I did some more checking. The Legacy L SE is $600 less than the fairly comparable Accord EX. But when you consider the Legacy's AWD, the Subaru becomes a real bargain. However, when I compared the GT with the Accord EX w/leather (again pretty comparably equipped) the problem with Subaru's pricing becomes obvious. The EX w/leather costs $1,2k more than the plain EX while the GT costs $3,4k more than the L SE. Now suddenly the Accord looks like a much better deal (even considering the lack of AWD).
Again it is an Apples and oranges comparison, The GT gets a lot more content it is not just a leather package, although if you do not break it down it looks like the Accord is way ahead when it is not.
The only difference between the two Accord EX is the leather and that is it.
If you break down the difference in equipment between the L SE and the GT you will see why there is a $3.4K difference in price.
Pat- You don't give me much credit. The Accord EX leather package also includes power driver's seat, heated seats and dual climate control. The GT may be better equipped, but $3,4k worth?
I do give you credit, but I was comparing Canadian Accords and the only difference in the Canadian Accord is the leather, The cloth Ex gets the rest of the Amenities.
My Mistake in forgetting that car makers tend to put different content in cars between our two countrys, although for the life of me I will never figure that out.
And BTW. an Accord EX V6 with a cloth interior is scarcer than chickens teeth around here.
Nice catch Leo. So now you can get a monotone H6 Outback fairly cheap. I actually like the Titanium with a Gray interior, it's probably what I'd ask for.
Jim: the H6 also has a rear LSD and the AWP, it's much better equipped than most Accords. Hondas are bare-bones equipped, except maybe EX models, and even then they don't match high-end Subarus for equipment.
Plus, the Outback is a wagon, and that alone is worth a grand or so over a sedan. Noone has mentioned this so far - you can cram about 4 times as much cargo.
They'll tweak the H6 for about 240hp, my guess is next year. We'll have to wait and see.
The street price of the H6 base model will drop to about $24k soon enough.
By the way, the L/SE is not comparable. It doesn't get a rear LSD, no heated seats, no heated mirrors, no wiper de-icers, etc. You're getting much more than just the engine, and for about $4 grand, not $7.
Frank: the GT has VTD and shiftronic. But yeah, *that* model is overpriced, IMO.
In reality, the Accord is bigger and not really equipped the way Outbacks are. My guess is the Acura TSX is actually closer in size and equipment, and remember that's a $25-30k vehicle, and a 4-banger too. And they do make a wagon from that platform in Europe, so add at least another grand on top of that price. Plus add $1500-1700 for AWD. You get $27.5-32.7k, now which is the better value?
I don't believe the Euro Accord has an AWD option. Passat's 4-Motion system is not nearly as robust or predictable as the Subie AWD system, so that tilts the comparison even further in the Outback's favor.
There is an AWD Accord wagon in Europe, there is also type R models in the Accord line actually what we get in north America is not even close to the whole Accord line up.
And let me say this again as a former big time Accord fan I would not swap my GT for any Accord presently sold on this continent.
Combine the Type R *and* the AWD and then you're talking.
The US Accord is vanilla, big but anything but sporty. I recall an issue of C&D where it was quicker 0-60 than a full group of near luxury cars, including the Passat W8! They were not compared directly, but they were in the same issue.
But then I looked at the handling, braking, and slalom, and it was right around last in all 3 categories.
An engine alone does not make the car. I'd pick a Mazda 6 instead, maybe even an Altima SE, in the FWD sedan class.
Passat's 4-Motion system is not nearly as robust or predictable as the Subie AWD system
I don't think you can justify a statement like that. The Passat's AWD system (same as Audi Quattro in the A4 and A6) has a long history of success and offers a good compromise between performance and safety. It is also very robust and predictable in my opinion, in particular when compared to Subaru's simple (non-VDC) AWD in the automatic models.
Passat's torsen is actually very robust. Combined with traction control it's also very effective, maybe better than the VC or the basic auto AWD on Subies because both axles are managed. Stability control is optional, though, IMO it should be standard since all the hardware is already in place.
However, and this was a loooong debate in one thread, VTD+VDC is better for two reasons: it can send 100% of power to each axle, while the VW systems is limited to 67% per, and only the Soob system is truly proactive in that it can transfer power even before any slippage occurs.
The torsen reacts very quickly, but it's still reactive.
Example: you enter a curve too hot, and drop the throttle. VDC senses the lateral Gs and the throttle position, proactively transfers more power to the front wheels for better balanced engine braking. As a backup, the standard stability control is there if needed.
In that same situation, the Passat might get caught flat footed. Probably half of the power will be on the rear axle, and dropping the throttle unweighs the rear axle and could result in a dangerous spin. Traction control won't act because you're not on the gas. *If* you have the optional stability control, that might save you, but again only after your tail has begun to slide out, by then you've lost at least some traction. Good luck.
We used vwvortex.com and VW.com as references, as well as this PDF as a Subaru reference:
I am curious why you prefer Subaru's standard auto AWD (non-VDC) to the VC in the manual version. I haven't driven them back-to-back or on slippery conditions, but I think I like the VC better – at least on paper.
Firstly, it has (depending on implementation, close to) 50-50 power distribution as default. So you are better prepared before a problem occurs. Secondly, when the distribution changes under slippery conditions, it changes smoothly. Many people have described the abrupt and large transfer to the back in the auto system as scary and that it can lead to the back slipping and fishtailing on snow.
I don't want to rehash the AWD manufacturer discussion here. But ESP is also a pro-active system that uses steering wheel and vehicle dynamic sensors and can activate the brakes and reduce the engine torque, similar to VTD+VDC. It is a very inexpensive option, and I agree everyone should choose it.
Wow! I'm gone for most of a week and I've got hundreds of posts to catch up on. You guys and gals are amazing!
On the turbo Legacy rumor front, I'm going to have to disagree with Bob and side with Paul H. (Shirokima over at NASIOC). I think the Alaska sightings are only test mules for the new drivetrain and that Subaru will shock the pants off of us again by releasing the all new Legacy here in the States this summer as an '04. At least that is what I'm hoping!
-Ian (who should request a username change to GTsoon and hopefully sooner than later)
I do prefer the VC's 50/50 default split, but the automatic's AWD is more sophisticated in that it also take inputs like throttle position and doses out the power accordingly.
It does feel more like FWD in many conditions, though, so the VC is more fun to toss around.
I disagree about ESP, and here is the key line from that description (nice link, BTW):
Upon detection of an unstable condition such as a sudden evasive reaction, the system responds within split seconds...
In this case "responds" is the same as "reacts", i.e. there has to be an unstable condition first, then and only then ESP kicks in.
VDC kicks in before there is an unstable condition, like in the drop-throttle example above. It works hard to prevent the unstable condition in the first place.
OK, the difference in subtle, and few in the real world will ever notice, but I think it's valid.
I also have the plain VC on my Forester and while the 50:50 split does lend itself to more sporty driving, I would prefer the auto AWD for slippery conditions for the same reasons stated by juice. With the auto AWD, you can force the system to 50:50 by leaving the gear selector in 1 or 2. With the plain VC, you get a slight back and forth of power if you start getting slippage. It's subtle, but noticeable if you're on very slippery roads. I'd rather have the drivetrain at a fixed split in these conditions.
When you leave the selector in 1 or 2, does it split 50-50 or does it (almost) lock the diff so you would get instantaneous, almost 0-100 distribution if there was slippage on one end?
I am currently tending towards the manual 2.5XT, but I am open to suggestions regarding the auto version.
Your arguments sound compelling, but in practice the only complaining I have heard regarding difficulties (or better, annoyances) in snow handling came from automatic drivers, not from the manual. I am sure that was at higher speeds, too, like 3rd or 4th gear. Perhaps manual drivers are naturally better prepared to react to slight slippage and don't find it as bothersome.
Personally, I prefer a slight amount of drifting over violent and sudden redistribution of the power front and back. I am curious, though, about your slight back-and-forth comment with the manual. When you have pretty slippery conditions, the VC should be almost always engaged. So again, theoretically, I would think this behavior to be more characteristic of the auto transmission. Strange.
I went from a manual Outback to an auto. In really slippery conditions, I preferred the manual... That's because I had more control over the gearing. The auto works great, but there have been a couple of times that I've had to apply the brakes (and slipped a bit), and with the manual I could of geared down and avoided that momentary panic.
On the flip side the auto's great in traffic and I had to replace my clutch in my manual at 28k and it was wearing again when I sold it at 60k - not a good sign for longevity. The auto's been great.
Well I have to weigh in here on the auto-awd system on the subarus...
This past weekend I did a track day down at VIR which encompassed 3-30minute track sessions with Torrential Rains w/50mph cross winds (tornados touched down in adjacent counties) we had standing water on the track. I drove the course nearly as fast as I did the following day in the dry. Through all 17 curves I didn't get one time that the AWD abruptly kicked in, and the AWD had me riding on M3, Vette, and just about every car that got in front of me that day's bumper, especially though the turns. Several FWD and RWD cars nearly got rearended by me in the turns cause they slowed down, and an M3 owner who tried to keep up in the turns skidded off the track!
While there are significant differences in the way the auto and manual AWD systems work, both do a good job of transferring power to where it's needed in a manner that is transparent to most drivers. Personally, I think that individual preference, type of commute, and driving style would all be more important factors when deciding between an auto or manual transmission.
Even though there's no word on production, one can't help but think that this is the long-rumored Neo-SVX. Obviously Subaru is waiting for consumer response to the radical new styling direction before committing to production. I bet when that vehicle actually debuts, it will look a lot like this concept vehicle.
IMHO, in normal slippery driving, you can't tell that much of a difference in the systems. I've compared both in the snow and can tell a slight difference under hard acceleration from a stop (you can get the manual to spin a little more), and when you're driving hard into a snowy corner (easier to fishtail). Then again I was comparing an auto OB to a manual OBS, don't know if weight is a factor.
The VC reacts slower, but it's already at 50/50.
I also think that the bit about locking the torque split is either urban legend or something to do with the older model 4EAT's. Lots of talk, but no proof. Ed from ISR performance (master tech) said you will only get a lock if there's a problem. See his comments here (SubyTechMaster): http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=84430&- ;referrerid=767
I don't know. There's certainly enough time to ship the car over here in time for the NY show. It's just a matter if FHI/SOA decide to do so. To me it seems like a no-brainer, as NY is the last major US auto show for the year. I would think they would want all the press exposure they can get.
consider this: If the '04 Legacy/Baja turbos debut with the existing body style (a bit of a downer, IMO) rather than the highly anticipated all-new body—which is just around the corner, having this concept car on display will add to any missing "splash" at the SOA NY display.
The VC cycles on/off very quickly. It sort of feels like it's pulsing the power back...then forth...then back.
If I power into a wide turn, it'll wag the tail, then the front pulls it out, then it'll wag the tail again. It's an absolute hoot, but with a beginner behind the wheel I'm sure it's not as safe as the automatic's system.
I like the new Sienna too - AWD, magic folding seats, hidden sliding door tracks, rear windows that open. It's really complete. MPV is nice too, especially with 200hp.
I like that neo-SVX, gimme a roadster version of it. 5 speed auto, too, means Subaru will have one available soon. They said more than, so I guess that means 250hp. I'll guess from a 2.5l version of the STi engine, which will also end up in the WRX.
with that pricing and the 'expected' pricing of the XT to fall in the $26k-28k range, I'd have a tough time deciding between a VDC and a XT premium. Only a test drive will tell... ;-)
Actually, we can compare. Sheehy.com is a no-haggle Honda dealer in the same area (DC Metro), and here are some of their prices:
Accord EX sedan auto - $21,095 Accord EX V6 leather/auto - $25,050
The L/SE is $18,773 for an auto sedan, cheaper than you thought, that is a whopping $2,322 less than a similar Accord, with AWD and a 67% longer powertrain warranty plus 3 years of roadside assistance thrown in for free. Heck, you could get a full blown Subaru Gold warranty for 7/100 and still come out more than a grand ahead.
An H6 sedan runs $24,958. Outback is a wagon and has 4 times the cargo capacity, so it's not a good comparison. Comparing apples to apples (6-cylinder sedans) the Subie is still $92 cheaper, with AWD and a rear LSD included for free.
You might as well ignore MSRPs, as they are almost totally insignificant. Real-world prices show the Subies are very clearly a better value.
I've seen some posts that refer to a new auto tranny in the 2004 Forester XT, with a vague reference to a man-u-matic feature. When looking at photos on one of the foums ( I forget which), the shift quadrant seems the same as the old one. Can anyone confirm or put to bed the notion of a man-u-matic type shifter? I would prefer it, but not a deal killer. Cheers Pat
Any word if they will be offering a manual transmission for either the Forester XT premium, or the H6 Outback Wagon? I love driving a stick, even in NYC traffic, and am toying with the idea of upgrading from my 2000 OB. Especailly with everything that has been going on with it.
Actually, the preliminary literature indicates that the Forester XT Premium will only be available with the auto tranny (hopefully the literature is wrong). The H6 is still strictly auto (regardless of model).
"It could have button-shifters on the steering wheel. I don't think anyone has considered that yet?
-mike "
The steering wheel on that Alaska test car was covered up with a rag. I posted that I thought it was for some sort or dash display or tranny buttons. We can hope.
mike: I think we would have noticed buttons on the steering wheel of the show car, but it looked the same. That's the type of thing Subaru would have hyped loudly if it were added.
Bummer is aftermarket moonroofs aren't nearly as big as the one in the Premium model, not even close. ASC's biggest is 17"x30", which is bigger than average but puny compared to the Forester's. It runs about $900 installed.
Aftermarket leather would run $900 or so, too, and you could get a nice charcoal color. Some of the Catskins interiors I've seen are actually better than some stock leather, Acura's for instance.
I want to know what this "direct control" is. I mean they made it a point to mention that, how does this differ from the std. 4EAT tranny? or from the VTD 4EAT Tranny? ARRGGGG I hate marketing terms.
I can't remember, didn't look for the news release again; was there the word "NEW" preceeding the words "direct shift"? If yes, there's something "NEW". Otherwise, it's the same animal being described differently. A zebra with black stripes over white is a zebra. A zebra with white stripes over black is still a zebra.
Comments
-Frank P.
The only difference between the two Accord EX is the leather and that is it.
If you break down the difference in equipment between the L SE and the GT you will see why there is a $3.4K difference in price.
Cheers Pat.
-Frank P.
My Mistake in forgetting that car makers tend to put different content in cars between our two countrys, although for the life of me I will never figure that out.
And BTW. an Accord EX V6 with a cloth interior is scarcer than chickens teeth around here.
Cheers Pat.
Jim: the H6 also has a rear LSD and the AWP, it's much better equipped than most Accords. Hondas are bare-bones equipped, except maybe EX models, and even then they don't match high-end Subarus for equipment.
Plus, the Outback is a wagon, and that alone is worth a grand or so over a sedan. Noone has mentioned this so far - you can cram about 4 times as much cargo.
They'll tweak the H6 for about 240hp, my guess is next year. We'll have to wait and see.
The street price of the H6 base model will drop to about $24k soon enough.
By the way, the L/SE is not comparable. It doesn't get a rear LSD, no heated seats, no heated mirrors, no wiper de-icers, etc. You're getting much more than just the engine, and for about $4 grand, not $7.
Frank: the GT has VTD and shiftronic. But yeah, *that* model is overpriced, IMO.
In reality, the Accord is bigger and not really equipped the way Outbacks are. My guess is the Acura TSX is actually closer in size and equipment, and remember that's a $25-30k vehicle, and a 4-banger too. And they do make a wagon from that platform in Europe, so add at least another grand on top of that price. Plus add $1500-1700 for AWD. You get $27.5-32.7k, now which is the better value?
-juice
Subes should be compared to German AWD, which then will show you how big of a bargain it is !
The Passat 4Motion is another, and it's well above the H6s in price. Several grand.
-juice
And let me say this again as a former big time Accord fan I would not swap my GT for any Accord presently sold on this continent.
Cheers Pat.
The US Accord is vanilla, big but anything but sporty. I recall an issue of C&D where it was quicker 0-60 than a full group of near luxury cars, including the Passat W8! They were not compared directly, but they were in the same issue.
But then I looked at the handling, braking, and slalom, and it was right around last in all 3 categories.
An engine alone does not make the car. I'd pick a Mazda 6 instead, maybe even an Altima SE, in the FWD sedan class.
-juice
Passat's 4-Motion system is not nearly as robust or predictable as the Subie AWD system
I don't think you can justify a statement like that. The Passat's AWD system (same as Audi Quattro in the A4 and A6) has a long history of success and offers a good compromise between performance and safety. It is also very robust and predictable in my opinion, in particular when compared to Subaru's simple (non-VDC) AWD in the automatic models.
- D
There is nothing out there directly comparable, Subaru is really in a class on its own.
Cheers Pat.
However, and this was a loooong debate in one thread, VTD+VDC is better for two reasons: it can send 100% of power to each axle, while the VW systems is limited to 67% per, and only the Soob system is truly proactive in that it can transfer power even before any slippage occurs.
The torsen reacts very quickly, but it's still reactive.
Example: you enter a curve too hot, and drop the throttle. VDC senses the lateral Gs and the throttle position, proactively transfers more power to the front wheels for better balanced engine braking. As a backup, the standard stability control is there if needed.
In that same situation, the Passat might get caught flat footed. Probably half of the power will be on the rear axle, and dropping the throttle unweighs the rear axle and could result in a dangerous spin. Traction control won't act because you're not on the gas. *If* you have the optional stability control, that might save you, but again only after your tail has begun to slide out, by then you've lost at least some traction. Good luck.
We used vwvortex.com and VW.com as references, as well as this PDF as a Subaru reference:
http://210.101.116.115/fisita/pdf/G347.pdf
So, I'd rate it this way:
1. VDC
2. 4Motion w/Stability Control
3. 4Motion w/no SC
4. Auto AWD w/rear LSD
5. VC w/rear LSD
6. Auto AWD
7. VC
Mind you, I have #7 there, and it's still better than FWD by far.
-juice
I am curious why you prefer Subaru's standard auto AWD (non-VDC) to the VC in the manual version. I haven't driven them back-to-back or on slippery conditions, but I think I like the VC better – at least on paper.
Firstly, it has (depending on implementation, close to) 50-50 power distribution as default. So you are better prepared before a problem occurs. Secondly, when the distribution changes under slippery conditions, it changes smoothly. Many people have described the abrupt and large transfer to the back in the auto system as scary and that it can lead to the back slipping and fishtailing on snow.
I don't want to rehash the AWD manufacturer discussion here. But ESP is also a pro-active system that uses steering wheel and vehicle dynamic sensors and can activate the brakes and reduce the engine torque, similar to VTD+VDC. It is a very inexpensive option, and I agree everyone should choose it.
- D
On the turbo Legacy rumor front, I'm going to have to disagree with Bob and side with Paul H. (Shirokima over at NASIOC). I think the Alaska sightings are only test mules for the new drivetrain and that Subaru will shock the pants off of us again by releasing the all new Legacy here in the States this summer as an '04. At least that is what I'm hoping!
-Ian (who should request a username change to GTsoon and hopefully sooner than later)
It does feel more like FWD in many conditions, though, so the VC is more fun to toss around.
I disagree about ESP, and here is the key line from that description (nice link, BTW):
Upon detection of an unstable condition such as a sudden evasive reaction, the system responds within split seconds...
In this case "responds" is the same as "reacts", i.e. there has to be an unstable condition first, then and only then ESP kicks in.
VDC kicks in before there is an unstable condition, like in the drop-throttle example above. It works hard to prevent the unstable condition in the first place.
OK, the difference in subtle, and few in the real world will ever notice, but I think it's valid.
-juice
Ken
When you leave the selector in 1 or 2, does it split 50-50 or does it (almost) lock the diff so you would get instantaneous, almost 0-100 distribution if there was slippage on one end?
I am currently tending towards the manual 2.5XT, but I am open to suggestions regarding the auto version.
Your arguments sound compelling, but in practice the only complaining I have heard regarding difficulties (or better, annoyances) in snow handling came from automatic drivers, not from the manual. I am sure that was at higher speeds, too, like 3rd or 4th gear. Perhaps manual drivers are naturally better prepared to react to slight slippage and don't find it as bothersome.
Personally, I prefer a slight amount of drifting over violent and sudden redistribution of the power front and back. I am curious, though, about your slight back-and-forth comment with the manual. When you have pretty slippery conditions, the VC should be almost always engaged. So again, theoretically, I would think this behavior to be more characteristic of the auto transmission. Strange.
- D
But I will say that under slippery conditions you can bring the back around ala rear wheel drive by adding too much power with the LSD.
50:50 default split makes for very predictable handling in the corners, I sure like that part...
-brianV
On the flip side the auto's great in traffic and I had to replace my clutch in my manual at 28k and it was wearing again when I sold it at 60k - not a good sign for longevity. The auto's been great.
http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/road- tests/firstdrive/2004/toyota.sienna/04.toyota.sienna.r34.500.jpg
This past weekend I did a track day down at VIR which encompassed 3-30minute track sessions with Torrential Rains w/50mph cross winds (tornados touched down in adjacent counties) we had standing water on the track. I drove the course nearly as fast as I did the following day in the dry. Through all 17 curves I didn't get one time that the AWD abruptly kicked in, and the AWD had me riding on M3, Vette, and just about every car that got in front of me that day's bumper, especially though the turns. Several FWD and RWD cars nearly got rearended by me in the turns cause they slowed down, and an M3 owner who tried to keep up in the turns skidded off the track!
Heck I even passed an audi TT w/AWD out there
-mike
-Frank P.
Even though there's no word on production, one can't help but think that this is the long-rumored Neo-SVX. Obviously Subaru is waiting for consumer response to the radical new styling direction before committing to production. I bet when that vehicle actually debuts, it will look a lot like this concept vehicle.
Bob
The VC reacts slower, but it's already at 50/50.
I also think that the bit about locking the torque split is either urban legend or something to do with the older model 4EAT's. Lots of talk, but no proof. Ed from ISR performance (master tech) said you will only get a lock if there's a problem. See his comments here (SubyTechMaster): http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=84430&- ;referrerid=767
-Dennis
-Dennis
I got this link over at nasioc. The poster said the horsepower was around 245, IIRC.
I can't wait to see the actual car! I wonder (HOPE!!) it will be at the NY auto show in April, as the Geneva show is in about a week or so?
Bob
-Dennis
Bob
Bob
-mike
If I power into a wide turn, it'll wag the tail, then the front pulls it out, then it'll wag the tail again. It's an absolute hoot, but with a beginner behind the wheel I'm sure it's not as safe as the automatic's system.
I like the new Sienna too - AWD, magic folding seats, hidden sliding door tracks, rear windows that open. It's really complete. MPV is nice too, especially with 200hp.
I like that neo-SVX, gimme a roadster version of it. 5 speed auto, too, means Subaru will have one available soon. They said more than, so I guess that means 250hp. I'll guess from a 2.5l version of the STi engine, which will also end up in the WRX.
-juice
LL bean 26.5.............
VDC for 27.2................
@ fitz mall.....Jeez that's steal !
See why we can't compare Sube & Accord MSRP !
-Brian
Accord EX sedan auto - $21,095
Accord EX V6 leather/auto - $25,050
The L/SE is $18,773 for an auto sedan, cheaper than you thought, that is a whopping $2,322 less than a similar Accord, with AWD and a 67% longer powertrain warranty plus 3 years of roadside assistance thrown in for free. Heck, you could get a full blown Subaru Gold warranty for 7/100 and still come out more than a grand ahead.
An H6 sedan runs $24,958. Outback is a wagon and has 4 times the cargo capacity, so it's not a good comparison. Comparing apples to apples (6-cylinder sedans) the Subie is still $92 cheaper, with AWD and a rear LSD included for free.
You might as well ignore MSRPs, as they are almost totally insignificant. Real-world prices show the Subies are very clearly a better value.
-juice
Cheers
Pat
Subaru uses the name "Shiftronic" for their man-u-matic, as in the 2.5 GT.
-juice
-mike
Mark
-mike
-Frank P.
-mike
-mike "
The steering wheel on that Alaska test car was covered up with a rag. I posted that I thought it was for some sort or dash display or tranny buttons. We can hope.
Jim
Mike-something to keep in mind.
Mark
I also did not see any control buttons on the steering wheel, but who knows, I could have missed it.
There's pics in my album of the steering wheel area: http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4290640109
-Brian
Bummer is aftermarket moonroofs aren't nearly as big as the one in the Premium model, not even close. ASC's biggest is 17"x30", which is bigger than average but puny compared to the Forester's. It runs about $900 installed.
Aftermarket leather would run $900 or so, too, and you could get a nice charcoal color. Some of the Catskins interiors I've seen are actually better than some stock leather, Acura's for instance.
-juice
Bob
-mike
If yes, there's something "NEW".
Otherwise, it's the same animal being described differently.
A zebra with black stripes over white is a zebra.
A zebra with white stripes over black is still a zebra.
-Dave