Subaru Crew - Future Models II

lark6 · June 2001

I'll have to look at a first-gen OBS to confirm your comments.

I have noticed that the new Forester cloth interiors are less colorful than the 98-00 versions. My S upholstery has ribbons of color running through it that remind me of butterfly scales. The seats have been pretty durable thus far but I do have a spot on the drivers' side door panel that has abraided a bit. Since I live in the Northeast Corridor I do drive on toll roads a lot and have to roll down the window to pay the tolls. The service manager at Fred Beans said they'd replace the panel, which I agreed to, but he never set up the appointment and it's my fault for not following through with him.

Juice told me to stop driving with my arm on the windowsill so I did. I also got an EZ Pass so that helps a lot as well.

Ed

kens · June 2001

Yeah, I need to agree that I sometimes wonder what the thought process is in choosing some of the interior fabrics. I agree with Dennis that it seems as though the selections are becoming more conservative -- a good thing in my opinion.

Ken

ateixeira · June 2001

Actually, I get a lot of compliments on the rather wild upholstery on my '98, which is textured like burlap.

I can say that it holds up well, at least, with a dog that tends to get motion sickness and a toddler that has the occasional food fight with my wife.

Something Blitzen-ish would be good. Now if only I could afford the Blitzenette and the 2005 big SUW, and it were moved up a couple of years...

Tribute has the dreaded Ford CD4E transmission that Mazda 626 owners advise you to avoid. It also has 6 recalls right off the bat, and a short, 3 year powertrain warranty, plus crash test results that do not match the Forester.

So no, I'm not afraid to compare it to the Forester (reliable, only 1 recall in 4 model years, 5/60 warranty, IIHS "Good" score) all for less money.

Tribute has a bigger back seat and more power, but mileage simply will not match the 25.1mpg I'm getting. That plus it's AWD system is part-time only (no center differential).

-juice

rsholland · June 2001

Part-time AWD, isn't that an oxymoron?

Bob

francophile · June 2001

...whatever! Thanks Patti, for making our wishes heard!

I'd like to see the car have somewhere around 250hp (225 MINIMUM), spiffed up suspension from the GT, bigger brakes, 17" wheels. VTD in the manual tranny model would be really cool, 6 speeds would too. Finally, the spoiler MUST be optional! I want a sleeper :-)

I wonder if it would be worth just going after the manual transmission folks first, maybe saving some development time and costs?

Cheers,
-wdb

tincup47 · June 2001

minor correction- 2 recalls, received 02 sensor recall on our 01

jagarland · June 2001

What is the latest news on the larger (Outback based???) SUV. Perhaps I have missed recent postings. If I did, tell me what number post to go to. Otherwise any relevant details would be appreciated. Thanks

Jack

rsholland · June 2001

If you're speaking of the joint GM/Subaru SUV, due out around '05, there isn't any new news that I'm aware of. There is a recent rumor that the '03 Forester may be based on the Outback platform, rather than the Impreza platform, which it currently uses.

Bob

ateixeira · June 2001

Someone asked for the VDC to trickle down into other models (as well as the H6 of course), and that is a good point - even the entry-level Focus now offers stability control as an option. So that alone hardly makes the VDC near-luxury.

The moonroof, leather, wood, and stereo do, but toss in optional HIDs and a 5 speed auto and I bet the price would seem less shocking.

-juice

locke2c · June 2001

Nah... less gadgets, more meat. Put the biggest engine in the cheapest trim level (as an option is fine). Then offer higher trim levels if customers see the need for the gadgets.

You'll sell a lot of cars this way, and a goodly number of customers will upgrade. I think Subaru wasted a lot of money on the H6 VDC and LL Bean, and would have been better served by getting the H6 in as many models as possible. Of course, they can rectify that problem starting model year.

Make a manual tranny available!

-Colin

lark6 · June 2001

juice: I know what the L's upholstery looks and feels like - a green '00 L was the first Forester I test drove. The new OBS upholstery just seems even rougher to me.

How was your Florida trip?

Ed

ateixeira · June 2001

I see two distinct markets, though. One for the performance driver, perhaps even a little decontented for lightness. The other for the near-luxury customer that would otherwise buy an Acura TL (and not a Bimmer or an Audi).

I fully agree that to amortize the development costs of the H6 they'll have to make it more widely available. Same with the WRX engine. :-)

You would have loved this Cruise In they had in Old Town Kissimme. Saw a nice Lark there, even, which reminded me of you. Plenty of early SS Camaros, too, Colin.

-juice

jagarland · June 2001

Thanks. Yes it was the Outback based Forester I was thinking of. You said you thought '03...ist that an educated guess or based on some solid knowledge?

Jack

rsholland · June 2001

That's a very educated guess. I'm about 99.9% certain. The real question is: what month?

I'm only about 50% certain it will be Outback based, however.

Bob

leomort · June 2001

when should we start seeing some sneak peaks of the 2003 Forester? Hoping that the rear suspension get re-work to reduce rear shock tower in cargo area so as to increase the useable space. More room in the back seat would be nice. A H6 Forester--would that be a dream come true.

Leo

p0926 · June 2001

I want to add my vote endorsing the current "bland" pattern for the fabric in the Forester. The pattern used in the 98-00 models is too "colorful" for my tastes.

-Frank P.

rsholland · June 2001

I thought it might be sometime this summer, if we get the vehicle next March. The March date is somewhat in question, judging by a comment made by a Subaru spokesman on SpeedVision's Subaru Showroom. It may(?) be six months later.

Bob

cb70 · June 2001

I just can't stand the wait!

amishra · June 2001

H6, 5-speed in a base Outback / Legacy GT? Yum! That would be enough to make me hop on a plane back to Canada today

A 5 speed will certainly make that engine shine.

bluesubie · June 2001

Subaru is building an engine plant to start production 1st qtr 02. This will make room for the ST-X production . I'm ready for a peek too.
From:
http://www.glpi.org/SIA%20Engine%20Plant%20Announcement.htm
"Subaru production facilities are being expanded to prepare for production of a new model based on the ST-X concept vehicle shown earlier this year at the Los Angeles Auto Show. Initial production for the new model is projected to be 2,000 vehicles per month. Start of production is planned for the third quarter of 2002."

Dennis

rsholland · June 2001

I know the mold has already been cast on this model, and that Subaru is at this stage basically "crossing the T's and dotting the I's." I just hope they got it right, in terms of content and capability.

And I think the key word here is capability. IMO, I think most people who will shopping this vehicle will also be cross-shopping it with other compact 4-door pickups. If the OutBRAT can't deliver on both payload and trailering, two items that most of these customers want, then Subaru has made a big mistake.

Most small pickups have payloads that range from around 900 lbs. to over 1700 lbs. I hope the OutBRAT will offer something in the 1400 lb. range, which is just over the middle.

Most small pickups have the capability of towing from 3500 lbs. to 5000 lbs. I hope the OutBRAT will be able to tow around 4000 lbs., again right in the middle. I definitely would like it to be Class III capable, or at least make it into the Class III category.

I also hope they get creative with the pickup bed area. I understand the mid-gate may not appear, which I'm sorry to hear. I hope to see storage pockets in the fenders, similar to the Chevy Avalanche. I would also love to see a tailgate that could fold out and drop to become a loading ramp for lawn mowers, ATVs, motorcycles, etc.

Bob

bluesubie · June 2001

Don't forget - it's still a Legacy, no matter how they slice it (pun intended). :-)
Dennis

paisan · June 2001

The chassis just can't handle it. All the other pickups it's gonna be compared to are frame-based trucks, not uni-body. I highly doubt you'll see 4K capacity.

-mike

rsholland · June 2001

Aussie H-6 Outbacks are already rated to tow over 3500 lbs. (with trailer brakes). So, if they beef it up even morewhich I sure hope they do, I think 4000 lbs. is within reason.

I sure hope they don't just make it a Subaru El Camino or Ranchero.

Bob

paisan · June 2001

Bob, you must understand, we live in the Sue S of A. The reason we have lower towing is because of the sue happy americans. It won't be any different with the next generation of cars. Care to wager?

-mike

bluesubie · June 2001

Mike, are you starting an ST-X tow pool?
I say 2,500 lbs., maybe 3,000 if we're lucky.
Didn't realize the Aussies could tow 3,500 w/brakes though.

Dennis

hypov · June 2001

I say we'll be stuck with the current 2000 lbs.

dsattler · June 2001

...just because no one else has.

David

kate5000 · June 2001

oops, meant 3500 lbs

armac13 · June 2001

Ross

soon2bsubee · June 2001

2800 lbs

subearu · June 2001

I'll say 1 (from the Price is Right....)

realistically: maybe 2750lb?

-Brian

p0926 · June 2001

Bob- I understand your oft stated desire for increased towing capability. I just don't think Subaru is going to accomodate you. In fact, I think that towing capacity counts for very little in their design plans. Actually, I see the OutBrat filling a market niche quite similar to that of the El Camino :(O) As far as payload capacity goes, I see the OutBrat also being at the low end of that spectrum.

Mike- Put me down for 3050.

-Frank P.

rsholland · June 2001

decent towing4000 lbs. is certainly on the high end, even I will admit to thatthey will lose a substantial audience. People looking at the OutBRAT will also be looking at Tacoma Double Cabs, and Frontier Crew Cabs, both of which tow 5000 lbs. If they only allow 2000 lbs., they are going to limit themselves to mostly current Subaru owners. I see very little "conquest" sales from other pickup brands.

As I stated my hope would be for 4000 lbs., realistically I think 3500 lbs. is within reach. That the max allowed for Class II trailers.

Also, keep in mind the Volvo V70 is rated (right here in sue-happy America) at 3300 lbs. I think Subaru can match, or exceed, Volvo don't you think?

Bob

p0926 · June 2001

Bob- I see that OutBrat as being more of a cross-over vehicle and not meant to appeal to strictly the pickup truck crowd. Besides, I'm pretty sure that compact pickup owners are just like SUV owners in that the vast majority of them never tow anything. Just like SUV owners never go off-roading. So yes, I can see the OutBrat stealing sales from the "hip" compact pickup truck market.

-Frank P.

rsholland · June 2001

The compact "crew cab" market (the vehicles I mentioned above) is very different from the traditional compact truck market. It's much more of a "lifesyle" audiencewhich is exactly what Subaru is going after.

I really think if Subaru limits the towing of the OutBRAT to 2000 lbs., they're shooting themselves in the foot.

Bob

rsholland · June 2001

Long time no see, did you ever get your Subaru?

Bob

paisan · June 2001

So let's see so far we have:

David from Brooklyn: 2000lb
Dennis: 2500lb
Paisan: 2600lb
subearu: 2750lb
Soon2bsubee: 2800lb
David(dsattler): 3000lb
Frank P: 3050lb
Ross: 3100lb
Kate: 3500lb
Bob: 4000lb

-mike

locke2c · June 2001

Bob, I don't think the Outbrat won't be able to haul or tow nearly as much as a compact truck because it's NOT a truck. Unless they're basing it on the S10 and sneaking that one in, lol. It's a Legacy, whose chassis is unmistakable for a truck's... much lighter, better handling and unable to bear as much load.

If it can haul as much as a truck, it will weigh as much as one and worse, drive like one too. I don't think Subaru has a chance in hell at the traditional compact truck market, they need more than AWD to differentiate the Outbrat.

Sorry.

-Colin

paisan · June 2001

The new s10/s15 is going to be an isuzu!

They are actually designing the 2003 S10/S15 for GM.

-mike

rsholland · June 2001

I agree that Subaru doesn't have chance with the traditional compact truck customer. The key word here is "traditional."

The compact crew-cab market here in the USA is much different from the non-crew cab market. Both the Tacoma Double Cab and Frontier are aimed, I think, at much the same customer that the OutBRAT is going after.

Please note I didn't say they're equally capable in terms of being able to generate work, but I think the the customer that is cross-shopping the Tacoma Double-Cab, etc., could also very well be cross-shopping the OutBRAT. What will sway the purchase decision is just how much "work" needs to be done vs. driving "pleasure." What I'm saying Subaru needs to be in the ballparknot necessarily matchbut be in the ballpark with the traditional trucks as far as work ability.

Bob

leomort · June 2001

In particular the Forester. Is the AWD split 50/50 all the time? I thought somone had said that the split is 90/10 and that it shifts power as needed. Can someone help explain Subaru's AWD?

Leo

bluesubie · June 2001

I'll give you a technically challenged description.
The 5-speed uses a viscous coupling that has a default of 50/50 in "normal" driving. It can transfer the split from ~10/90 - ~90/10 as needed.

The automatic's default in "normal" driving is 90/10 using an electronic clutch(?) thingy. It can transfer to a max. split of 50/50. It also allegedly locks at 50/50 in R, 1 or 2. Also check out subaru.com

I use normal in quotes because the split is always changing on both systems during different scenarios (accelerating, turns, slippery conditions, etc.)
Hope this helps.

Dennis

paisan · June 2001

I don't think the MT moves very far off of the 50/50 split. #s I've heard are around 60/40, 40/60 at best on the MTs, cause it constantly strives to get a 50/50 split between power f-r.

I'm still waiting for patti to get us actual torque split #s and to definitively tell us if on the AT in R, 1, 2 you get a 50/50 lock.

-mike

bluesubie · June 2001

My numbers on the VC come from an email I received from Subaru in 1998. If Subaru came out with official numbers, it would end a lot of speculation (hint, hint Patti). :-)
Dennis

paisan · June 2001

was from an e-mail from subaru? Wow didn't know they had officially stated that the torque split that far. Interesting. But yes, it would be nice for Patti to let us know...

-mike

bluesubie · June 2001

I wished I would have saved that email. I wonder why they're not as forthcoming with the info nowadays?
Dennis

leomort · June 2001

I think the AWD on the RAV's is a constant 50/50, and the Tribute's is 90/10. Are all AWD create equal? Afterall, is the principle all the same?

Leo

paisan · June 2001

I believe the Tributes is 100/0 like the CRV and only kicks in the rears after the fronts are slipping. The Rav's is similar IIRC to the one in the MT Subies.

-mike

paisan · June 2001

Would you settle for this as the next generation out-brat?

http://www.holden.com.au/sc02_vehicle_showroom/ sc02_6_commercial/sc02_6_1_ute/overview.asp?cartype=3

-mike

Subaru Crew - Future Models II

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles