Subaru B9 Tribeca (B9X)

jeffmc · February 2005

wmquan,
Yes, Joe @ cars101.com is terrific. I see from your profile you're in WA. This is somewhat off-topic, and I hate to do a shameless plug like this, but if you're in the market for Tribeca (or any other Subaru) in the future, Joe is a fantastic salesman for a fantastic dealership - Carter Subaru in Shoreline (north Seattle). I have purchased two cars from this dealership, the most recent of which was from Joe. Several of my co-workers are also extremely pleased after purchases from Joe. As the fleet manager, his prices are unbeatable, and he's very knowledgeable and is in no way hard-sell or pushy. Just a no-nonsense guy who loves Subarus. The cars sell themselves if you let them, really. This dealership doesn't play games and has a non-commission service staff. Oh... and complimentary service loaners if you purchased your car there. (Nothin' like taking my oldest Subie - '91 Legacy w/230k miles - in for service and driving a brand spankin' new one for a day. Almost feels like stealing.) Plus even the service department is open 7 days a week, 6AM-9PM weekdays, 8AM-6PM weekends. To me, it's unheard of to have a service department open 'til 9PM. That's true customer service.

robr2 · February 2005

In any event, the Tribeca was mentionedwith a "V6!" Obviously the guy describing it was clueless.

See - I keep telling you, nobody knows and nobody cares about the boxer engine - even with a press release and 14 writers on staff.

Now 1/2 the people who saw that will remember V6.

jeffmc · February 2005

Bob, could you tell if the rack was metallic or black-finish?
You may be the first of us to see Tribeca in motion - not including rotating on a stage.

rsholland · February 2005

The fact that he was wrong has nothing to do with people not caring about boxer engines. Fortunately his faux pax was mentioned in passing, so maybe not too many people caught it.

Bob

wmquan · February 2005

Thanks Jeff. Good to hear that the Subaru side of the Carter dealership is fine. I had a very bad experience 2 years ago with the Saab side of Carter. The salesperson tried pulling a bait-and-switch in the 11th hour. Claimed that his verbal price quotes (that we'd discussed for two weeks) were for different equipment setups. He had forgotten that he had written down the quotes he was denying on the back of a business card. Needless to say, we went with a different dealership. He was trying to call me on my cell phone a half-dozen times the rest of the day, blocking his caller ID.

As far as the LATCH anchors go, Joe did subsequently email me and note that he could be wrong about the lower LATCH anchors in the back. He only had a very short look. So we'll wait for confirmation when someone sees a Tribeca in the flesh.

rsholland · February 2005

Black rack.

Bob

dcm61 · February 2005

the two co-hosts drove off in a Seacrest Green Metallic Tribeca (with roof racks) that looked like the one at the Philly show!

You mean this one, Bob?

This looks like it's Titanium Silver, not Seacrest Green.

DaveM

rsholland · February 2005

Are you sure Dave? I thought it was Seacrest Green. Yes, it's silver, but with a hint of green.

Bob

richwood · February 2005

Thanks to all whom wrote regarding my post from last week (and to jeffmc for the hyperlink to cars101). It seems I am not the only one interested in this issue.

I did not make it to the Toronto autoshow this weekend, but will go on Friday. I plan to look at several vehicles to see if ANY have LATCH positions for the 3rd row. Personally, I can't think of any car, truck or crossover that even has 3 LATCH positions in the 2nd row, so if the TRIBECA does turn out to have more than the typical 2 sets (at the outboard positions in the 2nd row) I will be pleasantly surprised!

The only vehicle I have heard of (but not verified) as having a 3rd row with LATCH is the SIENNA. I will definitely check that out Friday and post back for those whom are interested.

Regrettably, the TRIBECA here in Toronto is shown on a pedestal, and I don't think the buying public is allowed to climb aboard. But I will wave my WRX keys and see if they'll make an exception.

I'm not sure what others think, but I surmise that when a seat is mobile, or folds away flat, it impacts on whether a set of LATCH hooks can be put on it. No science here, just a guess. Otherwise, why would a manufacturer not grab hold of this perceived need of the public and champion it? For all those parents who have experienced the ease of putting car seats in & out using LATCH vs. a conventional seatbelt, there is an obvious market for such a vehicle.

Is this just another case of the industry having the means, but holding on to a technical carrot to keep us buying new cars? Maybe the '07 or '08 model lines will roll out this 'innovation'.

Thanks again for all those who've replied to my post.

dcm61 · February 2005

Looking at the colors at http://www.b9tribeca.com it looks closer to Titanium Silver.

DaveM

ateixeira · February 2005

The day we see a V6 in any Subaru here in the USA is the day I'll resign as Crew Chief!

-juice

varmint · February 2005

Couplah minor points.

I'm all for new ideas and new designs. But new designs that work are even better. The Dodge Ram, Lexus RX300, and Chrysler 300C are examples of new ideas that work. They introduced new ideas and people liked them. New ideas without substance are exemplified by the Aztek.

Bottom line: Newness alone is not enough.

Oddly enough, the Tribeca also exhibits what is likely the best interior for a cross-over in the 30K price range. But that interior is just a variation on existing ideas. Everybody loves it, but there's nothing new about it.

And, FWIW, Ford has been awarded the highest customer return rate every year since 1996.

Your enthusiasm is infectious, but I don't share your reasoning. As a person who has posted "detracting" remarks regarding the styling of the Tribeca, my opinions have nothing to do with jealousy. I mean, I'm a guy who likes the Element. What do I have to be jealous of?

varmint · February 2005

"In any event, the Tribeca was mentionedwith a "V6!" Obviously the guy describing it was clueless. "

I see two possibilities.

1. The guy was clueless. But how many times have we seen others make the same mistake here? Does this fall under the category of understandable mistake?

2. Subaru isn't get the word out the way they should. Or, at the least, no one is listening.

I still think Subaru should lead with "lower center of gravity", rather than the design that makes it possible. You don't sell the steak, you sell the sizzle...

subearu · February 2005

I'm not sure what others think, but I surmise that when a seat is mobile, or folds away flat, it impacts on whether a set of LATCH hooks can be put on it. No science here, just a guess. Otherwise, why would a manufacturer not grab hold of this perceived need of the public and champion it? For all those parents who have experienced the ease of putting car seats in & out using LATCH vs. a conventional seatbelt, there is an obvious market for such a vehicle.

Yes, LATCH-ing a child seat in is way easier. Click, click, tug. Very simple. Our MPV has LATCH (and rear seat base anchor) on both 2nd row captain chairs (which are also removable AND fold flat AND one can slide to the center). The center 3rd row position on the MPV has a tether anchor only.

Only the outer 2 seats on my Forester have LATCH anchors, though rear tethers are on all 3 seating positions.

-Brian

wmquan · February 2005

I'm not sure what others think, but I surmise that when a seat is mobile, or folds away flat, it impacts on whether a set of LATCH hooks can be put on it. No science here, just a guess. Otherwise, why would a manufacturer not grab hold of this perceived need of the public and champion it? For all those parents who have experienced the ease of putting car seats in & out using LATCH vs. a conventional seatbelt, there is an obvious market for such a vehicle.

Unfortunately it appears to be cost-avoidance and just a general perspective that the overall marketplace doesn't care. E.g. is there really much demand (especially when it comes to vehicle purchase decisions) to put three pairs of LATCH anchors in the second row, or a pair in the second. While I would want it, I don't think it's a common perceived need.

As Brian pointed out, it doesn't really have to do with whether the seat is mobile or folds away flat. SUV's with second rows have a pair of lower LATCH anchors, even though their second row folds flat. In the case of some SUV's, the second row slides forward/aft or even tumbles forward as part of the fold (e.g. MB M-class).

Putting lower LATCH anchors on the third row means the manufacturer has to not only engineer the anchors in, but also do whatever regulatory testing is required by NHTSA. A manufacturer can be held liable if the LATCH anchors fail, so it's just another technical/legal/regulatory item on the project list that costs money.

The only technical issue that I'm aware of is whether there is room to put three pairs of lower LATCH anchors in the third row. NHTSA has very specific requirements on the spacing of each anchor pair, and some vehicles may not have the width to achieve the proper spacing.

This reminds me of how VW introduced LATCH when it was first made mandatory. Commendably, they came up with a way that a dealer could retrofit LATCH anchors to older VW's that weren't manufactured with them (before NHTSA made it a requirement to have a minimum number). However, a lot of their dealers did not support the retrofit, because it was "not worth it to them," and/or because they feared any liability if they did it incorrectly.

ateixeira · February 2005

Ford is a full-line manufacturer, so they can be compared to Toyota or Chevy, which seemingly sell a vehicle in every single class (pickup, hybrid, van, car) and size.

When you're talking about a manufacturer that only sells cars in a few segments, then the comparison isn't very meaningful.

Forester usually wins the RL Polk award for owner loyalty in its class, meaning they have the most repeat buyers as a % of former owners.

-juice

varmint · February 2005

And the F-150 typically does it for Ford. Given that the F-150 sells about 10 times as many units as the Forester, we might guesstimate that Ford has ten times as many loyal customers.

If anything, the fact that Subaru competes in market niches means they have little competition - and an inherent advantage for loyalty. Ford, and others who compete in the mainstream, would have a harder time.

My point was simply that Ford has no real reason to be jealous of Subaru. And that the earlier assertion was not based on the facts.

Perhaps I should have simply written... "Keep it real."

jon_in_ct · February 2005

Ford's high loyalty rating stems solely from its trucks. I believe Ford sells more trucks than cars and truck owners in general, for reasons unknown to me, tend to be fiercely loyal.

alpha01 · February 2005

Why are we talking about Ford F-150s?

~alpha

rsholland · February 2005

Loyalty. Subaru has high loyalty, as do F-150s. Varmint was simply making the point that because Ford sell so many more F-150sin a more competitive settingthat the F-150s loyalty is more meaningful than that of Subarus. He may have a point.

Bob

ateixeira · February 2005

I'm sure Ford has the most repeat buyers, but if you think about it they might also have the highest number of buyers that defect to other brands.

Seriously, look how many sales they have. It's quite possible.

I don't think Ford and Subaru are cross-shopped often, so no, neither is worried much about the other.

Swampy posted the price of the RX400 in another thread: $48,535. That's higher than the $45k estimated earlier, but NAV and HIDs are standard.

Still, yowsah! Just try finding one on the lot under $50 grand.

I guess my beef is that the customers that this will appeal to probably have 10,000 square foot homes that require tons of energy to heat and cool (and the emissions that go with it). So it sort of misses the point, don't you think?

Too bad. Maybe the Highlander Hybrid will make more sense.

-juice

lark6 · February 2005

Varmint was simply making the point that because Ford sell so many more F-150sin a more competitive settingthat the F-150s loyalty is more meaningful than that of Subarus. He may have a point.

Not to try to put a spin on any of this, but isn't it possible that a significant portion of repeat purchases of F-150s come via fleet sales?

Ed

ateixeira · February 2005

Strange segment, full-size pickups, and quite a different one from near-lux SUVs.

Tribeca will have to win shoppers on its own merits, plain and simple. Buyers in this segment are tough to please.

I keep saying this, but the driving experience will be essential for the Subie.

-juice

alpha01 · February 2005

Ahh. I have to admit, I was skimming. That said, I agree with Juice- the two segments are very different. The point on the Fleet sales is a great one, but also consider that loyalty is more likely where less choice exists. The contenders for anything greater than moderate duty in that segment are but two- the Ram and Silverado/Sierra. Even adding in the Titan and Tundra, thats still a very small segment compared to those in which Subaru currently competes.

Joe

jeffmc · February 2005

Ford and Subaru may not have been cross-shopped often in the past, but with AWD in the Freestyle and 500, I think it is happening now. Most of us posting here know which AWD system is better, but a lot of people looking for AWD will simply pick Ford because it is easier for them, is American, or is a known quantity. No sense arguing about the systems in this forum, though (preaching to the choir)... or about the "American-ness" of different vehicles.

subearu · February 2005

I had read recently that Ford just realized the Five Hundred has a higher demand for AWD than they planned. I think they planned on something like 20% of 'em being AWD, but it's actually closer to 50%.

-Brian

jay_24 · February 2005

I'd agree with the issue you mentioned on spacing requirements. But it applies to the second row as well as the third. Most child seats seem to be in the 18 to 19 inch wide range. 3 across just doesn't fit in the midsize or compact SUVs.

I've found booster seats that are 16 inches wide which is a big help at getting three across but you still need room to get your hand bewteen the seats to buckle-up.

--jay

robr2 · February 2005

Not to try to put a spin on any of this, but isn't it possible that a significant portion of repeat purchases of F-150s come via fleet sales?

I'm sure many of the sales of F series trucks are to fleets but those fleet sales are different IMHO as compared to fleet sales to rental companies.

XYZ Construction wants to buy 100 new trucks this year and they expect them to last so many years as compared to a rental company who wants to get rid of their cars in a year. XYZ is looking for dependability over the long term and I think they would be more loyal and demanding than a rental company.

Besides, Ford sold over 900K F series trucks last year - they are shooting for 1 million in 2005 per an article in Sunday's Boston Globe.

Kirstie_H · February 2005

Let's focus specifically on the new Subaru, please.

wmquan · February 2005

3 across just doesn't fit in the midsize or compact SUVs.

jay - there's one key reason for a LATCH install in the middle of the second row. It doesn't have anything to do with whether you can fit three seats across the middle of the third row or not.

A lot of parents have just one child in a car seat, and want to put the child in the middle of the second row, where it is technically the safest (away from side impacts). However, most vehicles don't have a LATCH install there. So they have to resort to either using the vehicle's seat belt, or sometimes they use the two inner LATCH anchors (which not everyone advises).

Another possibility is if you can fit two seats, one in the middle, one in an outboard position, and still get access to the third row. In that case, it's much more handy to have a LATCH install in the middle.

jeffmc · February 2005

Either Edmunds' Inside Line knows many things that we don't, or they've been careless listing the specifications for B9 Tribeca:
http://www.edmunds.com/future/2006/subaru/b9tribeca/100498459/spe- cs.html?tid=edmunds.f.review.leftsidenav..1.Subaru*
OnStar?
Telescoping steering wheel?
Retained accessory power?
Manual flip-up liftgate window?
Inside mounted spare tire?
On demand 4WD?
And a few other items seem questionable:
Regular unleaded fuel? (I thought premium recommended for H6)
Desk sensing headlamps?
Auto delay off headlamps? (As opposed to Auto-off on my Outback... no "delay".)
Exterior automatic dimming electrochromatic mirror, driver only?
Rear reading lights? (I'd love to see them, though)

Anyone see anything else that seems wrong?

jeffmc · February 2005

Inside Line also says Tribeca's built in Japan.

rsholland · February 2005

obviously that's wrong.

Bob

sweet_subie · February 2005

The heading says "Compact Wagon".
Do you more errors than this ?

They consider exterior awkward

ateixeira · February 2005

Actually, the Volvo-derived Haldex AWD system is not bad. It's still part-time, but it does act quickly.

I still say Ford is going to get the price shoppers first and foremost.

Tribeca aims a little higher in terms of design and materials, so it's not nearly as vanilla.

Honestly, I think the segment will expand as a whole and Subaru can easily squeeze out 40k buyers per year.

-juice

varmint · February 2005

Juice mentioned a specific model (Forester). So, I mentioned one for Ford (F-150). But Ford has done more than win just individual categories, they've won the overall division rankings, as well. GM, for that matter, frequently wins the manufacturer's title.

Polk Awards

But we are getting way off topic here. All I meant to do add some perspective on a claim by introducing some facts.

When it comes to the Tribeca as a single model, I think Subaru will have a tougher time with loyalty. Mid-size SUVs is a fully developed market with many competitors. And unlike entry level markets, buyers are likely to come back to the segment (filled with sharks). This is not like a niche market where there are only one two players in the game. So, getting Tribeca owners to come back for another might be difficult.

OTOH, I expect they will retain customers. As I'm sure Subaru has planned, Forester or Outback owners who need something larger should look to the Tribeca. That will improve Subaru's chances of winning the Division Award.

c_hunter · February 2005

They must have mixed up specs with another vehicle -- that is a lot of wrong stuff!

Craig

sweet_subie · February 2005

you are missing the whole point.

Subaru is only (as always) targeting a small niche customer base.

1. Already loyal customers that go elsewhere for 7-seaters.
2. Those who can't afford expensive german brands.

that's it.

Comparing with Ford is not logical

varmint · February 2005

Tell that to the guy who brought it up.

subearu · February 2005

We decided to rename the Mahogany Red Pearl of the Tribeca to Root Bear Pearl:

From http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=2130361635 (image #158):

-Brian

dt63944 · February 2005

No matter how many times I've looked at this vehicle, I still think the exterior is a big mistake. Interior's fine, it's a Subaru, so I'm sure it's going to be a great 12-month vehicle that'll be very reliable and useful in any conditions. But that grill and that strange overhang in the back reminds me of an Edsel in front and an old Toyota design in the rear. Anyone??

sweet_subie · February 2005

http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2130361635

sweet_subie · February 2005

1. did you see it in person ? it looks lot better in person although it sounds a bit weird

2. The rear does remind me of old Sienna a bit.

Having said this, tell me which SUV looks you like better ? I consider the rest of SUVs too bland. From that sense, Tribeca looks very trendy.

rsholland · February 2005

The CHAT! I forgot last night was Thursday!

Bob (geezing again)

subearu · February 2005

(let me know if anyone is having trouble seeing these images)

yep, the front turnsignals are amber/orange:

-Brian

sweet_subie · February 2005

I was referring to rear turn lights as well. See this pic (#174)

http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=2130361635

dcm61 · February 2005

This picture is also showing orange but it seems to be a side reflector???

http://img219.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img219&image=img02770zm.jpg

DaveM

dt63944 · February 2005

I haven't seen one in person, I hope I can agree with you on that - I like everything else about it and I'm on my 3rd Forester and Subaru's are about all that interest me. I like my '03 BMW M3 and can't stand their new designs, so that's probably my last one.

I do like the BMW X5 and X3 exteriors, but I've had both for some time as demos in snowy weather and they have some significant design problems, at least to me. I think the Outback is gorgeous, but the interior doesn't offer a few things I'd like. Kia makes an SUV whose exterior I like a lot, but I'd never buy one, for a whole lot of reasons!

If you can identify with my thoughts, than I hope I'll agree with you that it looks better in person!

subearu · February 2005

I agree with Dave - it appears to be just the reflection of the flash. I don't recall the color being orange on the rear tail, but then again the lighting in the Subaru area was dark, hence my flash going off.

-Brian

dcm61 · February 2005

It is also showing orange in the bumper reflector.

DaveM

Subaru B9 Tribeca (B9X)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles