Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Subaru Legacy/Outback

1…200201203205206…230

Comments

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'm sure someone here will answer. I've never looked.

    -juice
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    The sub comes with a harness that you (or the installer) route from under the seat, through the console, into the dash area behind the radio. The harness "tees" into the factory radio harness, and picks off speaker-level audio and power connections for the sub.

    As long as the factory radio connector is present behind the dash (as it would be if they used an adapter) the Subaru sub harness can plug into it and work just fine. Most radio shops use an adapter, so it's more than likely that the factory radio connector is present.

    Craig
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    In that case, I stand corrected. I thought the wires were already under the seat.

    The wires are present in the Forester's door for the tweeters, even if those are not ordered.

    Sorry 'bout that.

    -juice
  • masteryodamasteryoda Member Posts: 41
    Thank you all for the replies. At the very least, I now have a clear picture of what needs to be done.
  • tickmantickman Member Posts: 16
    My hitch arrived yesterday, and I installed it last evening. About a two hour job. The instructions say to remove the two heat shields under the mufflers, but it looks like that is not needed.

    The reason I went with the Subaru hitch was the wiring harness. Not sure if aftermarket wiring would plug directly into the connector hidden behind the cubby on the left rear. I'd hate to fry something in the car if there was a short in the trailer or the aftermarket converter.

    My only gripe is that the drawbar is just a bit small for the receiver, and you hear some clunking as the trailer bounces around. I may try an aftermarket drawbar and see if it fits any tighter.
  • fibber2fibber2 Member Posts: 3,786
    Tickman,

    I have an '02 OBW and installed the Subi kit as well. There is indeed some slop on the drawbar, and some thin splints of wood help reduce the noise. I also found that I needed to lower the ball height and so had to go with an aftermarket drawbar that had a large enough tongue that I could flip it over to lower rather than raise the ball. Everything gets quieter and better behaved if you have a bit of tongue weight. When the trailer is too balanced, it really makes the drawbar assembly knock around.

    Steve
  • mark_wnymark_wny Member Posts: 70
    OK, this is a 'devil's advocate' question. The current issue on Consumer's Report says that 4WD and AWD is useful only in snow - and that it's 'not worth the extra money' for non-snow conditions. Any comment from board members here?
    (BTW, I don't own a Subaru - but I'm thinking of getting one).
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    I disagree with CR on this, and I really surprised that they stated that, as they have said in the past that AWD is useful in the rain and on other slippery surfaces, and that it's a good safety feature to have.

    It's a well established fact that (full-time) AWD drive, like what Subaru, Audi, the new Acura RL, and a few others have, are better in the rain than RWD or FWD.

    Bob
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    Most people who try AWD never go back to 2WD.

    Nough said!
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    Ah, that's baloney. I have had several RWD and FWD sports cars, and then got a WRX with AWD -- it had far better driving and handling dynamics. In fact for such a powerful small car, it puts all that power down to the road like it's no big deal.

    Try driving a high HP FWD vehicle and you will immediately realize it's shortcomings. When the power gets up there, AWD is a huge benefit to dry handling.

    Craig
  • mark_wnymark_wny Member Posts: 70
    Hmmm - very interesting feedback - and in such a short time! I will now admit a dark secret: for some time, I have suspected that Consumer's Report is a bastion of automotive ignorance and lightweight opinions, unsupported by real-world experience and technical knowledge. Thanks for your responses - AWD is looking better all the time.
  • fibber2fibber2 Member Posts: 3,786
    not all all-wheel-drive systems are created equal. Some, like that found on a number of Honda products, are reactive in such a way that they can create dangerous handling in slippery conditions when they kick in. Plus, many of the great unwashed equate AWD with 4WD, huge SUV's and trucks. The bottom line is that many buyers end up with vehicles totally unsuitable for daily use or their intended purpose in an attempt to add all weather go. To this end, many buyers would simply be better off adding 4 good winter tires to their FWD cars or minivans.

    While I love my OBW, I find that our FWD Honda Ody with 4 snows is perfectly suitable for most snow conditions that we encounter in NY.

    <ducking for cover from thrown objects>

    Steve
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    I wouldn't say that CR is necessarily ignorant -- I think they just reflect the views of the "average" car consumer. That would mean people who really don't know the difference between full time and part time AWD and/or traditional Low/High 4WD.

    For most cars CR tests, AWD is there to simply get the vehicle rolling in snow or mud. I believe only a few of the cars they test have AWD there to improve overall handling.

    Ken
  • KCRamKCRam Member Posts: 3,516
    ...that makes a world of difference in how an AWD car performs is torque split. The closer a vehicle is to 50% front/50% rear, the closer you are to true "all wheel drive". Variable torque split systems are the next best step, assuming they sense vehicle loading as well as road traction (e.g, a heavily rear-loaded wagon has different needs than an empty one). A fixed-split system with a high bias towards one end is not a whole lot better than RWD/FWD in most cases.

    Granted, my vehicle (Dodge Ram dually 4x4) is on a different level than a Subie, but when I engage 4WD, I get 50/50 and it's pretty much unstoppable (so to speak), rain or snow. Personally, I'm surprised that AWD minivans haven't sold better. Maybe that's Subie's next move...

    kcram
    Host - Wagons
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    Back in the early 80s I was working in the home electronics industry (at a National retailer chain) when Consumer Reports did a test of some 20 cassette decks.

    We were suprised to find that most of the best brands and models were not even represented in the test. But to our total dismay, C.R. declared the worst p.o.s. we had in our inventory to be the "best buy". These were cheaply made units with poor performance and horrible reliability. We had stock piles of them in our warehouse and we just couldn't sell them. Within 2 weeks of the C.R. report, they were all gone.

    I have been totally ignoring C.R. since then as I have absolutely no trust in them whatsoever.

    Sly
  • ladywclassladywclass Member Posts: 1,713
    this is from no 'learned perspective' ... but I bought my Outback in October before there was snow ... I have LOT of experience in driving in the rain (being from Houston TX) and I can tell you that I could definitely tell the difference in driving the AWD vehicle on wet streets!
  • mark_wnymark_wny Member Posts: 70
    Well - you've all been very helpful - this is obviously an active and informed group (maybe that says something about of Subaru owners). So, here's a modest follow-up: as I recall, Subaru does not offer conventional stability control; I presume the idea is that AWD makes additional stability control unnecessary (?)
  • hilberthilbert Member Posts: 103
    I have heard that's not true. But let the experts comment.
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    It's only available on the Outback 3.0R VDC (basically top of the line). Many of us think they should offer stability control on all the models. While it's true that AWD may keep you out of trouble in some cases, stability control would be even better.

    Craig
  • liv4todayliv4today Member Posts: 6
    Does anyone know what the 0-60 times would be on the 2.5i Legacy ltd wagon?
    The December issue of Consumer Reports reported that the 2.5i base Outback wagon went to 60mph in 11.8 seconds. How can this be!? First of all, the article had a discrepancy as they claim that they tested the Outback 2.5i base model but the weight of the vehicle as tested was almost 210 lbs heavier than what Subaru.com claims…3545 in CR lbs versus 3355 at Subaru.com. How can they be that far off??
    I understand that the Outback 2.5i ltd is higher off the ground than the Legacy and weighs 3410 vs. 3380. Shouldn't the 0-60 times on the Legacy be around 8-9 seconds with the boxer 4?
    I presently have the 05' 2.5i ltd wagon and it seems to me that the 0-60 times feel like its more around 8.5-9 seconds. Are there any official numbers out there? Thanks for any input or feedback.
  • 63corvette63corvette Member Posts: 51
    I've owned my 2004 2.5i Outback since 08/26, and now have 4500 miles on it. So far I haven't been able to get documented acceleration figures on it. However, I have noticed several things. I have the 5MT transmission, and it has gotten smoother as the mileage piled up. The throttle was VERY non-linear during the first 2000 miles. A large throttle opening (especially in the lower gears) produced no effect, followed by uneven acceleration and slowing before the shift point. I have seen other posts to this effect here on line, but the Subaru dealer says it's "normal" and they can't find anything wrong. So, after 4500 miles, this effect has mitigated, and the throttle operation has become "More normal" or like other small engined, manual transmission cars I have driven. I would say that my 0-60 time NOW feels like it's in the "sub 10 second range", where before, it felt slower. I have read that the computer takes a while to "learn" your driving habits......but I think 4000 miles is rediculous, and I believe 04s have manual throttle, unlike the 05 which has "drive-by-wire" throttle, and so might have a learning curve. I would appreciate anyone else's opinion on this matter, as well as posting of some hard documented facts on Subaru OB performance.

    Thanks
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    No, AWD does not replace stability control (and vice-versa) but it can keep one out of situations that would require electronic assistance.

    Stability control systems basically are designed to assist in under and oversteer conditions. AWD that is close to 50:50 all the time or proactive (vs. the other types of AWD that only kick in after 2WD wheelspin is induced) can help keep a car handling more neutral to begin with. What AWD can not do is sense and correct a specifc under/oversteer situation.

    However, not all stability control systems are created equal and one can not defy the laws of physics. Some stability control systems are known to be very intrusive and immediately clamp down on spirited driving. Also, stability control systems operate by braking (vs. sending power with AWD) so the net effect is to slow down the vehicle. Lastly, because they rely on brakes and traction, even the best stability control program will not be able to correct a situation with no grip or well beyond what can be accomplished with the tires.

    Subaru's philosophy has been to create cars that handle well on the virtues of their design: stiff chassis, symmetric drivetrain layout, suspension tuning and AWD. Other manufacturers rely on stability control to act as an electronic band-aid to poor vehicle design.

    Having said that, stability control is no longer a luxury car feature. Subaru will need to start adding some form of stability control in it's lineup to remain competitive.

    Ken
  • zman3zman3 Member Posts: 857
    "Other manufacturers rely on stability control to act as an electronic band-aid to poor vehicle design."

    I think that may be a bit of a strong statement there Ken. I wouldn't consider the stability control on my Corvette to be a band aid for poor vehicle design. More like a band aid for a stupid driver. I do agree with your last paragraph however. When it comes time to replace my 98 Outback I will not be buying a $30K plus car if I still have my Corvette. That would be way too much money tied up in vehicles. If Subaru does not extend stability control down to lower end models it will be a huge strike against them for my decision making criteria.

    Karl
  • 63corvette63corvette Member Posts: 51
    Welcome aboard Karl,

    I too have a Corvette and an Outback (2004). I ski:-)
  • zman3zman3 Member Posts: 857
    Thanks. I've mostly lurked for quite awhile now but occasionally I will interject. My Outback is a 98 but fortunately my Vette is a 2004!! :)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Permanent AWD is very nice, but most AWD systems are only part-time. Those systems don't offer the advantages of more neutral handling and less understeer, so CR's comments might be in that context.

    Stability control can only make the best of what traction is availble. AWD actually increases available traction.

    Ideally you'd have both. But I'd pick AWD over VSC any day.

    -juice
  • cdndrivercdndriver Member Posts: 86
    HI,
    I have a 2003 Legacy SE with about 44,000km on it. I live in a big city and have had the car for not quite 2 years. I recently was told I needed to have the rotors and discs replaced ($1000.00! and that it was normal for this to be done at 46,000. (Is this true?)
    I am now told that my tires which came with the car have about 25% tread left and aren't really good for the winter. I didn't think they'd wear out after only 50K, but again, they say that's normal.
    I'll be doing a lot of winter driving and they offer Blizzak W50 on aftermarket rims for 1100.00. Is this a good tire for this car for winter? What about the Michelin Arctic Alpin? And does that sound like a fair price or should I go to a tire store?
    I don't know if I can trust this dealer or is he just trying to sell some tires.
    I welcome your experience/advice. We get some good wet snow and ice here, and I'll be going to ski resorts a lot this winter for work.
    thanks,
    cdndriver
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    That is total BS, you should never have to replace disks unless you let the brake pads go down to the metal.

    I have never replaced disks on any car and I've gone as high as 200,000Kms on one of them

    If Subaru thinks this is normal, then I say it is pathetic.

    Sly
  • slickdogslickdog Member Posts: 225
    stuford is right, rotor replacement at that mileage shouldn't be considered "normal". It could be necessary for your situation, but certainly not normal. Did the shop tell you why they want to replace the pads and rotors? I don't replace mine until they are either below minimum thickness and in need of machining, or rust is encroaching on the friction surface.

    Your tires should probably not be too bad at that mileage either, although I can't say how they would do in the snow. My wife has ~54K miles on her OEM Bridgestone Potenza's so far, and there's quite a lot of tread remaining. I'm usually happy if I get at least 40-50K miles out of OEM tires.

    I've never had Arctic Alpins, but I researched them this week after failing to order the Michelin X-Ice tires I wanted for my Mazda6 wagon from tirerack.com before they sold out. Seems the general consensus is that they trade off a bit of snow/ice traction for better handling in dry/wet conditions. Most reviews I've seen on Blizzaks suggest that they're one of the best for deep snow and ice traction. You can see a comparison test between the two tires at tirerack.com:

    http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/studless_2002.jsp

    If you decide on Blizzaks, you may be able to get them cheaper online. I don't know if Tirerack ships to Canada, but last week I looked up a set of new steel rims (16") with Blizzak WS-50 (225/60QR16), mounted and balanced, for my wife's Outback, and the total came ~$650 US, ~$720 with shipping. That would be ~$850 Canadian.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    See if they can resurface the rotors with an on-car lathe.

    If they don't know what you're talking about, find a more competent mechanic! :-)

    50k miles for tires is good, I got just 28k out of my Duelers. I'd change all 4 at this point, that rubber has to be hard and worn.

    -juice
  • slickdogslickdog Member Posts: 225
    Just picked up the latest edition of Subaru End Wrench from my dealer, and inside is an interesting article about on-car brake lathes. There was a good write-up on ABS systems too.
  • fibber2fibber2 Member Posts: 3,786
    I would strongly suggest that you seek a second opinion. While I might not call it total BS, it seems highly unlikely that you would need 4 rotors this early on. Granted, I have never had brake issues on any car before as I have had on my '02 Subi, there should be enough meat remaining to lathe off most moderate surface scoring or runout.

    On the tire issue, TireRack probably delivers to the "Great White North". WS50's on steel rims with covers, mounted, balanced & shipping would probably cost you a bit less than your local, friendly dealer wants, even with the currency conversion. I wouldn't drive on 2/3 worn OEM tires in a Canadian winter.

    Steve
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Karl,

    When I meant "other" manufacturers, I didn't mean all makes other than Subaru. The one example that came to my mind was the Volvo S60 sedan that was used in the Subaru Ride and Drive comparison with the Legacy. A nice vehicle that handles okay in the slalom with ESP on. Turn it off and the handling changes drastically.

    Ken
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    My "total BS" remark wasn't referring to whether or not he needs new rotors, but on the fact he was told this is normal at 46000Kms (28000 Miles)
  • zman3zman3 Member Posts: 857
    Got it Ken. You are one of the more rational, knowledgeable people here so I was a bit surprised by the statement. Understood.

    Karl
  • fibber2fibber2 Member Posts: 3,786
    Agree! I wasn't sure which part of the story to apply the "BS" to!!!

    Steve
  • rochcomrochcom Member Posts: 247
    I have not been on the forum for a while, so I may be too late. I am using Turanza LS/T s on my Forester. They are incredible all weather tires, good even in snow. The best thing next to dedicated snows and excellent handling in wet and dry also, including hydroplaning performance. At 38,000 miles, they are a bit over half worn and have retained their handling. They were expensive at $110 each, but that included mounting, balancing, lifetime flat repair, and lifetime rotations. The "H" rated tires are somewhat diffeent and will not last as long, but may handle better in good conditions.
  • judetahoejudetahoe Member Posts: 5
    This just started on my 1997 Outback. When we turn the key to start the ignition we get a loud squeal coming from the engine. It goes away in a few seconds. We do not get an engine check light or have any problems other than the squeal. It occurs most times, but not always. Any ideas?
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 16,788
    Sounds like a loose belt to me.... I'd at least check them first, tighten as necessary, and then look for other possibilities. This job is simple to do with a 10 mm and 12 mm socket.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250
  • jopopsyjopopsy Member Posts: 65
    Hey gang,

    Anybody have any luck w/ getting the pricing of a Subaru brand extended warranty online? If so, please share the URLs !!!

    Jopopsy
  • rayccraycc Member Posts: 28
    When you replaced the timing belt on a 2.5 liter engine do you replace the water pump, tensioner, and idler pullys at the same time too.

    Thanks,

    Ray
  • kenskens Member Posts: 5,869
    Ray,

    Since all the accessory belts need to be removed when changing the T-belt, it's usually a cost-effective time to change out other items since the labor is already included.

    You probably don't need to change the pulleys, but the accessory belt and probably the water pump, if your budget permits.

    Ken
  • cdndrivercdndriver Member Posts: 86
    HI,
    I've called Subaru to see what they say about brake rotors and pad life...
    as for snow tires, I've narrowed it down to the blizzak ws50, Michelin alpin pa, and was also recommended to look at the kumho kw17 i-zen. They are the least expensive, the alpins get good reviews and seem to last longest. I am in Toronto, so winter is a real mix of dry roads, to lots of slush and wet, and snow and ice, plus I go to ski country alot. It sounds like the alpins would do it, but the kumhos have a better price. Any of you have these?
    thanks,
    John
  • cdndrivercdndriver Member Posts: 86
    I took my legacy se in because the lights were going out when I used the turn signal. The dealer had the car all day and when I picked it up told me he took the part from a new car (they didn't have one in stock he said) and I could go. Well, once on the road, I discovered that the clock hadn't been reset and when going straight down the road the steering wheel was centered at 1-2 o'clock. I called them and took the car back the next morning. Again, he had it most of the day and when I picked it up he siad the mechanic said he hadn't made any mistake but "fixed it" anyway! I told him I never want that guy touching my car again...not only is he sloppy with his work but a liar as well. I don't trust the dealership now because if he makes that kind of screw up and sloppy work on something that simple, then what will he mess up on a big tune up? Or that brake job they said I needed...did he forget to put a few bolts back in, or will he only check 20 of the 30 things he's supposed to do? This is a downtown dealership. I may have to find one of the others but it's much farther to get to.
    I have sent a letter to Subaru Canada, but I don't know what they will do, since they don't hire the mechanics. In any case, I love the car, but I'm not impressed with their service, at least not at this dealer.
    I'll let you know what I hear from them. My 48k service is coming up, too.
    cdndriver
  • sdufordsduford Member Posts: 577
    Hi John. The WS-50 and the Pilot Alpin are two very different tires.

    The WS-50 is designed to give the maximum possible ice traction at the expense of handing, noise, and threadwear.

    The Pilot Alpin is designed to give you good handling and highway ride/noise comfort with decent ice traction, but not anywhere near the WS-50's.

    The new Michelin X-Ice would be more comparable to the WS-50. That is what I have on my OBXT this year and I would say they provide about 90% of the WS-50's ice traction while still providing decent handling in dry and wet, and good ride/noise comfort. As for thread life, the jury is still out, but I'm sure it will be better then the ultra-soft WS-50's.
  • jopopsyjopopsy Member Posts: 65
    Hey Gang,

    I'm targeting my questions towards current generation Outback 2.5i owners (automatic tranny). Can anybody shed some light on the following:

    A. Passing power: How does the 2.5i perform in passing situations? Does it dog out or is it capable (by capable I don't mean quick as a bullet I mean is it comfortable or is it a major exercise in forward planning)?

    B. AC: How does your AC perform?

    C. Noise: I hear CR-V's are pretty noisy, how bout those Outbacks?

    Thanks a bunch !!!

    Jopopsy
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Definitely belts, my Miata's belts do the same thing even after tension was adjusted. I'll change them at the 60k service.

    -juice
  • c_hunterc_hunter Member Posts: 4,487
    I can't answer A (only drove 5MT 2.5i models), but B and C are both thumbs up. I actually find the 2.5i quieter than my previous top of the line 6-cylinder Outback. They have done a real good job with refinement on the 05 models.

    Craig
  • smillersmiller Member Posts: 32
    So far I love my 2005 Outback 2.5i auto with sport shift. I have no problem passing.
    The tranny is responsive to your needs as you wish. Powertrain seems much better than my 1999 Outback. The 2.5i's are lighter and have a bit more power. If you really want power go for the XT.

    AC performs as it should. Keeps the fog off the windows and keeps me cool in the summer.

    The car stays quiet for the most part - I love the growl of the H4. I don't like the stock tires because I think they transmit too much road noise at times.
  • nowakj66nowakj66 Member Posts: 709
    Eric - I am fascinated by your seat modification to your Outback which you posted 3 years ago.

     

    How is it holding up? I have a 2002 LL Bean and am 6' 4". Any sugestion where I could take it to have it done? I am not sure the dealer would want the added liability. I am not too handy and would probably have to take the car somewhere to have it done.

     

    Anyone else do this drivers seat modifciation?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles