. The maximum speed is 60 mph. The test is run with the engine warmed up and has little idling time and no stops (except at the end of the test).
When's the last time you drove 48mph on the highway with no A/C or other electrical accessories on?
Here's what AAA has been finding in their own tests:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6448213/did/7128017/
Under ideal conditions, it's not unthinkable to have gas milage 10-15% off the EPA mark. Throw in short trips and other real world factors and the milage can drop even more.
Ken
As usual YMMV.
Karl
When I got to the other dealer, I was exposed to Subaru of Dallas' owner's true colors. I called to let him know that I'd found another vehicle, and he hem-hawed, and essentially backed-out of his buy-bid offer saying he wanted to help me, but not help another dealer. My impression was that he never had any intention of going through with the buy-bid, as long as there was a chance to get me in a Tribeca. When he realized that this was not going to happen, he reneged on his offer.
Not to be deterred, I went back to the dealer of the different brand I was looking at and had them bid on the car. Of course with only two dealerships in the DFW area, he ended up calling Subaru of Dallas, and the manager's assistant, knowing it was me trying to sell my Outback, essentially low-balled his own product @ $3000 less than Kelly Blue Book value on the car. I tried Carmax later and they did the same thing, this time only $2500 below what the LLBean was worth. I feel that Carmax was higher because at least they knew how much the car is truly worth and could ship it back up north to sell it in Denver or similar location.
BTW, the service department for Subaru of Dallas was superb and always worked hard and was ethical. It's a terrible shame that sales and service are under the same roof.
Steve
NOTE: To make the numbers in the Fuel Economy Guide more useful for consumers, EPA adjusts these laboratory test results to account for the difference between controlled laboratory conditions and actual driving on the road. The laboratory fuel economy results are adjusted downward to arrive at the estimates in the Fuel Economy Guide and on the labels seen on new cars, light trucks, and vans. The city estimate is lowered by 10% and the highway estimate by 22% from the laboratory test results. Experience has proven that these adjustments make the mileage estimates in the Fuel Economy Guide correspond more closely to the actual fuel economy realized by the average driver.
All of my cars usually perform within the EPA numbers - the avg is always about halfway or better between the city and highway. I have never had a case on any of my cars where it actually performed lower than the city number, but quite often I get better numbers on the highway.
And I live in the NY metro area, so a lot of traffic, lots of stop and go, reformulated gas in the winter, and when driving on the highway, the speeds fluctuate greatly (hard to drive a steady speed around here).
As far as AAA's numbers, I wouldn't put much credence in them - they don't explain how they obtain their numbers, don't break down the city / highway portions, don't give the test sample size, etc...
Ken
:confuse: If you filled up 16.7 gal... you would have ~18 gal. in your tank.
Someone correct me if I'm off the mark. The OB has 16.9 gal capacity but like the WRX and others only 14.9 is useable before the fuel pump shuts off. If my understanding of the gas tank and capacity is correct, then you either rolled downhill into the gas station or you got fleeced.
There are gas stations here in NY/NJ where you're issued receipt that shows sale for gasoline of a lower grade than you pumped in. I've encountered many instances where my 12 gal. 94 oct. fill up shows up as a 14 gal. 89 oct.
Anyway, your OBXT is still an infant. Give it and yourself time to adjust :shades:
If you do not have a boost gauge, you should get one as it helps you at keeping the XT off boost to save on gas
-Dave
Suggestions? Try to combine errands, so the engine doesn't have to warm up multiple times. Until it's warm you probably get about 0 mpg. :surprise:
Also, try to open it up, take it for a long drive on a weekend or something.
Finally, try a different gas station. If your tank took 16.7 gallons I'd honestly be suspicious of the gas pump being accurate.
-juice
Anyways, my city commuting and city/highway combined comuting per computer estimate and fuel indicator at "E" level is giving me 250 -255 miles per tank. You can calculate gas milege yourself. I really hope it's going to imrpove with engine aging. I'm not sure how it works though, I mean aging and gas/mileage improvement. If someone can explain I would really appreciate it.
Thanks in advance!
Frog
My understanding is, the fuel pump do shut off - for safety and pump longevity if that's is correct.
The pump intake does not sit on the floor of the tank, instead it is raised about an inch so it could not have sucked in all 16.9 gal. Also, if you look at the tank from under the car, you'll notice a hump between the tank. That hump separates about a gal from the other section where the fuel pump resides [right side?].
I'm inclined to agree with juice that the accuracy of the pump numbers is questionable.
From my experience, when my fuel indicator goes to "E" and the fuel light comes on, I'll have ~2 gal. or ~40 miles available to get to a gas station and my refill would be ~13 gal. So, @ 250-255 miles with 13 gal., your average would be ~19 mpg. Not great numbers but not unusual for an infant Subaru.
At the indicator marker before "E", my refill would be 10~11 gal.
Unless Subaru has upped the tank capacity on the Legacy and omitted to document it, it is odd that you could get 16+ gal. into it. That's 16 gal. @ "E" + 2 gal. available after "E" + 2 gal. unuseable = 20 gal.
-Dave
Having run my car out of gas, I can tell you that the miles to empty indicator is fairly accurate. At the beginning of my final trip on that tank, it said 60 miles to go. I ran out very shortly after 60 miles. The needle on the gas guage was well below empty, and the low fuel light had been on for about 50 miles.
I just hit 5000 miles on my Legacy GT wagon. I had been averaging 21-22 since I purchased the car, but lately it has been creeping up and on the last tank, I got just over 23. Almost all my miles are on fairly long trips at highway speeds.
I would be very surprised if you were able to actually put 16.7 in a 16.9 gallon tank without having run out of fuel. That's not a big deal except that (if true) you paid more $ than you received in fuel and your calculations would result in a lower mileage than actual.
Let's see it!
Not sure I'd like to replace my headlights on a yearly basis though.
tom
Bought for invoice price ~last Sept - best deal avail then.
Got the manual transmission because really my intent was a sporty car.
Drove Mazda3 hatch, wrx wagon, rsx, 9-3 hatchback used, jetta wagon 1.8t, focus 2.3l, etc. So it was a stretch to get an outback wagon, but was very impressed with the ride, room, looks, & specs.
The computer is very accurate at telling how many miles you have to go before you run out of gas, and you really can get close to the full tank size (altho that is not good for fuel pump etc.)
I now get about 23 mpg mixed, & 24-25 mpg highway (at typical California left lane speeds). It did go up some after 4-5000 miles.
The computer does claim to get about 2 mpg higher than the actual.
The offroad handling is great, the cd player doesn't ever skip, radio reception is great. You do feel the ABS sometimes.
However the combination of this engine & transmission does not work for 4wd tracks. I have taken it on some tough roads, and wished I had the automatic. On rocky uphills you have to burn up the clutch & it stalls often. There is almost no torque available at crawling speeds of say 2 mph. It is the California PZEV engine but I don't think there's any sig difference.
A much lower granny gear would be way better, or the old Hi/Low selector gearing. I guess most people just buy the automatic, so there isn't much market for a granny gear in manual.
The other problem is that in 5th gear it is revved rather high. About 4000rpm at 85mph (a calculatable value). The gas mileage suffers a bit because of this, and you get too much mechanical noise. It's much better at 75mph. In one way that might be a good thing - it acts as mental speed governor. But really, not only does this engine need a lower low gear, but also a higher high gear.
A few other comments:
--The autodim mirror the dealer forced me to buy does not dim enough.
--The seat position is comfy but a little confining. It's hard to reach out the passenger side window to drop off mail (which is easier in many other cars).
--The only thing to break so far is the cheapo plastic hook that holds the carmat in place. (the mat moves a lot under the clutch)
--The buttons on the remote are not recessed so they often go off accidentally. I might glue a ring of something around the buttons to effectively recess them.
The other question is if the climate control system get a version 2.0 program, can a 2005 model be reprogrammed by the dealer or do I need to change the unit?
thanks
mark
(Still love
Peace.
From earlier posts, seemed like Turanza V's were a good choice. Any new thoughts, now that folks have had the vehicles for a while?
Peace.
Obviously, I disagree with sweet-subie. Glad you're happy with it, but I'm not at all. It is by far the worst ACC of any car I've ever owned or driven. In AUTO it never does the right thing, it is too agressive, and I'm always too cold or too warm. You also have to fiddle with the temp controls when it switches mode. For example, when heating I have to lower the temp setting to trigger it to stop cooking me, but as soon as it stabilizes and switches to the dash vents, I have to raise the temp setting again because all of a sudden it gets several degrees colder. Similar thing happens when cooling.
The other deficiency is that in cooling mode it keeps oscillating between hot an cold instead of blending the air to achieve the right temp.
So I find myself in semi-auto or even manual mode most of the time. But even that is infuriating as you now have to fiddle with way too many controls to achieve what you want. And having to always change two temp settings is a pain, especially since it isn't even a tru dual-zone system.
Froma design standpoint it fails miserably: an ACC is supposed to make your life easier, this thing makes you fight with it all the time. I would take a good old manual three-dial system over this atrocity any day.
Sly
Thanks, Craig H for writing an awesome instruction sheet on the operation of the automatic, semi-manual and manual modes. It can be found in another forum specific to LEGACY + GT + .com. Rob M.
But set and forget? No way. That's what a proper ACC does. The one in recent Volvos for example is not only set and forget, but you can barely notice it doing it's work.
The Subie system is far from being set and forget, unless you have an extremely wide temperature tolerance zone.
But once again, if you don't mind it, great for you. It's still a very bad design though.
Oh come on now - you've only had it less than a week. Since you're in the Boston area, all you've had to deal with is 50 degrees and overcast.
Let's see this weekend when it's supposed to be 80-90 and humid.