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
Will all sedans eventually morph into light trucks and SUVs?
http://planetizen.com/news/item.php?id=11842
A logical assumption if they keep the current system.
"Subaru's strategy highlights what environmentalists, consumer groups and some politicians say is a loophole in the fuel economy regulations”
Well that’s an understatement. Anybody with half a brain recognizes it at a huge gaping “loophole”.
-Frank P.
Watch, it'll be a huge hit, LOL. I bet 50,000 buyers are telling themselves, "Cool, I can get tinted windows now."
-juice
However, I personally think the new design is hideous and cannot see myself owning it. Guess I'd better get a turbo Legacy before its next re-design.
Jim
Bart
-Brian
* integrated towing
* low range
* tinted windows
* more power (could be)
* suspension changes
* Navi
-juice
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/?http
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid99/pac2e2e56ec0c6ef65be9- 3c13e7f79991/f9ee114a.jpg
All it needs it one of those stick-on logos from a utility company.
-juice
Beat me to it. I'm a member of the NRDC, but I just dropped my membership to the Sierra Club because of over the top bitching just like this. So Subaru is making its vehicles MORE fuel-efficient, but because they are being classified differently, you have a problem with it? Keep it up, NRDC, and you'll end up like PETA - a fringe organization that has maginalized itself by protesting on increasingly ridiculous issues.
what happened to edmunds's love for passat ? 5th place !!!!!!!!!!!
-juice
-juice
-juice
Ken
Let us step back for a minute.
The newer Outbacks are to be lighter & more efficient
(3-4 miles per gallon better) than the old ones. So,
what if they are classified under Light Trucks ? We
have to ask a bigger question as to why Outback's
competitors are classified as Light Trucks ( PT
Cruiser ? ) & that's really what is motivating OB to
be reclassified.
Maybe Subaru is proactive in doing this so that the
Law will be changed so that it is a level playing
field for Outback & its competitors.
Krish
--- NRDCinfo <nrdcinfo@nrdc.org> wrote:
>
> Dear Krish,
>
> Thank you for contacting NRDC and for commenting on
> our press release about Subaru's recent attempt to
> make use of fuel economy loopholes. You're
> absolutely right about the importance of putting
> pressure on major American vehicle manufacturers,
> and we have had several full-scale campaigns based
> on this over the past four years, beginning with our
> EarthSmartCars campaign, which concluded after
> collecting more than 100,000 consumer pledges to
> purchase cleaner, greener vehicles if Detroit would
> build them, and publicly delivering seven mailbags
> filled with pledge cards to automakers at their
> annual auto show in January 2001. For information on
> how cleaner vehicles can reduce Americans' reliance
> on oil and to send an action message to GM, see
> NRDC's Break the Chain campaign at
> www.nrdc.org/breakthechain/. We focused this press
> release on Subaru because we believe its move to
> reclassify its Outback models as SUVs shows contempt
> for the environment and runs sharply counter to the
> image promoted by the company. Again, thanks for
> contacting NRDC. Feedback is important to us, and
> we appreciate your taking the time to write.
>
> Sincerely,
> Kate Brauman
> NRDC Membership and Public Education
Greg
But Subaru classifying the Outback as a Light truck should encourage the other makers to increase the fuel efficiency on their products to compete with the Outback.
Is this a bad thing?
Luch
My son couldn't get a Beyblade to spin like that!! LOL
According to the NRDC article, Subaru's average CAFE number has been dropping for years - I can't confirm that. But, it's not the fuel efficiency of a single model that is the issue, it is the average of all units solds ie 10K at Outbacks at 24 mpg, 50K Imprezas at 31 mpg...
CAFE: Corporate Average Fuel Economy.
See the following and go to the bottom of Page 3:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/factshts/fefact01.pdf
I got my dad out of a string of SUVs into his Outback. He had a Cherokee, an Explorer, then two Land Cruisers before his OBLtd.
Subaru's mileage has been dropping, indeed, but because they're making bigger cars and stopped selling FWD in 1995.
-juice
If it had more clearance and bigger engines, they would have sold more all along.
The market has spoken, and perhaps sadly, people want more power.
You know what happened to Impreza sales when the WRX came out.
They doubled.
In this market-based economy, Subaru would be foolish not to change their strategy, which didn't really work in the past. RAV4, CR-V, and Escape all easily outsell the Forester.
What would you do, if you also had a responsibility to your share holder to make a profit?
-juice
Probably the same thing. Yes - if Subaru wants to expand it's market it has to start offering SUV's. But it will come with a price: alienation of a core customer group and a re-evaluation of their marketing strategy.
As I said before, I don't have an issue with them going in this direction. My issue is with the "suprise" reaction to the backlash presented here. For years they've touted themselves as eco-friendly. Now by going the SUV route - even if it is the most fuel effiecient SUV out there - it is a negative in the eyes of eco-community - a major supporter/customer of Subaru.
As much as I hate this phrase: this is a paradigm shift for Subaru.
Question is, if Subaru was so eco-friendly in the past, why were they such an afterthought in terms of sales?
-juice
Most buyers don't truly care about them being eco-friendly?? You'd have to ask their marketing dept that.
My guesses:
NE, CO, UT, PNW markets too small
somewhat quirky products/features
products not generic enough for mainstream buyers
products not positioned as performance leader
products not positioned as safety leader
products not positioned as quality leader
poor distribution
fear of leaving current market niche
silly Paul Hogan ads.
We're in the minority. I actually cared about the EPA mileage numbers.
-juice
If you spend any time on Edmund's boards, including the Subaru boards, the main topic of conversation is 0-60 times and horsepower. The manufacturers respond to market forces. Hence if the public demands horsepower, that is what they make. The day the majority of the American buying public stops buying horsepower over fuel economy, then the manufacturers will respond.
It's funny, in 1994 we bought a Taurus SHO. At the time this was the quickest volume vehicle in it's class. 220HP and 0-60 times of about 7 seconds. Today, for a performance sedan this would be an average performer at best. My wife traded this in in 2001 for a Forester S and the minor hit in acceleration was hardly noticable in day-to-day driving. She had freinds that couldn't believe her Forester was only a four cylinder. She found things that she missed from the SHO, but all out acceleration wasn't one of them. Nowdays 0-60 times of 7 sec. are treated like they are a snail's pace.
The issue here is Subaru took a car (good) and is making it a truck (bad). In the eyes of many, it's a step backwards, and in the wrong direction.
The "reality" of this change in minimal at most. The "symbolism," however is huge—and that's what people are reacting to.
Bob
Ken
Subaru's Baja pickup and Forester SUV/wagon are already qualified as light trucks. With the Outback qualifying as a light truck, it may serve a function in the automaker's CAFE, even though SUV-like features are the main motivation for the change.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=6769&sid=24- - 1&n=163
Bob
http://www.drive.subaru.com/Win04_DesignRevolution.htm
Bob
Bob
I think Edmunds dropped the ball big time on this.
I thought you and juice were the ones providing the Edmunds coverage! LOL! ;-)
-Ian
-Ian