The good news for us 06+ Forester owners who are fans of that grill is that it should be much cheaper and easier to get now as a replacement for the faux-chrome on the stock grill.
One thing I haven't seen is any mention of suspension changes (reading over at nabisco). That's too bad since the JDM Cross Sport offered a lowered suspension.
Maybe Subaru is testing the waters again and this is a prelude to a more sporty Forester in the future?
I did not find anything about a 'better AWD'. Does this come with VTD ?
I know the regular Forester EAT Turbo comes with the front-wheel biased center-diff lacking 90/10 AWD system with only the EAT WRX coming with the real-wheel biased VTD with the center diff + rear diff, among the Impreza derivatives.
Good question. Until a while ago, VDC implied VTD, but with the introduction of the 2007 Spec B (6MT+VDC), it may no longer be a requirement.
I wouldn't be surprised if Subaru started implementing more VTD-less VDC systems -- something that engages just the ABS system without trying to redistribute torque. It probably would mean they can also ride the stability control wave without a major change in their drivetrains.
Those who have not read the latest Consumer Reports test of VDC (on a 3.0 Outback) should do so. Their review faults the slightly tail-happy response. I personally like it, but they emphatically do not.
The original 90% front bias on the 4 cylinder automatic models certainly won't have that problem with VDC! Evidently front end plow is ok with the safety nuts. It may be better for very unskilled drivers, but certainly does not permit optimum safety for those with skill.
They like intrusive systems, problem is that spoils any fun you might have.
It was more than that. They said the Outback VDC still stuck its tail out during emergency maneuvers, and that the avoidance maneuver speed was low.
There are plenty of vehicles they've tested with non-intrusive systems, and that didn't have the tail-happiness exhibited by the Outback VDC. The Tribeca is one such example.
The only other vehicle I remember them having similar complaints about is the Acura MDX. They complained that the initial model (without VSA) fishtailed. Then after VSA was added, they tested it again, and the rear end still swung out.
I read that in my new issue too and thought is was odd since videos I've seen of the VDC showed it controlling over/understeer. Hard to believe that Subaru didn't tune the VDC response correctly.
For a vehicle like the OB VDC, I would expect it to behave with less drama under emergency conditions. Could it be something inherent to the OB suspension set up that can't be dialed out with VDC?
Could it be something inherent to the OB suspension set up that can't be dialed out with VDC?
Probably, but it's only a guess. The stock Outback's suspension probably can't be fully-controlled by VDC. To truly counter the potentially inherent limitations, Subaru would have to dial-up the VDC so high that it WOULD be very intrusive.
Yes, I'm disappointed too. You'd expect that a vehicle with a nice AWD system, stellar crash test scores, better general handling than many SUV's, etc. would be more composed in an emergency maneuver.
I would not be surprised if did something about it.
Unlike others, they don't respond to unfavorable results with proverbial "no single test represents overall safaty" or "these tests don't represent real-life situation". When '05 Legacy got not so great side impact and rear crash scores, they redesigned it to get '06 gold award. IIHS also stated that their first '05 batch did not deploy airbags correctly, which spurred an immediate recall.
Of the other hand of course suspension/traction/stability control systems are more difficult to troubleshoot than structural crashworthiness, as there is much more give and take with those.
Theoretically, they should be factoring in stuff like that -- VDC is augmenting the basic handling characteristics and qualities -- so they should be able to improve the Outback and Tribeca to the same level of stability.
If the track and the roll center are both the same, that would seem to be true. But does not the Tribecca have a slightly wider track? A wider track to roll center height is inherently better. Then VDC doesn't have to do as much.
The 2007 Jeep will demonstrate such improvement when it is compared to the old (2006) model....even without stability control which is available on the 2007.
As an aside, I wouldn't even consider owning a Tribecca instead of my VDC wagon. The glaringly ugly, heavy and slow Tribecca minivan reminds me of an old Chrysler product. Perhaps an inch or two more track on the Outback would be nice, however.
Agreed that for those who need the extra seats the Beca is a way to stay with Subaru. I'm not sure I would describe the styling as avant-garde as much as eclectic.
The marketplace will decide. I have noticed that Chrysler's 2+2+2 model is in great oversupply.......speaking of disguised minivans.
Ironically I wish it were more minivan-like. I think the cargo capacity could be bigger (it's about the same as an Outback) and 3rd row head room and visibility could be better. Plus the side curtains could then offer protection for that row.
That's what I am getting at -- theoretically, VDC should be correcting for any basic characteristics (flaws) in the vehicle stability -- at least as far as tail-happy behavior is concerned, and I think that was the point of the CR article. The Tribeca may have a starting advantage in some ways, just based on physics, but there are other areas where it's surely at a disadvantage to the lighter, shorter (height) Outback. Either way, VDC can compensate for that stuff to bring the vehicles to a certain level of final stability, regardless of the initial stability.
It sounds like the Outback is allowed to yaw to higher angles for some reason, and that clearly doesn't have to be the case. They may have just made the VDC less intrusive on the Outback, but for my purposes, I want it to be super conservative. I can always switch it off when I want to swing the tail or flirt with instability. When it's on, I expect significant damping from the system -- the tail should not get out on me. I have that behavior on my non-VDC 05 Outback XT, and it's not desirable on the road.
I'll take VDC just the way is is on my 2005. I traded in a 2002 Passsat W8 wagon with Bosch stability control that had just the kind of response you are asking for. It could be counted on to plow...front end sliding right towards the ditch in certain turns.
There is one advantage of the Bosch system however: Wide open throttle on snow produces no weave whatsoever, unlike the VDC. Subaru presumes we know how to drive.
I did not buy the LLBean because I would not have a car without stability control after driving with it for several years. But there is a limit as to how much help I want from nanny.
Well, the thing is -- plow is a natural understeer tendency. I wouldn't blame the Bosch system for that -- it's more a result of the Passat's FWD platform. Subarus that are FWD biased do the same exact thing. My last Subaru had a 90/10 F/R nominal split and would plow like crazy in the snow. My previous Subaru was 50/50 and my current Subaru is 45/55, and both have an oversteer tendency. With VDC off, your LL Bean is going to be exactly the same way. Turning VDC on is just going to damp that oversteer, but it would never be able to induce understeer/plow in a practical sense because it's not inherent to the vehicle in that condition. Even with VDC off you'd probably never get it to understeer on a slippery road.
While I agree that plowing/understeer is undesirable, I think tail out oversteer is equally bad. Personally, I would much rather if my OB XT did not step the tail out in certain winter conditions. And if you do want that feature, it would be as simple as turing VDC off.
"As an aside, I wouldn't even consider owning a Tribecca instead of my VDC wagon. The glaringly ugly, heavy and slow Tribecca minivan reminds me of an old Chrysler product. Perhaps an inch or two more track on the Outback would be nice, however." ________________________________________________
Well, there's no need for that. Saying it's glaringly ugly, heavy and slow is just plain subjective and unnecessary. Sounds like you are just trying to make yourself feel better about your outback. Many people would write the outback off as being an overdone station wagon that reminds them of an AMC wagon from the 80's. I don't agree with that...I like the current outback styling...but some people just faint at anything called a station wagon.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and just because the Tribeca is not to your liking...why trash it.
While I'm not a huge fan of the grill...it is growing on me...and I give it extra points for having more uniqueness and character than most box shaped CUV's out there.
It's performance while not stellar...are very good and you can't argue with it's safety and reliability. For someone who wants Subaru safety and reliability but find the outback isn't quite large enough...or want some extra seating for kids...the Tribeca is a good choice. Also, I like the idea that when people see the tribeca...wheather they like the styling or not...they know it is an expensive and well optioned vehicle. The top of the line $35K outback could easily be mistaken for the $22K outback basic.
Yes, I own a Tribeca and I really like it...so I will also defend it!
I'm glad you enjoy your outback...but respect that others like their vehicle purchases as well and may not take kindly to trashing....I can also provide plenty of good reviews regarding the Tribeca. So in future try saying: "I personally don't like the styling" rather than a personal opinion stated as fact: "The stying IS ugly"
Not to be too hard on you...as we are all guilty of stating our opinions as if they are fact...."wow she's ugly" may be true for an observer...but likely wouldn't be appreciated by her husband....which is why it's polite to not say that too loudly.
Your rebuttal seems a bit disproportionate, but that's just my opinion, not a statement of fact. I think a significant number of people would agree that it is ugly and underpowered.
I don't think it's ugly at all, and on the Ride n Drive it had no problems at all keeping up with a Pilot and a Murano. If anything the Pilot seemed to have trouble keeping up.
I was just looking at those Japanese spec Legacy's. Wow, look nice. Too bad we have to wait a year for them. Also noticed the STI tuned Legacy. They get all the cool toys. ha..
I'm a fan of the Tribeca styling as well -- if I have a gripe, it's w/the back end. As for acceleration, like many in its class it ain't a rocket, but in sport mode, is wholly adequate for anything I need to do, and this is in crowded NJ driving where quickness counts. Upon buying, I thought the acceleration would be more of an issue than it's turned out to be.
Let's remember, the original SUV, or at least the one that made them popular, was the 160hp Explorer, and that was pre-SAE HP days, so figure 150 or so ponies.
funny you mentioned that, the 1986-89 Isuzu Troopers were one of the first gen SUV's, and the 2.6 liter 4 banger only had ...drum roll....119 big ponies. Even the 2.9 liter V-6 that came in 1989 at 2.8 liters only had about 130 hp.
Yet today some consider 243hp "underpowered". I don't, however. I had one for a week and it was peppy, a lot more relaxed than my Forester pulling weight.
As an owner of a Forester before the Tribeca, I totally agree. The whole HP/acceleration thing has become a contest without much real world utility, and it's wasteful too.
It's Thursday, so that means Subaru Crew chat time! Stop in and chat about Subarus (or all the other stuff that comes up)
I'll also be picking your brains for dicsussion suggestions for the Subaru vehicle groups as we reorganize the forums. Your input and assistance is greatly appreciated!
will have 2 engines. I heard this at a dealer today and it was confirmed by several supposedly in the know over at nabisco.
The 3.0 H-6 will remain and there will be an optional 3.6 H-6. I'm not sure if the 3.6 will be an option across the board, or will only come on top level models; knowing Subaru, probably the later. The horsepower is rumored to be around 275 or 280.
That'd be awesome. Keeping the 3.0 H6 will help keep the model's sticker low, while the 3.6 H6 will satisfy those who want more power (and are willing to pay for it).
Hopefully they'll find ways to keep it relatively efficient. I don't expect stellar gas mileage, but terrible mileage shouldn't be in order.
I presume that the engines won't be turbocharged, or at least not yet.
That'd be awesome. Keeping the 3.0 H6 will help keep the model's sticker low, while the 3.6 H6 will satisfy those who want more power (and are willing to pay for it).
Other than possibly lower production volume there is little cost difference in the two. However, CAFE regulations would make selling too many 3.6's a possible problem. The available price premium may be limited by competition.
Now let's have that 3.6l engine available in the Legacy GT!
Comments
Bob
Joh
-Brian
Bob
If the engine is made here, then no there would not be any "import" taxes. Subaru does have an engine factory in Indiana.
Bob
There may be room to stroke the EJ25 in the Legacy, but not the Forester. Then again, the redesign may be wider so it may go in that.
-juice
Ken
John
I loooove that grille. The wife wants more room but this is hard to resist!
-juice
Maybe Subaru is testing the waters again and this is a prelude to a more sporty Forester in the future?
Ken
Bob
-juice
Bob
I know the regular Forester EAT Turbo comes with the front-wheel biased center-diff lacking 90/10 AWD system with only the EAT WRX coming with the real-wheel biased VTD with the center diff + rear diff, among the Impreza derivatives.
I wouldn't be surprised if Subaru started implementing more VTD-less VDC systems -- something that engages just the ABS system without trying to redistribute torque. It probably would mean they can also ride the stability control wave without a major change in their drivetrains.
Ken
The original 90% front bias on the 4 cylinder automatic models certainly won't have that problem with VDC! Evidently front end plow is ok with the safety nuts. It may be better for very unskilled drivers, but certainly does not permit optimum safety for those with skill.
-juice
It was more than that. They said the Outback VDC still stuck its tail out during emergency maneuvers, and that the avoidance maneuver speed was low.
There are plenty of vehicles they've tested with non-intrusive systems, and that didn't have the tail-happiness exhibited by the Outback VDC. The Tribeca is one such example.
The only other vehicle I remember them having similar complaints about is the Acura MDX. They complained that the initial model (without VSA) fishtailed. Then after VSA was added, they tested it again, and the rear end still swung out.
For a vehicle like the OB VDC, I would expect it to behave with less drama under emergency conditions. Could it be something inherent to the OB suspension set up that can't be dialed out with VDC?
Ken
Probably, but it's only a guess. The stock Outback's suspension probably can't be fully-controlled by VDC. To truly counter the potentially inherent limitations, Subaru would have to dial-up the VDC so high that it WOULD be very intrusive.
Yes, I'm disappointed too. You'd expect that a vehicle with a nice AWD system, stellar crash test scores, better general handling than many SUV's, etc. would be more composed in an emergency maneuver.
Unlike others, they don't respond to unfavorable results with proverbial "no single test represents overall safaty" or "these tests don't represent real-life situation". When '05 Legacy got not so great side impact and rear crash scores, they redesigned it to get '06 gold award. IIHS also stated that their first '05 batch did not deploy airbags correctly, which spurred an immediate recall.
Of the other hand of course suspension/traction/stability control systems are more difficult to troubleshoot than structural crashworthiness, as there is much more give and take with those.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
-juice
The 2007 Jeep will demonstrate such improvement when it is compared to the old (2006) model....even without stability control which is available on the 2007.
As an aside, I wouldn't even consider owning a Tribecca instead of my VDC wagon. The glaringly ugly, heavy and slow Tribecca minivan reminds me of an old Chrysler product. Perhaps an inch or two more track on the Outback would be nice, however.
Even for 5 passengers, the 40/20/40 seat layout is better.
That plus the interior looks nicer to me.
I'd get a Tribeca in a heart beat. But I like the avant-garde styling, and the fact that you don't see yourself coming and going.
-juice
Agreed that for those who need the extra seats the Beca is a way to stay with Subaru. I'm not sure I would describe the styling as avant-garde as much as eclectic.
The marketplace will decide. I have noticed that Chrysler's 2+2+2 model is in great oversupply.......speaking of disguised minivans.
Dave
Let's see the updates for MY08.
-juice
It sounds like the Outback is allowed to yaw to higher angles for some reason, and that clearly doesn't have to be the case. They may have just made the VDC less intrusive on the Outback, but for my purposes, I want it to be super conservative. I can always switch it off when I want to swing the tail or flirt with instability. When it's on, I expect significant damping from the system -- the tail should not get out on me. I have that behavior on my non-VDC 05 Outback XT, and it's not desirable on the road.
Bob
-juice
There is one advantage of the Bosch system however: Wide open throttle on snow produces no weave whatsoever, unlike the VDC. Subaru presumes we know how to drive.
I did not buy the LLBean because I would not have a car without stability control after driving with it for several years. But there is a limit as to how much help I want from nanny.
While I agree that plowing/understeer is undesirable, I think tail out oversteer is equally bad. Personally, I would much rather if my OB XT did not step the tail out in certain winter conditions. And if you do want that feature, it would be as simple as turing VDC off.
________________________________________________
Well, there's no need for that. Saying it's glaringly ugly, heavy and slow is just plain subjective and unnecessary. Sounds like you are just trying to make yourself feel better about your outback. Many people would write the outback off as being an overdone station wagon that reminds them of an AMC wagon from the 80's. I don't agree with that...I like the current outback styling...but some people just faint at anything called a station wagon.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and just because the Tribeca is not to your liking...why trash it.
While I'm not a huge fan of the grill...it is growing on me...and I give it extra points for having more uniqueness and character than most box shaped CUV's out there.
It's performance while not stellar...are very good and you can't argue with it's safety and reliability. For someone who wants Subaru safety and reliability but find the outback isn't quite large enough...or want some extra seating for kids...the Tribeca is a good choice. Also, I like the idea that when people see the tribeca...wheather they like the styling or not...they know it is an expensive and well optioned vehicle. The top of the line $35K outback could easily be mistaken for the $22K outback basic.
Yes, I own a Tribeca and I really like it...so I will also defend it!
I'm glad you enjoy your outback...but respect that others like their vehicle purchases as well and may not take kindly to trashing....I can also provide plenty of good reviews regarding the Tribeca. So in future try saying: "I personally don't like the styling" rather than a personal opinion stated as fact: "The stying IS ugly"
Not to be too hard on you...as we are all guilty of stating our opinions as if they are fact...."wow she's ugly" may be true for an observer...but likely wouldn't be appreciated by her husband....which is why it's polite to not say that too loudly.
It ain't a sports car.
-juice
-juice
We are totally spoiled these days.
John
-juice
I'll also be picking your brains for dicsussion suggestions for the Subaru vehicle groups as we reorganize the forums. Your input and assistance is greatly appreciated!
The Subaru Crew Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
The 3.0 H-6 will remain and there will be an optional 3.6 H-6. I'm not sure if the 3.6 will be an option across the board, or will only come on top level models; knowing Subaru, probably the later. The horsepower is rumored to be around 275 or 280.
Bob
Hopefully they'll find ways to keep it relatively efficient. I don't expect stellar gas mileage, but terrible mileage shouldn't be in order.
I presume that the engines won't be turbocharged, or at least not yet.
Other than possibly lower production volume there is little cost difference in the two. However, CAFE regulations would make selling too many 3.6's a possible problem. The available price premium may be limited by competition.
Now let's have that 3.6l engine available in the Legacy GT!