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.
Options

Subaru Crew - Future Models II

1…4243454748…446

Comments

  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    Mike, that phrase didn't come off as I intended. I didn't mean that SVX owners are by and large unhappy, I meant that compared to how many SVXs Subaru hoped to sell there are *numerically* few owners of them. You know, warm bodies that would recognize the SVX name and think fondly of it.

    Most other folks would remember it as overpriced, overweight, strange windows, no manual tranny, etc. All the reasons they didn't buy one.

    -Colin
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    the 300zx, 3000gt, Supra, Starion, and a # of other vehicles also died the same horrible death as the SVX. :(

    -mike
  • subaru_teamsubaru_team Member Posts: 1,676
    in the article is the "Forecast" header. I've never give a lot of credit to crystal balls!

    Patti
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    To keep the roadster light, I'd prefer to see it on the WRX platform. No sense making another Sebring/Solara "prom queen".

    -juice
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    Mike the first 3 names you mentioned failed on price more than anything else. I don't know if the same could be said for the SVX-- if it were $5k cheaper would it have been barnburner?
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I don't think it was price, it was the SUV craze that killed em. Even if they dropped the prices on the Z, 3000GT, Supra, they wouldn't have sold at that time period, cause the cars certianly weren't costing that much to build, and are/were still strong sellers in other markets that didn't have the SUV craze.

    I think the SVX was just poor timing, just like the other Super Coupes of the day.

    -mike
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    That had something to do with it, no doubt. But I sure don't remember many 16-30 year olds wishing they could afford a $35k car and it being the SVX. Supra turbo, 3000GT VR4, RX7 turbo, 300z, you bet.

    -Colin
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    LOL! Perfect description! I gotta remember that one. Thanks juice.

    Bob
  • drew_drew_ Member Posts: 3,382
    image

    ...at 6-7pm Pacific/9-10 pm Eastern. Hope to see you there!
    http://www.edmunds.com/chat/subaruchat.html



    Drew
    Host
    Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
  • p0926p0926 Member Posts: 4,423
    Hey Colin- I think you just described me! I lusted after all four of those cars. The SVX on the other hand, did nothing for me. When it came out, I remember thinking that its proportions just didn't look right.

    -Frank P.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I was a HS grad in '92 and absolutely loved it. Also let's not forget that subaru was even more of a niche player in '92 than now. So obviously it's not going to have the overall appeal of the supra, 300zx, etc. which had much more marketing $ and market share.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The SVX had bad timing. And no, it wasn't the type of car a teenager longed for. It was more mature, and could have pleased a lot of empty-nest baby boomers tired of their ill handling SUVs, looking for a nice GT with AWD. Think of it as a bargain Porsche 928.

    I swear though, every time I see one I still think they are totally exotic looking. Timeless, even. Zs are nice, but Supras are so era-specific. They already look old. RX7s are muscular and still look OK.

    Back in HS, I wanted something flashy, so an RX7, Z, or Starion, something along those lines. But my tastes grew out of those.

    -juice
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I still want a Conquest TSI, but they are all pretty shot now, hard to find a good one. Thats why I'm jumping on the 300z. If it only was a 300z turbo, I'd be even happier.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I remember those mega-wide tires they used. 265mm section width, something like that, on a relatively small car. The fender blisters actually look like the ones on the Forester.

    A bit overdone, looking back.

    -juice
  • drew_drew_ Member Posts: 3,382
    image
  • nygregnygreg Member Posts: 1,936
    about the SVX was the commercial. The son driving home on the farm and the father saying...,"son, I thought we said you were to buy a Subaru. But, dad, I did!". Now I understand.

    Greg
  • lark6lark6 Member Posts: 2,565
    I remember visiting a Subaru dealer in VA when the SVX was introduced. Thought the windows odd but liked everything else, especially the interior. I wish I could have alcantara in my Forester.

    The Impreza Cabrio looks odd with that basket handle rollbar - like an Olds Cutlass or a VW Golf Cabrio. Technology should have advanced to the point where that won't be necessary in any future Subaru convertible - for example, the Impreza Turbo-based Delfino being built in the UK.

    What I have seen that I like is the OSCA 2500 GT, an Italian built 2-seater closed car with Subaru 2.5L SOHC internals. (OSCA is the revival of a small Italian make that made racing and sports cars in the early 1950's - wish I knew more about it.) Also wish I had a link to a photo - it looks great with it's little Abarth-style "double bubble" roof. Better looking and more integrated than the Delfino.

    Ed
  • texsubarutexsubaru Member Posts: 242
    It's a little hard for me to imagine Subaru making a convertible because it seems like the company's engineers put a lot of emphasis on body rigidity (I assume the quest for rigidity is part of the reason the Impreza sedan doesn't have folding rear seats and the Legacy only has the teeny pass-through port). And, of course, if you lop the roof off a car to make a convertible, body rigidity will tend to suffer.

    As for SVX, I suspect simple mass-market obscurity was a big problem. I had never even heard of the model until after it was out of production. I think it took the Outback ad campaign to really bring Subies to the masses (more or less). Of course, having largely missed the SVX entirely, I have no idea know how often pricing was cited in SVX reviews; did the press give it the same sort of "great car but overpriced" reviews that the H6 Outbacks have consistently garnering?
  • wmiller4wmiller4 Member Posts: 97
    Any idea when the '02 Outbacks are due in the showrooms?
    When are the '02 LL Bean/VDC Outback due out?

    Thanks in advance.
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Will be the same as the '01 Wagons. Added for '02 will be the VDC Sedan, with an H6. Due in dealers around Sept.

    -mike
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    A few interseting links:

    Nissan

    Altima- A few weeks ago I posted that I thought the new Altima was going to be a breakthrough car for the Japanese family sedan market. I still do. Here's some more info. BTW, the wheelbase is 110," which is right the Mercedes E-Class and BMW 5 Series area.

    http://www.auto.com/industry/nissan21_20010621.htm

    SUV/pickup- They may debut a new SUV before the full-size pickup. The pickup may have a 5.0 DOHC V8. The 5.0 displacement was reported somewhere else, not here.

    http://www.autonews.com/html/main/stories0625/nissansuv625.htm

    Toyota

    Toyota Estima Hybrid 4WD, w/o rear propeller shaft- This hybrid minivan sends its power to the rear wheels via an electic motor, not a propeller shaft. Interesting...

    http://auto.ascii24.com/auto24/e/2001/0618/e42npr_ks0618_01.html

    Bob
  • bluesubiebluesubie Member Posts: 3,497
    Bob,

    There's and ST-X towing topic on the i-club.

    http://www.i-club.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=65194&referrerid=767

    Dennis
  • bblachabblacha Member Posts: 160
    The low towing limit doesn't seem to have much to do with technical limitations. Subarus overseas have much higher towing specs.
    For example according to www.subaru.pl, it's almost 4000lb with brakes for both the 2.5l Legacy and 2.0l turbo Forester.

    So I assume those are the *real* specs of these vehicles. I doubt there are significant structural differences.

    -Bart
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    here in the USA is probably due to the lawsuit-happy lawyers, as Mike has pointed out. Even so, there's much room for improvement here.

    In a related item, I noticed that in the full-size Chevy Silverado pickup and Suburban brochures, there is very specific info regarding towing with those vehicles. Believe it or not, Chevy very clearly states in both brochures—if the trailer does not have brakes, they can only tow 2000 lbs. Can you believe that, from a full-size pickup? Unbelievable! You know the the GM lawyers must have written that copy.

    Bob
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Require brakes on all trailers above 2000lbs. so it's kinda a mute point. I will check my trooper book tomorrow and see if it requires brakes at all.

    -mike
  • drew_drew_ Member Posts: 3,382
    Unbelievable? Not really, IMHO. The brakes of the vehicle already have to deal with the heavy curb weight of the truck. Adding 2000 lbs of extra weight (in addition to the vehicle's payload) will add a significant load. You probably could design brakes on the vehicle to deal with the load, but that would probably be cost prohibitive.


    Drew
    Host
    Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
  • subearusubearu Member Posts: 3,613
    I was glad to have trailer brakes (albeit, manual 'surge' brakes) on my ski boat trailer that I towed with my Z71. Sure the Z71 could tow 6500# with no problem (it had the 5.7L). But, that ski boat was about 5500# on the trailer - that's a LOT of weight to not have any control over.

    We always joked about throwing the 'anchor' out when it was time to slow down or stop.

    -Brian
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Always wanted a Nautique or Mastercraft myself. Just can't justify the $30+K investment.

    -mike
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    Actually you could get a smallish Yamaha--they make some really potent outboards--with plenty of power to get two skiers up for a whole lot less than $30k. Visit your local Yamaha dealer or check www.boattraderonline.com .

    Whoops, back to your regularly scheduled Subaru programming.
    -Colin
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I know that, I meant a true ski-boat though, like with a 350 inboard :) Love that deep tone. I currently have a 17ft with a 90hp til I can afford to upgrade to a new boat. Eventually I'd like to get a 4 winns with a 175 Evenrude or Johnson on it. :) How this is scooby related I don't know...

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    90hp? Man, I'd figure paisan would have a small block in there some how...

    I used to water ski and lot and loved Master Craft boats. They could do power slides like nothing else.

    Major low-end torque, too, meant great take-offs. We once pulled 17 skiers out of the water with a single boat (Lake of the Woods Ski Club).

    My dad's 140hp I/O Aristocraft struggled to pull two slalom skiers.

    Sorry, back on topic.

    A drop-top Subies biggest obstacle is Subaru's market. We already joke about the 4 or 5 Subies in Florida, the sunshine state. Subaru's strongest markets aren't exactly sunny year-round.

    So...it would have to be very well sealed, with the all weather package standard. It would have excellent aerodynamics, too.

    How about something real clever, like a power glass targa top?

    -juice
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    Uh, look at the Yamaha XR1800. Two 1200cc inline-3 outboards with 155HP each, $19,999 MSRP but unsold 2000s are going for 16k-17.5k. 18', seats five.

    -Colin
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    How do we make this relevant? Hmm, how much does that boat weigh, with trailer? ;-)

    -juice
  • subearusubearu Member Posts: 3,613
    Our ski boat was a 1987 22' Ski Centurion 'Concourse' with an 351W Ford V8. Probably pushed out about 250 hp. Had a 50 gallon gas tank that fed the thirsty 4 barrel carb. Trailered with a dual axel trailer with surge brakes on one axel. Bought it used 5 years ago - sold it to a friend late last year.

    It was a big heavy boat. No way I'd tow that with anything but a TRUCK.

    -Brian
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Like the yamaha are becoming more and more illegal on many lakes in upstate NY, and our west. I'm not a big fan of impeller technology. I did find that a winter boat show is the best place to buy a boat, saving $3-$8K on them since the winter is a total dead time for boat dealers. Hmmm topic, oh yeah the boat show comes right before the Car show in NY and there are Subarus @ the car show!

    -mike
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    That's a bit hard to believe. How can you ban jetboats when jetskis and waverunners have never been more popular?

    Impellers have a limit before their output becomes limited by cavitation, but 155HP is nowhere near it. There's nothing wrong with jetboats.

    ______

    Real Subaru Stuff:

    Can Subaru make wagons that capture large chunks of market share as SUVs decline? If so, what features would it take?

    -Colin
  • bluesubiebluesubie Member Posts: 3,497
    The 05 SubaGM can't come fast enough.

    Three row seating
    Towing close to Bob's specs :-)
    Stronger H6 (or SC4)
    More marketing towards non-Subaru areas, (the rainy Southeast for example) but not with dinosaur commercials.

    Also, the ST-X needs to be out now instead of a year away.

    Dennis
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Well they are banning wave-runners, jetskis etc, mostly due to noise and danger factors. You have these yahoos that run around on them at like 70mph without obeying the rules of the nautical road, and the jetboats are loud as all get-up. Also IIRC in 2006 there are some heavy restrictions being imposed on 2-cycle engines on boats.

    __________
    REAL SUBARU STUFF:

    I think they would need a bigger wagon, like the SUW. I'd say a longer, wider version of the OB or Legacy, that has power, but retains good gas milage and handling. Maybe a beefier H6 with Turbo or SC.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Good question Colin.

    Check out the Car & Driver reviews of the Avalanche and Blackwood. Basically, the Midgate on the Avalanche makes that concept. It's the single feature that stands out on it - so it'd be nice to see them work out something similar in the ST-X in case has does hit $3/gallon.

    Overall, though, I think Subaru is in a great position to cash in on any decline in SUV sales. When you think of wagon alternatives, Subaru is one of the first that comes to mind. Well, at least with mainstream customers.

    People will miss the payload and towing on their trucks, so I say address those areas a bit, but without losing focus on value. If it's too expensive, make a towing package optional, with a tranny cooler and bigger brakes or something.

    I like Dennis' list.

    -juice
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Actually saw on on the NJTP the other day. I called my buddy up as I tracked it. WIsh I had a digital camera that day. It had a family in it and had Mich. Manuf. Plates on it. It did look sharp, not my cup of tea, but nifty none the less.

    -mike
  • locke2clocke2c Member Posts: 5,038
    As a percentage, a pretty low number of folks do any towing or hauling. The absence of these features could hurt Subaru in the marketing sense, but in the "real world" it won't matter much... Except that many folks don't buy based on their real use, they want that towing capability Just In Case.

    -Colin
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Image is everything in this world! :) Actual capabilities are appreciated by few, unfortunately. That is why V8s V10s V6s are all more popular than a 4 banger. People equate those big #s with speed and power, even if it isn't necessarily true. But if they want to market it they'll need to have those towing and hauling capabilities to appease the masses.

    -mike
  • bluesubiebluesubie Member Posts: 3,497
    Yep - people are V6 this, V6 that without even knowing horsepower and torque.

    I know someone that bought a 2WD Cherokee. What's the point?? Another friend bought a 4WD GC and hasn't even been down a dirt road. Tow hooks optional? [rolleyes]

    Dennis
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Wow, looks really are subjective. I don't think the Blackwood looks sharp at all. The proportions are just plain odd. It's like a truck without the utility, and goofy looks, for the price of a condo.

    At least the Avalanche has a breakthrough feature and far more utility, though it's just as ugly if not worse.

    My Forester can easily smoke the V6 Sante Fe, V6 Grand Vitara, V6 Chevy Tracker, or V6 Xterra.

    -juice
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    I'd say you could beat the GV and the CT, not sure of the SF or the XT. The SF is pretty light and the XT is up there in HP. I'll admit the Blackwood does look like a chopped off Navigator though. I saw an Avalanche at a dealer, but didn't get a chance to stop in and see it, I may go test drive it next week when on vacation since it was at a dealer near my house upstate.

    -mike
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    The Sante Fe is pretty slow. It does have 181hp, but it's porky pig in terms of weight, with a good 5-600 pounds more than the Forester. Plus it only comes in automatic.

    C&D clocked it at 10.3s to 60mph, and remember I have a 5 speed. Even the auto Foresters do it in under 10s.

    The Xterra is not bad off the line, with good torque, but it runs out of steam pretty quickly (170hp IIRC). The N/A version will not keep up with a Forester.

    -juice
  • paisanpaisan Member Posts: 21,181
    Apples to Apples Juice. You would have to use an AT Forester against the SF... :)

    The weight does make a difference though. Right now I'm looking at the specs of the 300z, it's around 2900lbs-ish with 165hp/170lbs torque so it should be pretty zippy. :)

    -mike
  • armac13armac13 Member Posts: 1,129
    since the SF is not available in a 5 speed V6 why do you have to compare it with the Forester Auto? I recently saw a comparison between the SF and the RAV4 5 speed (Motor Week I believe). They indicated that the SF was slow, handled terribly, braked very poorly and was generally awful by comparison. The Forester is faster and handles better than the RAV4.

    Ross
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Fair enough, mike, but C&D did test all automatics and the Forester outran all four of the V6 models I mentioned. That was despite it taking a longish 9.7s to reach 60mph. The Washington Post and Motorweek both reached 60 in 9.1s with automatics - not bad.

    In the sport/cute class, only the Escape holds any significant advantage over the Forester in acceleration. We've tried to race them head to head 6 times, but the Escape kept getting recalled! ;-)

    You got a photo of the Z? What year again? A classmate from college had one, but it had the cheesy digital dash. Drove nice, though.

    -juice
  • barresa62barresa62 Member Posts: 1,379
    The Xterra w/std v6 is only 170hp and as Juice points out, loses a lot of steam quickly, chalk it up as an also-ran when comparing acceleration w/an auto Forester. Not sure if the SC option is available on the Xterra but on the Frontiers it nets about 9.5 w/auto. The top o'line Santa Fe w/v6 is a porker! It weighs as much as my 00'OB Ltd w/auto did, close to 3700 lbs. The acceleration figures are identical to my OB h4 w/auto. Sorry, Mike the Forester is quicker than the Santa Fe, no contest. Of course, I'm jaded by the WRX mystique so everything is seeming a bit slow to me at the moment (including this d_mn computer). :-)

    Stephen
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles