Options

Subaru Crew - Future Models II

1397398400402403446

Comments

  • rblnrrblnr Member Posts: 124
    I think the Forester looks exactly as it should. With the same basic shape and big windows all around, utility is retained (and hopefully improved) while streamlining the box look a bit. A 'Forester' should not be too sleek. That would be a Murano or a Tribeca. It doesn't need to be too distinctive vs. the pack visually. Assuming it's a good performer, let's hope the marketing folks bring their A game.

    Narrowing the grille vertically, which gives the impression of widening it, takes it out of Chrysler territory a bit; it's the only Subie I like it on. Looks ungainly on the Tribeca. I'm OK w/the original Tribeca grille (I own an '06), but wished it would have gotten a similar vertical narrowing which would have sleeked it up while maintaining some distinction.

    In NYC, I don't need a rear view cam for my Tribeca to parallel park because I use braille. :)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I agree.

    Even if Subaru does take risks, it should not be with the Forester.

    Forester should remain their rational and practical small utility.
  • zman3zman3 Member Posts: 857
    Yes ours has the back-up sensors and they work quite well, although I prefer the the older Ford implementation better than the Buick version. The Ford simply used the frequency of the beeps to indicate proximity. The Buick uses lights on the inside roof at the rear of the vehicle along with an audible indicator. I don't want to look at the lights while backing up, I want to look out the rear window!

    A back-up camera might be nice in certain situations but I was not going to spend $2000 on the NAV just to get the back-up camera.

    Bob, I've changed my mind. I am not coming over for Christmas dinner. I don't want to deal with your driveway and dog.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    :D

    Yeah, backup cams should not be bundled with GPS Nav. That makes it unaffordable for many.

    Toyota made a bold move - the Highlander has a backup cam standard on the Sport and Limited models, even if you do not get a GPS.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    My backup sensor on the Armada works amazingly well. I can basically get it about 6-8" from any car or object behind me just based on the tones. I use it extensively when parking in Manhattan, works very well.

    -mike
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Yeah, backup cams should not be bundled with GPS Nav. That makes it unaffordable for many.

    Toyota made a bold move - the Highlander has a backup cam standard on the Sport and Limited models, even if you do not get a GPS.


    Not that bold, the Nissans also have non-GPS backup cameras on their SUVs as well.

    -mike
  • zman3zman3 Member Posts: 857
    Armada? Manhattan?

    No thank you. That doesn't sound like fun.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    It's not bad at all really. i usually find some parking for it when I need it. I can't wait to get my 08 Armada, it has front sensors as well.

    -mike
  • css1css1 Member Posts: 247
    Mike,

    Are you going to be at your garage in Nj saturday?
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    Given the possibly early introduction of the Forester (april ??), I wonder if anyone has heard what might happen with the '09 outback.

    Things I would like to see are the 3.6 H6 motor and the Tribeca auto trans in the outback, since they apparently made some major improvements in both of those .vs. what's now in the outback.

    A few months is not all that long to wait... ;)
  • tifightertifighter Member Posts: 3,793
    My guess is that it will not happen. Subaru always seems to make the mid cycle change for a given model, then nothing major mechanically until the next generation. Forester got the 06 update, then nada, for example. Since 08 was the mid cycle update, I would be really surprised if they threw the 3.6l in this current chassis.

    But if they did, I'd sit up and pay attention... ;)

    25 NX 450h+ / 24 Sienna Plat AWD / 23 Civic Type-R / 21 Boxster GTS 4.0

  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    The Outback and Legacy will be all-new for 2010. The only thing I've heard is that it will be larger. I'm expecting the 3.6 engine to show up then, but I haven't heard anything to that end.

    There was an image of an Outback test mule a while back that showed a vehicle with a wheelbase around 108 inches.

    http://blogs.edmunds.com/Straightline/3444

    Even though the story says Forester—it's the next Outback. I've had that confirmed from someone at SOA.

    Bob
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    the longer wheelbase sounds good, the longer overall length is not. I'm trying to keep the next car around 190 inches max (shorter would be better) and that is proving hard with all the formerly midsized cars now approaching full size.

    Perhaps the '09 Forester is the better bet?
  • saedavesaedave Member Posts: 694
    The current Outback is almost 190". I agree that longer is not better.

    Have you considered the new Impreza wagon (hatch)? At about 174 inches it is an ideal size. It's lighter weight makes the 2.5i a viable engine also.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    As bob said, 2010 will be the new legacy/outback. I have confirmed 3.6L w/6speed and somewhere around 300hp for the new larger legacy/outback. Possible 3.6L w/Turbo but that is still up in the air.

    -mike
  • toboggantoboggan Member Posts: 283
    Hmmm, must start "working on" the better half to replace the '98 OBW Ltd with another MT to tow behind the motor home. Then the '08 Tribeca would be all her's. :P

    MNSteve
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    thnx for info. How much larger is "larger"? Still under 190 inches or is it going to go for full size status?
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Well larger than the current models, not sure how big they are now, probably A6ish sized. It'll be slated for what are "mid-size" cars in my book, (Accord/Camary) although a lot of folks call those full-sized cars. Full size to me is Caprice/Crown Vic/etc.

    -mike
  • lucien2lucien2 Member Posts: 2,984
    what's a Caprice? ;)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I agree they should not make it a lot bigger.

    To be honest, it's the Tribeca that needs to be bigger. It's way too close in size to the Outback.

    When I compared a 5 seat model to a Tribeca, the cargo dimensions were within an inch, both width and length. And the funny thing is the Outback was bigger on one of those (I forget which). Tribeca's cargo area is taller, but that's not enough.

    I say keep the Outback where it is. Maybe box off the rear end, the concept hinted strongly at that, actually.

    The Tribeca could grow to about 200", which is common for the class it's in.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Um, the impreza has more front passenger and drive room than the current Outback/Legacy, the OB/Legacy MUST get larger. Not to mention, I know a ton of folks that have had to walk away from Subaru for the sole reason that the car wasn't big enough. They went to Altima, Accord, Camary. Were they happy about it? Nope. But they had no choice.

    It'll be as large in footprint as the current tribecca as it'll be built on that platform.

    -mike
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,697
    hahaha! That is a great picture, juice! My dog likes to do that as well, but as I tell everyone who falls victim to it: "Don't mind her; she will either get out of the way or save me the food bill."
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    trick is efficient packaging; sounds like Subaru did that for the Impreza.
    That maxx I drive has a ton of interior space, way more than the outback but is somewhat limited in cargo spage.

    My only complaint with Impreza is seat heigth adjustment. The tip forward bit smacks of old VW and doesn't work very well, and unfortunately no power seat is offered.
    Still, I need to drive an Impreza, probably the WRX, and see if they did better with the turbo's low end.

    Kurt
  • rblnrrblnr Member Posts: 124
    The major reason I got a Tribeca over a Legacy GT wagon was backseat width. A car seat on either side, and no one can sit in the middle w/the wagon.

    I appreciate that the Tribeca interior is a really nice step up, but that was secondary.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    09 Forester was out wind-noise testing today on I295 in NJ. Apparently they are extremely quiet. :)

    -mike
  • volkovvolkov Member Posts: 1,306
    The car seat issue was the reason I didn't buy the Leg/OB 4 years ago. It's not just the width, but the centre seatbelt position is too narrow. The WRX was incredibly more accomodating than the OB in that regard. Course, no regrets it turned out that way. :-)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Valid point, and width and height are the main reasons the Tribeca feels bigger.

    I was talking about length specifically. They can make the wheelbase longer, make the cargo area boxier, move the rear seat back a bit, and give the front seat more travel. Making it taller means you can raise the seats, too, but I'm not sure if they should do that on the Legacy.

    So I'm with kurt on this one, go for more efficient packaging, but I still don't think that should make it any longer. A little wider, and little taller, sure. Longer wheelbase, absolutely.
  • saedavesaedave Member Posts: 694
    A little wider, and little taller, sure. Longer wheelbase, absolutely.

    That is just what was done at a controllable cost to turn the Legacy into the Tribeca. Subaru released to Automotive Engineering drawings showing the changes at time of intro..

    It may be the limit of economical change without lots of tooling cost. Will Toyota fund this to compete with the Sienna? The Exiga for now Japan-only model is possibly as close as I expect to see. And it is more like a narrower Tribeca.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The rear of the Tribeca is raked forward, i.e. it gives up a lot of space by not being very boxy back there.

    My van is only 8" longer than a Tribeca, yet it has more cargo room behind the 2nd row (with 5 seats in place) than a Tribeca has behind the 1st row. By a wide margin.

    Being boxy really helps create space.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    "Being boxy really helps create space."

    And reduce fuel economy, unfortunately. :-(

    However, I am intrigued to discover that the Sienna AWD, weighing 300 pounds more (and priced - for a Sienna XLE - about the same as a Tribeca 7-passenger), is rated exactly the same for fuel economy as the Tribeca.

    Cargo space is no contest: 149 cu ft for the Sienna 7-passenger, 74 cu ft for the Tribeca 7-passenger. Whoa!

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I mean boxy at the rear/cargo area.

    74 cubic feet for an SUV that is 192" long is not impressive.

    The Sienna has 99 cubic feet behind the 2nd row. So I can seat 5 and still enjoy 25 more cubic feet, about twice the trunk space in a Legacy sedan.

    Forester also has much better space efficiency. If they simply apply the same formula on a bigger scale, they could get 80-90 cubic feet out of a Tribeca.

    Better yet, make it grow to about 200" long (the norm for the newer CX9 and Lambdas) and they could get that over 100 cubes.

    The new Impreza is well packaged, but it has a very short overall length (the 5 door, I mean). It's shorter than the 2007 model. It's OK for its size.

    The Forester is looking good.

    Build the next Tribeca as a 125% scale Forester. Maybe even 140%.
  • samiam_68samiam_68 Member Posts: 775
    My 96 Legacy wagon had 73 cubic feet of space behind 1st row. Plenty of legroom and headroom for both rows. It was only 184" long, 68" wide, and 57" high, and not too boxy. Subaru has gone in the wrong direction with their latest Legacy and Tribeca design - bigger on the outside, smaller on the inside. Not a very bright move on their part.
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    yes the new Impreza is nicer than the older one and seems to make good use of interior space;

    except for its seats.
    The passenger seat is like sitting in a bathtub, with a huge amount of headroom. Drivers seat is a little better. Both seats need real heigth adjustments like in the current VW models.
    Rear cargo space has less intrustion from the rear suspension than many cars (though I'm surprised how good the older Outback is in this regard - the Maxx shock towers are huge by comparison).
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    any glimmers of what Subaru will do with their models in '08?

    GM announced major hikes today, claiming commodities (steel, etc). were responsible.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    The 08 pricing is out already.

    As for the Legacy getting larger, it definitely will get there cause after test driving an 08 STi yesterday, I can say that cabin has more space than my 05 Legacy wagon, however the hatch space is about 1/2 that of my wagon space.

    They really need an A6/Camary/Accord/Etc. sized vehicle to have any shot at competing in the US market. Unfortunately we like our "boats" with headroom, seatroom, and room for 3-4 golf bags in the trunk.

    -mike
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    my bad for dumb question...should have said '09, and I guess it's too soon to know.

    As side topic:

    mimousa.com/info/blowerinfo.asp

    offers an unusual "supercharger" which is a specially modified electric fan and air filter. I wonder if these actually work ??
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Are those the $30 ones sold on E-bay? Doubtful.

    On a side note, I installed the SPT Cat-back exhaust tonight on my 05 LGT Wagon and felt a noticeable throttle response from it. I may get an SPT intake which would further boost this. I can't wait to see how it does once the 1,000 mile ECU re-learning period is over with the new exhaust.

    -mike
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    Yes, it is very similar, but not identical. Same trick in using a squirrel cage fan and blowing air into the intake manifold. Idea has far more sense that the turbinator or other intake manifold vane systems, but suspect there are other issues.

    Interesting about the cat-back...will appreciate further info on it as more data develops.
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,697
    Okay, so I hunted down the location of that last discussion - who knew it would be in the Future Models II thread?! There is some dynamic discussion for you...

    Update on rattles here.

    Regarding the battery, the 420CCA in an '08 4EAT Outback, the radio finally reset on me... it was -40 this morning. I even made sure that all accessories, including the headlights, were off when I cranked the starter. *shrugs* It started up just fine, so I am not going to worry about radio presets. If I were keeping the car, I would put a >600CCA battery in it, but I do not feel like this one might strand me as I did with the super-weak battery in the manual '07.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I responded over there, but I had another thought...

    Make sure it's not something in one of the bins. I had an annoying rattle in my van but it turned out to be my coin tray. I found a better place for it and it's quiet.

    Just make sure it's not something inside one of the many little storage bins. It may be worth emptying them out and seeing which rattles are still present.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    -40 degrees is more than most batteries can handle. I wouldn't expect any car to do well in those temps. I would imagine that your rattles are also related to these extreme conditions.

    -mike
  • ray_paray_pa Member Posts: 10
    179.5x70x66
  • jeffmcjeffmc Member Posts: 1,742
    09 Forester MPG for non-turbo Japanese models:
    28.7-32.9 mpg
    Nice job, Subaru. :shades:

    Similar mileage in the US model would be very tempting. I like the oomph from my Outback's H6, but similar utility & comfort and 30-50% in fuel savings would make me think about it. Imagine what they could do with direct injection, which I told myself I would wait for to have on my next Subie.

    In the voice of Captain Kirk:
    "Must... hold... out... for... direct... in... jection."
  • kurtamaxxxguykurtamaxxxguy Member Posts: 1,798
    yes it would be nice to see them add direct injection to the outback engines. Perhaps in '10 they will.
    My main issue with the outback is the engine choice. The motor from the Tribeca with direct injection might fix all the limitations they currently have.
    A pity Subaru has no hybrids.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Just drove an H6 Outback LLBean with 22k miles on it. We put on snows and brakes so I was bedding in the brakes. I have to tell you it's my first well broken in H6 (of the current gen) and I was thoroughly impressed.

    -mike
  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    Keep in mind that's a 2.0 liter engine, making about 150 hp. The Japanese also calculate fuel efficiency on a different cycle. I don't know the specifics, but Japanese MPG figures always look a bit inflated relative to their US EPA figures.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Imperial Gallons IIRC?

    -mike
  • dino001dino001 Member Posts: 6,191
    Imperial gallon would give you 20% higher values (1 US gall is 231 cu in = 3.78 l, imperial is 277 cu in = 4.55 cu in).

    2018 430i Gran Coupe

  • kenokakenoka Member Posts: 218
    Ah! Imperial gallons, of course. Well spotted guys.
Sign In or Register to comment.