By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Tom
For the most part, anyway. More oomph in the Legacy GT wagon would fill the bill exactly. As for cargo space, the Forester suits me just fine (I have a cheapie aluminum paddle and just take it apart and stow it in the rear). I don't like terribly big cars because nimble handling is a top priority for me, and the Forester has been surprisingly nimble. I just wish it had a little more power for onramp/offramp/passing maneuvers.
It'll be interesting to see what's available when I pay the Forester off next year. My current leaning is toward WRX wagon but a Forester turbo could be appealing as well. All AT Subarus should have the Sportshift option IMO.
Ed (kayak trips not long or often enough these days)
My dad had a Camry that spontaneously combusted. Seriously, he was driving, it caught fire, motorists pulled up next to him, signaling frantically for him to get out. He did, and then watched it burn to a crisp. Bad fuel line, something like that.
FYI, Ed has taken his Forester to autocross, and actually was running quicker than Maximas and V6 Accords. Not bad.
-juice
There are a lot of complaints about Volvo AWD reliability on Volvo boards. The recent change of AWD systems for 2003 is thought to improve this.
The Passat 4Motion feels pretty heavy - much heavier than my light 1.8T FWD wagon. Passats are a bit soft in body roll from the factory, but the ride is compliant and they will grip.
You didn't ask, but there is a big difference in size and utility between these two cars. The V70 has more cargo area, but the height of the cargo area isn't as high as the Passat. The V70 is also a lot wider, but the Passat has more rear seat legroom. Pick your poison I guess....
Tom
It handled like a Buick, very floaty, never quite settling down. Lots of up and down bobbing motions. It's also overpriced, at about $40 grand well equipped.
I actually think the XC90 is a better value, it actually starts at a lower price despite being based on the bigger S80 platform.
I was able to attend the Volvo Fire & Ice event, and drove the S60, S60 AWD, and S80 back-to-back on their little autocross track, including an area where they put soapy water on some tarps to test out the AWD.
First off, their AWD models were much nicer than their FWDs. Lots less understeer, far superior traction (in the wet and in curves). In fact I didn't like the FWD S60 much at all.
The S80 is much nicer, odd because I don't usually like big cars. It was more neutral, and had a better ride.
That's why I think an XC90 might be more appealing, especially since it's a better value. But also consider the plain V70 AWD.
VW probably wins the reliability battle, and price, too. You could probably get a W8 for about the price of a XC70.
I have not driven a Passat 4Motion, but I've test driven 1.8T manual and Tip, and a V6/auto at Edmunds Live.
I'd pick the Passat over the FWD S60 easily. My few complaints are the leather seats were sort of hard (Volvo's seats are fantastic) and the V6 didn't feel very alive with the auto. In fact I prefer the 1.8T manual with heated cloth.
Too bad you can't get 4Motion with cloth and a manual, that would be the ideal Passat IMO.
-juice
Considering a Legacy GT wagon--don't want to spend for Passat, and besides we drive a lot on gravel/badly paved road and I don't know how much better the Passat would be...the suspension in our poor little Camry is completely shot--everything's rattling around--and now that we have only one car we need the car to be bigger to haul bikes and gardening stuff etc...we're giving in to the Subaru hegemony here in Portland OR--
but MAN that engine (automatic--I have a daughter and I have to be handing water, kleenex, etc. back all the time) really DRAG...The Outback's H6 sounds a bit unsure reliability wise at this point, so we figure if the suspension is better in the GT, might as well save the money over a 4-cyl Outback...SO (all that was just to explain our perspective right now, although we're open to other considerations) Is there any relatively easy, inexpensive way to modify the engine to get more torque? We're new to it, never done it, but if it's possible we'll try it...I would be really *irritated* trying to merge and get decent acceleration in the Legacy GT as it stands. I do love good acceleration
thanks--
When we first test-drove a pre-2001.5, the leather seats were quite hard, and caused a nasty pressure point on my wife's back that made it a no-go.
We've driven a 2003 and the leather seats are definitely still on the firm side, but not as hard and much more comfortable. Also has very good lumbar support. I find the cloth seats on the 2001.5 Passat still way too hard, though.
Volvo does have terrific seating, though. Functional, comfortable, and with lots of safety touches (anti-submarining, anti-whiplash, supposedly made to many multiples of NHTSA's requirements for seatback strength, etc.).
The H6 is probably what would please you. What makes you think the H6 isn't reliable?
Steve
Get an H6, that leftover 2002 VDC is mega-cheap at $25.5k. Buy a Subaru Gold 7/100 warranty for $1000 or so and you're set.
The Passat I drove was a 2000, IIRC, the one Edmunds Live had. Pre-2001.5, I'm pretty sure. And to be fair, we did 2 minute laps around an autoX course, but that was enough to leave that impression on me.
The cloth seat (also pre-2001.5) felt more comfy to me, at least.
Try:
http://ludespeed.com/products/subaru/impreza.html
for turbos. About $2400 for a Stage I, which your tranny could take (the auto is very robust). If you turbo a manual I'd budget for a clutch, $460 extra.
-juice
The Ford/Subaru mechanic I take my LLBean to told me the H6 is (so far) the most trouble-free car he has seen in the 12 years he has worked at the dealership.
Except for front rotors and pads (paid by Subaru) I'm just "changing the oil" so far (now at 32K miles).
Don't understand your concerns about reliablilty? Except for the guy with the coolant issue (who we determined has other issues), who else has raised reliablilty issues?
I can't wait for the 2005 Outback remodel to replace my 96 Honda Accord. They have my $ if it's a little wider and comes in monotone....
Ralph
-juice
http://210.101.116.115/fisita/pdf/G347.pdf
I had stated that it was a pro-active system, and indeed, the VDC system takes the following inputs:
* steering angle sensor
* yaw angle sensor
* lateral acceleration sensor
* 4 wheel speed sensor
* brake pressure sensor
So basically it can compare your intentions (steering angle and throttle/brake position) to the results (speed and lateral acceleration). Pretty smart. But that's still focusing on the stability control system, not the AWD.
But in the same article they talk about how VTD is integrated, and here are some cool examples:
* in a tight turn, less torque is sent to the front wheels to make U-turns smoother
* in a potential drop-throttle oversteer situtation (i.e. fast corner where you let off the throttle), more torque is sent up front to evenly distribute engine braking and prevent oversteer, and since this happens even if you don't lose traction, it isn't reactive
* in all conditions, it estimates the surface friction available using those inputs and distributes torque accordingly
So yeah, VTD is definitely pro-active.
The cool thing is that if you read on, you'll find it's basically primarily REAR wheel drive, and that the "transfer torque" in this case is actually how much they send to the front wheels. They also claim they can send 100% to that axle.
I heard from a different source that the "VDC off" button is effective up to 30mph, though I'm not sure how reliable that information is. That would allow you to play around a bit without getting yourself into too much trouble.
Sorry it took so long to back up my claims. You called my bluff! ;-)
-juice
From the text, it almost seems like VTD does not act like a center differential. A torsen or a viscous LSD would allow some slip, for parking manuevers and U-turns, but it seems like VTD adjust itself to lessen its effect in such cases.
-juice
I haven't been here for a long time, but I've got to get some wheels. (My '77 320i just died, finally) I don't think I can swing a late model BMW, so Subarus are one of the alternatives I've been thinking about. I've spoken with several people who have 4motion Passats (another car I really like) and they say that they're gashogs. They are heavier and that eats it up. Also I've heard of reliability problems with them across the board.
I've always been curious about the Subs. CR says they're very reliable, but a book we have here in Canada (the LemonAid guide) says that Subs are not very reliable and says unless you really need the AWD, don't even think about it. So, I'm curious. Since there are many opinions here, are they on the whole pretty good, or is that the exception? Also the Outback is only an inch higher than the Legacy right? So is it mainly cosmetics between the two? I don't want to get set on one and be in for headaches and high repairs. I need a reliable car for my young family. Oh, we don't get the LLBean version up here, though an H6-VDC is available. I actually saw one of the Outback sedans, and it looks pretty sporty, too.
I welcome your input here.
Thanks,
cdndriver
I get better mileage in my 4Motion Passat (22mpg average, 26-27 highway) than any realistic reports I have seen on Subaru's H6. Having said that, yes, I wished they would sell it with the 1.8t and manual. And Subaru's 2.5 H4 is not stellar in that regard either, although otherwise it's a great engine.
Either way, it depends a bit on what your priorities are.
My personal experiences with the reliability of Subarus and VWs have all been excellent. With both, little things can go wrong, but they rarely leave you stranded. Both don't give the same reliability as Honda or Accord, but where it counts, they are close or better. By that I mean, the car may develop a rattle, or a switch may break, usually things covered under warranty. But they can easily outlast a Honda or Accord, at least the ones I have driven, compared to my friends' and family's.
The Passat 4Motion is pricey. If I would not need the space (or as a second car), I would get the Audi A4 1.8t manual quattro instead, anytime. Or the Forester, if/when the turbo comes out next year. If money is of concern, the best deals are the Legacies. If clearance is important, the Legacy and Passat are about the same, not bad but if you really need it, get the Outback. You'll pay in handling, though.
I think all of these are very good, reliable, and safe cars.
- D
Seriously, there are so many different factors to weigh. I guess I was overinterpreting re H6 reliability. Good to hear that it's a possibility too. Although literally every other car in Portland is an Outback. It's like they own the town.
Another choice we're looking at: getting a 2001.5 1.8T Passat wagon and chipping it...they're really affordable (I prefer buying used). We also like better seats than in the Subaru (no offense to any Subaru owners)... even the Passat's were better.
thanks though--can I keep trying out different configurations on you all and get your thoughts? I learn so much on these boards.
VW has improved to "average" reliability for the Passat, according to the just-released Buyer's Guide. The Golf still earns a black dot from CR, but you're not buying a Golf. Legacy and Outback are "better than average".
If you like the VDC, Fitzmall.com has a left over 2002 model for $25,574. The savings vs. the same dealer's cheapest Passat 4Mo, at $30,208, will pay for gas for several years.
A4 and Forester are a little smaller, but if they fit definitely have a look.
You can get a Forester Premium with a gargantuam moonroof for $22k and change. The turbo Forester should arrive in June and should be quicker than any vehicle we've mentioned by far.
WRX and Jetta come in wagons, but neither are as reliable as their big brothers.
My suggestion is to try that VDC, it's basically being offered at a used car price, but it's new. I bet a 2 year old Passat 4Mo cost no less than that, and older VWs had a 2/24 warranty, so you'd be left with NO warranty at all, vs. 3/36 and 5/60 on the powertrain for the Subie.
If you buy a new Passat, the warranty is great, and now it's fully transferable. I think it changed for 2003, correct me if I'm wrong guys.
-juice
Neither the Passat nor Subaru H6 are good on gas, and the fact that they use premium doesn't help at all. You might want to go for a regular H4 Subaru (regular Outback or Legacy). Mainly the difference between the Legacy and Outback is the suspension height and tuning, and appearance. Unless you really feel the need to have a pseudo SUV, the Legacy is a well-value capable car that is every bit as good....it just doesn't look as "hip and outdoorsy)
On the other hand, the Passat is a creamy ride, and oozing with luxury feel. However, reliability is always a concern and I don't feel VW's are built to be as trouble free over the long term from my personal research and experience. Parts are more expensive too. But that German feel is different that the purely no-nosense functional feel of a Subaru. You have to decide how much that matters to you (it doesn't to me)
As far as AWD, if it does snow where you are, then AWD is something you *can* appreciate a lot, especially if you don't take the time to outfit your car with snow tires. Think of it as a safety feature, the car reacts more quickly in slippery situations, and you won't be stranded when that freak snowstorm happens.
The Passat is actually closer to the Legacy than the Outback. I'd put it between the Legacy L and the Legacy GT in terms of sportiness.
I guess the VW/Audi product that is similar to the Outback is the allroad quattro, except it goes further with the concept and costs a lot more.
Read an interesting article about snow tires vs. AWD, and you might be surprised to hear that AWD with all-season tires beat snow tires, accelerating and even braking. The latter is surprising, maybe it's the better weight distribution?
-juice
Accelerating in snow 5-to-20, they found AWD was best, followed by FWD with snows and FWD with all-seasons last.
Braking on ice 10-to-0, however, they found all three to be similar.
The cars they tested were the Passat 4mo and the Volvo Cross Country (AWD) and the Passat GLS and Volvo S60 (FWD)
Will try out tentative conclusions soon--thanks again
I haven't read the whole article and obviously I need to go back and do just that.
-juice
-juice
Sign me up! Now I just have to wait. The decision, barring catastrophe, has been made.
Thanks for mentioning that car, teixeira--I'll pay it forward somehow
I think that one has 168hp, something like that, but very good torque across a wide band, so it easily outruns our 165hp 2.5l.
But they'll have to differntiate it a bit more. So we may get the JDM 217hp engine, the 227hp WRX engine, or if rumors out of Australia are correct, a whole new 2.5l turbo.
So it'll probably be a lot quicker.
-juice
the torque on the British one sure sounds great, I agree. I'd prefer that engine unless someone can make one of these with the same mpg.
Uh-oh, the guilt-free part is going away...help!
Why better than the WRX auto? Because I doubt it'll get VTD, which has a rear power bias. The Forester's AWD is 90/10 and it's more efficient than even the 5 speed.
-juice
Maybe I'm just one buyer, but I would think there are lots of folks who'd love room for stuff, AWD, full size back seats, *great* mpg (if they do it), AND speed/torque! Seriously, that's what I've been *dreaming* of. When the WRX came out, I drove it and had lots of fun, but then sat in the back seat which just won't do for long trips, looked at the negligible luggage space and thought why can't they make a Legacy/Outback WRX? The idea of a Forester never crossed my mind--they've always just seemed like a strange giraffe of a car to me, or like I saw them named in one review, the Popemobile (SO true!) Then came the Baja, what a joke (for my needs, anyway--seems like a car seriously designed by a committee)...
Guess I should take this to that nascent Forester Turbo future vehicle discussion board...I see you've posted there too
Back in college, in my idealistic days, I vowed to never buy a vehicle that didn't get at least 20mpg EPA city. So far I've been able to do it.
-juice
Is this bs? Seems like it. What are your all's thoughts?
5 speeds get the viscous coupling AWD. Advantages are a 50/50 default power split, which gives it a nice, neutral feel, and good traction from the get-go. It's light, cheap, and extremely reliable, plus maintenance-free.
Most autos get the auto AWD with electronically controlled clutches. They use a 50/50 split in some cases, but they default to 90/10. This is more fuel efficient, so some autos actually do better than 5 speeds in the EPA cycle. Advantages include fuel efficiency and the ability to be proactive. Disadvantages include a real-world mileage that does not match the 5 speed, plus it feels more like FWD in certain situations.
To each of these you can add a rear LSD. The VDC, GT, and WRX auto use VTD AWD, which is similar to the auto AWD except default power split carries a rear bias, 45/55. It's more fun but less fuel efficient.
Forget theory, how do they feel?
My 5 speed, VC AWD Forester is great in the snow. If I hit the gas in a turn, it'll wag the tail, and then pulse the power split back-and-forth. You can actually feel the VC acting, it's pretty cool. It feels very safe, despite my having both differentials open.
My dad has an auto Outback Limited, which has the more sophisticated AWD plus the rear differential. I'd say it reacts a little quicker than mine. I haven't pushed it nearly as hard, but he's never been left wanting for traction. His tires are better in the snow than what I have on there currently.
My mileage is better, I average about 25mpg. He hasn't documented his, but low 20s is the norm.
Get the tranny you want, those differences are far more significant. The auto is more robust, tows more easily, and is better for off road throttle control. The 5 speed costs less, uses less fuel in the real world, and it a little more fun, plus feels more like RWD.
Subaru isn't going to announce the turbo this far in advance 'cause it might hurt sales of the 2003. It's industrty standard to be secretive like that.
-juice
Can't get 5-speed anyway right now, so that renders it all moot. My mommy duties preclude my being able to focus as much as I'd need to drive stick. But I still ain' gettin' a minivan
best,
elsie who made a similar pledge back in college (my first car was a fire-engine-red tiny opel station wagon
All you need to know is this - you hit the gas and move forward on a snowy hill, while you wonder why the guy to your right in his FWD vehicle skids, and the guy on your left with his RWD skids and actually slides backward.
You sound like my wife. She actually insisted on a 5 speed, but now wished she'd given in to the automatic.
If you want the auto, here's some good news: the tranny is very robust, the AWD is more sophisticated, and it's easier to resell later.
-juice
US galon 3.785 Litr
Imperial 4.55
So UK mpg is 25% higher than US mpg. Luckily mile is exacly the same.
Krzys
The other car I am thinking about is the Subaru Legacy which I am sure handles well in the snow given the all-wheel drive.
This video just came up in another topic. In it is a Volvo XC with traction control that only uses its front wheels and basically fails to make it up a muddy hill. The rear wheels never get power.
A base Outback makes it up just fine, even without traction control, and even while tugging a trailer!
It's a Swedish magazine's test, done right on Volvo's home turf. Both cars had Pirelli tires.
Some people will recommend snow tires, but that's inconvenient to mount/remount, and CR this month tested those and found that AWD+all seasons was better than FWD+traction control+snows. Heck, the AWD even did slightly better in ice braking, perhaps because of better weight distribution.
For a "ski car", the Outback is the clear choice. My Forester is simply awesome in the snow. Remember - the Subies have a more ground clearance, too.
-juice
-juice
It's amazing how many people seem to be in the same scenario as I am, and how it's led them to the same boards I've been reading. I'm married, have one child, with another on the way, and two dogs. My wife has a Honda Accord, and therefore, we need at least one car that is something bigger than just a sedan and has some cargo space in the back. At the same time, however, I tend to drive a lot for my job, and we make 2-6 hour road trips to visit relatives on a regular basis. I've averaged around 24,000 miles a year the last 7 years, so while we need some space, I'd like to have something that is very comfortable, and gives a pleasant driving experience. My wife is for some reason adamantly opposed to minivans in principle, and I'm just about sick of the SUV experience (due to comfort, handling and mileage issues). I'm never going to do any real off-roading, but we get a couple good snows here a year in North Carolina, and try to get to the mountains as much as we can, so all-wheel drive seems to be the best solution. Apparently, I'm not alone with these needs, because just about every car magazine/website I've read lately says that "crossover" vehicles are now the wave of the future.
Lastly, I'm probably going to be holding on to whatever I buy for 6-7 years at least, and put roughly 150K miles or more on it, so long-term reliability is a big factor in the equation as well.
My dad was selling me on the Toyota Highlander and Lexus RX300, and that's where I started my search. My initial plan was to look at buying something with high reliability a year or two (or three) old, to get the best value. However, while both of those cars are very highly regarded, after an honest assessment of my needs, I started looking at the Outback, then specifically the H6 models, due to their creature comforts (VDC and LL Bean). I have to admit, when I first saw Outbacks in the 90's, I thought they looked silly, but they've really started to grow on me lately. I particularly like what I've seen of the high end H6 models on the interior (from pictures on the web). After debating on which I would like more, I think I prefer the VDC over the Bean due to the premium sound system, quieter cabin the VDC feature, even if I'll probably never need it.
In doing my research, however, the Passat Wagon kept coming up in CR and Edmunds as a favorite, so I've checked it out as well. On paper, a GLX 4motion is virtually identical to the VDC in features, MSRP and mileage.
Here's what I see as the recurring themes around here pro and con for each:
- From what I've gathered, the actual price of a VDC will be lower because the VW dealer seems to have all the leverage of keeping the selling price near MSRP, while Subaru dealers are cutting deals for up to a couple grand less. That bargaining position is a big plus for buying Sub, IMO.
- The VDC seems to have a little more "rough and tumble" capability to it, especially in snow of more than an inch or two, although the VW sounds equally good in slick/icy/light snow conditions.
- While the VDC looks very luxurious from pictures, at least as nice as the VW, the consensus seems to be that the VW has a more luxury feel to it in reality, with better "fit and finish." I guess I'll just have to sit in both before I can tell for sure.
- I've really heard mixed opinions about which gives the better ride. I guess that's pretty subjective, but that seems to be a toss up that I'll have to determine myself in test drives.
- I'm real curious as to what anyone who has listened to both thinks about the sound systems (McIntosh vs. Monsoon). Has anyone out there made a comparison? On the VDC thread, people are saying the Mac is outstanding, but it didn't make Edmunds' "top audio systems" lists for vehicles over or under $30K. Any opinions would be great to hear.
- Reliability over the long haul seems to favor the Subaru. I know that Passats are getting better, and are now above average according to CR, but that's only for the last year or two, and the Outback design (and just about all Subaru models) have historically performed very well. Maybe Passat will keep a high rating over the next few years, I can't be sure, but the track record would seem to indicate that the Subaru is a much higher percentage bet. I know one person that has a 1999 Jetta sedan (I know, it's built in Mexico, not Germany like the Passat), and it's been the bane of his existence with maintenance problems.
- I've seen several tall drivers ask about whether they will fit in the VDC, and I'm not sure I've seen a firm response. I'm 6'3", 230 lbs, and so that's a concern for me as well. Again, I guess I'll have to sit in one to find out. It will be very frustrating if that eliminates the VDC after all the research I've done on it.
To sum up, I guess I'll need to test drive both before making my final decision, but am leaning towards the VDC right now mostly due to the reliability issue and the more capable all-weather driving ability. Given the reliability concerns, the Passat is going to need to be A LOT more comfortable than the VDC to make it worth taking the long term risk. I haven't eliminated a used Lexus RX300 yet either, and would love if anyone has some input on it as well.
The Passat is sort of tuned to handle about half way between a Legacy L and GT, and compares more closely to those. Thought the GT only comes with an H4 (for now).
It's funny, VW does well in JD Power IQ study (i.e. at first), but not as well in the long haul. In JD Power's 5 year study, neither Audi nor VW broke into the upper half. Subaru did, and fell about 12% above the average number of problems.
You'll find this link interesting, check out fitzmall.com, they sell both VW and Subaru at no-haggle prices, so you can compare directly.
Darn, though, right now they don't have any V6 4Motions in stock. But wagons usually fall in the $31k price range. And make sure to get one with ESP if you're comparing with a VDC. Without ESP, I'd compare it with the LL Bean model.
They have a left over 2002 VDC for a whopping $25,574. If I were car shopping right now I'd jump on it. In fact if I could have gotten that price back in May, I would have stretched our budget and bought that instead of our 2002 Legacy L. They have a couple of other 2002s also.
2003 Beans start at $26,901. So you're talking about $4 grand price difference to a Passat 4Mo. 2003 VDCs go for a little more, usually around $28-29k, but none of those are in stock right now either.
The 2003 VDC added a 6CD changer and some new shocks, plus grille and wheels I think. It's your call, but the 2002 is a solid value.
A couple more considerations:
* the Bean model comes with a couple years of free maintenance. The VDC does not, oddly, but neither does VW (Audis do)
* you could get a 7/100 Subaru Gold warranty for just over a grand, and still be way ahead on price vs. VW. That's bumper-to-bumper with roadside assistance (I have one)
Just some food for thought. Bottom line is you gotta drive the cars, though. Don't buy either unless you fall in love. Drive a Highlander too, and maybe a Murano. Those will cost a lot more once you equip them like the Bean/VDC/4Mo.
-juice
Passat: more appealing interior design, the transmission, more sporty feel.
outback VDC: engine smoothness, quiet compliant ride, stereo, expected reliability.
I slightly preferred the Outback; however my wife didn't like the Passat ride nearly as well, so we went with the Outback.
We have been very pleased. It has proven to be a superb highway car - smooth, comfortable, powerful.
I didn't do a direct compare on the stereos; but I think the Mac is a great unit. I have a number of audiophile cd's and the clarity and accuracy is exceptional.
Concerning VW reliability: The CU data clearly shows significant degradation after several years across the brand. That did worry me a lot.
Good luck,
Mike
Our dealer let us put $3 grand on our credit card, so that would be $90 right there. It would pay for 3-4 oil changes.
Of course you can also use the credit to buy a new car.
-juice
- Price: The VDC is substantially cheaper. When I bought mine in April 2001 from Fitzgerald's, it was $500 below invoice. I have seen some leftover 2002s even cheaper. With the VDC, focus on the invoice price and not the MSRP.
- Snow: There hasn't been any snow in DC since I've owned the car (tonight may be another story though), but the Subaru AWD is very sure-footed in the rain. I also had to do an emergency maneuver on the PA turnpike (animal in the road) at 70 mph and the VDC pulled through just fine...scared the hell out of the wife and me and woke up the kids though. Oddly, the VDC didn't come on.
- Interior: While the interior is nice, it's not in the same category as the VW. However, you do get some practical features that aren't available (I still think) on the VW like the rear cargo liner. The VDC definitely has a more practical interior than the VW.
- Ride and Handling: The major advantage of the H6 Subaru engine compared to the H4 is its refinement. It's very smooth and the VDC has additional sound proofing to further isolate road noise. Driving it on long trips is pretty comfortable for the family. That said, I have no doubt that the VW is a bit more sporty. The 4-sp auto trans in the VDC is the weak link in the powertrain, but it isn't horrible either; just not as sophisticated and tuned as a good 5-sp auto.
- McIntosh Stereo: Easily the best stereo that I have ever listened to in a car. I can't say how it compares to the VW Monsoon, but I think that the Mac is pretty hard to beat. I don't know what the Edmund's reviewers were smoking during their review of car stereo systems. I will say this about the Mac though: the controls are not very intuitive and the gaudy knobs may be somewhat off-putting. But I generally spend my time looking at the road rather than the radio display...
- Reliability and MPG: No major problems so far. The MPG has been disappointing, however, especially since it takes premium gas. I've averaged about 18/19 in combined (90% city) driving, and I'm a whimp on the throttle. The EPA rating is 20/26, which is better than the VW Passat 4-mo, which is known for its thirsty engine. That said, I have never had a car actually average the EPA rating. The VDC system has also been a little buggy–light came on indicating that the ABS system wasn't functioning during one trip and just this morning the VDC off light came on when I started the car. In both cases, the VDC system seemed to reset itself when I restarted the car. Still disconcerting though...
- Tall Drivers: This could be a problem. I'm about 6' 1" and 220 lbs. It is difficult for me to find a really comfortable driving position. I think the problem is that the dead pedal for the left foot is either too damn close or the angle of the pedal too great. All of this could probably be cured if Subaru would add a telescoping steering wheel (like what's on the Passat).
Anyway, I've been pretty pleased with the car so far. I'll probably write a fuller review and post it here in the near future.
Bill
The good thing about my buying process is that here in Raleigh, the Subaru dealer and VW dealer are one and the same, and share the same lot, so comparing the two back to back shouldn't be a problem. The non-availability of the GLX's is a little disconcerting, however. I am getting the feeling that they are extremely scarce, and you basically have to order one and wait a few months for delivery. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but the local VW dealer's website is "under construction" when it comes to their inventory. In fact, of the 5 VW dealers within 50 miles of me, 3 of the websites don't have their inventory, and the other two don't seem to have any GLX 4motion wagons. It's going to be difficult to get an accurate comparison and experience first hand the feel of the Passat if I can't find one to test drive. The VDC's are by no means ubiquitous (about 2 or 3 total among 3 Subaru dealers anywhere close to here), but at least I can find a couple. What someone posted about the difficulty of getting parts for the Passat also has me a bit worried.
Juice, that extended warranty sounds pretty good, I may have to strongly consider it.
Mike, I've read a bunch of your posts on this thread and the VDC thread. Your satisfaction and positive reviews are one of the reasons it's at the top of my list right now.
Bill, did you get to try out the AWD today? We got the dreaded "wintry mix" here in Raleigh of snow, sleet and freezing rain, and I have to say that the AWD on my Explorer really came through like a champ. After I got my daughter home from daycare, I even went back out to pick up a pizza and really "pushed the envelope" a little on deserted roads, and never had even a hint of trouble. Actually, today would have been perfect to test drive a VDC, although when everyone on the road around you is going 10 mph because they are so freaked out by a little so, it's tough to really get a feel for it's capabilities.
Thanks again for all the helpful posts.