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.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Here's a pic on my WRX
-Dave
Right now, those units on sale at Staples for $999--the lowest advertised price I have seen yet.
After using it for the past year, I must say that I am totally sold on car navigation. At first, I didn't think it would get used all that much, but it has really been very useful and incredibly accurate. Compared to units with the Delorme mapping software (which I hated), the Garmin units are simple to program and offer fantastic turn-by-turn instructions with plenty of lead time.
We purchased the Europe maps and took the unit with us for our driving trip of France in February -- the Garmin GPS is worth its weight in gold when navigating a foreign country! It found every destination, never took a wrong turn, and took a load of stress off the trip.
I think the dash mounted nav systems (such as the IQue) are not the most elegant solution (since you have a power cord and a bean bag sitting on the dash) but the cost is a fraction of the factory installed nav units, the functionality is nearly as comprehensive, and you have the option of taking it with you when you switch cars.
Brian
-Dave
Okay, I changed the OEM Bridgestone RE92 tires at 6,500 miles after reading so many poor reviews on this board and over at the Tire Rack. Honestly I only had one hydroplaning incident with those tires while on the interstate but the criticisms were so frequent and intense that I went to Tire Kingdom in Palm Coast, Florida and purchased 4 Michelin Pilot Sport A/S tires. The ride improved dramatically to my mind. It now feels like the Subie is on steroids! The grip of these tires is a big improvement but at a cost. They are harsher and noisier according to my wife. And the fuel economy took a big hit, down from 24mpg to 21mpg. I am going to attribute this to new tires breaking in. I know I'm crazy for getting rid of those Bridgestones but I'm harmless.
Bob
Hal
Haahah! Yeah, all the crazy people claim to be harmless..... ;-D
When you are coming to a stop in gear, you'll hear a different click, which is the reverse lockout solenoid (allowing you to shift into reverse at the low speeds). That is a quiet "chunk" noise on my car, and I have to strain to notice it. Ken's Legacy GT has a bit louder noise, but I seem to remember he trained himself to not notice it anymore (no small feat for us OCD folks).
Honestly, neither of the solenoids should be loud enough to bother you. If you think it's abnormally loud, maybe ask the dealer to do something about it. I suppose you could possibly use foam or dynamat to damp out the noise, if you knew where to put it.
CRaig
In some cases, depending upon location it wants me to turn around & go back and up another highway to get to my destination. A 50 mile trip would come out 50 75 miles if I followed its instructions.
Going North from Boston to Manchester, NH would normally take 93 straight in. But, the damn thing wants me to get off 93, south on 495 than up 8 to get to the same place! Plus, if I did that would have to pay a toll!
I even tried programming it "shortest way" or "fastest way" but still these inconsistencies pop up.
You would have to load this instruction(s) into the unit directly [using the USB to the memory chip will not transfer those info].
You can also plan you own route to a destination.
If I'm not familiar with the route/area, I usually follow the GPS. Otherwise, I just ignore its instruction and let it recalculate while I go it my way.
One other thing I would do is use the "Via Point" to force the GPS to go your way. After awhile you'll pretty much anticipate what route it is going to plan for you.
-Dave
Some of you may recall that I had a bad accident on Dec. 26th. I was hit on the drivers side jsut behind the front tire by a pickup and a Nissan SUV. Four days after getting the car back from the body shop, looking like new, I was rear-ended in a snowfall in the city, by another SUV, this one a Ford Expedition. I had stopped and the Ford, though only going 30 kmph couldn't and slid into me. It did virtually nothing to his bumper, but his tow hook hit and pushed mine down causing over $1000.00 damage. If I get hit once more I'll have had teh car painted on all four sides!
My Bridgestone all season OEM tires wore out at 46k, which surprised me, but I'm told they aren't great. I needed some winter tires and ended up getting Nokian WR. They are an all season but have the winter rating. I must say they are really great. I am a ski instructor in the winter and they got me through all kinds of snow and slush with excellent hold, not a lot of noise, and they are really good on dry pavement so I can run them all year. They have superb grip in rain, too.
I recently took my car in for the 54000km service and was told that the warranty would be up at 60k. (I have a leased 2003 legacy special edition). I have recently replaced the pads and rotors (which I still am not happy about) but I'm told that I should consider an extended warranty until the lease is up in Dec. 06. I'm told it would cost 500.00 for another year starting at 60k. Now they say that all kinds of sensors could go, and they're really expensive. This is my first Subaru and I don't know if I should get the warranty or not. I welcome your ideas. Do these cars hold up or is it like an Audi where the cars get sold right after the warranty exires? I've got to make it hold out until then. I'm not a hard driver, and don't put more than 20k per year on it. But I don't want lots of surprises coming up either. What do you think?
It would be a Subaru dealership warranty.
thanks,
regards,
John
cdndriver
I love the power of the Legacy GT but the fuel economy I am not too enthused about. The "i" model gets much better EPA numbers (something to consider with gas prices going through the roof).
CRaig
Last go 'round, the Forester got the Phase II EJ25 engine in 1999, as did the Impreza, but the Legacy and Outback only got it in 2000.
I think it would be a mistake for Subaru to delay that engine intro, though.
The AVLS engine has the same 166 lb-ft torque peak, but it should rev better and make smoother power especially near the top end.
-juice
My question is have you noticed any detrimental handling because of the T rating and tire? Are you still happy with them. My 4 cycl. OB couldn't hit the H speed rating going down a steep hill, but they say it also affects handling and tire wear. Probably just an excuse to get customers to spend more??
They show dust, dirt, scratches, fingerprints, and any dings much more than lighter colors. They require frequent polishing or they begin to look shabby even when clean. They aren't as visible to other traffic which makes them not as safe.
And they get really hot in the summer.
My dealer gave me a black loaner last summer which reminded me again why I don't buy black. It took that car at least 10 miles to begin to cool down on a hot 90+ degree sunny day.
I actually think that a clean white car is hard to beat for appearance and practicality. Then again if we all had the same color it would be a boring world.
You'll enjoy your black car, if only for the experience of owning it. There's nothing sharper when freshly polished.
My other favorite was the Subaru Forester, but the rollover rating is even higher (16%).
You can check these numbers at the government web page:
http://www.safercar.gov/RollRatings.cfm
I feel a little bit deceived, because the salesperson I visited here at the Fields Erthel dealer here in Cincinnati told me with great pride that the Outback had a lower chance to rollover than SUVs.
Maybe somebody will be able to explain me these rating numbers.
Thanks,
Pablo
However, I am the proud owner of regal blue pearl.
Did the salesperson inform you that the Outback is also an SUV?
As for the ratings, they use a formula to determine rollover. Although the Outback isn't as tall as the Pilot, it is narrower so the center of gravity is probably pretty similar.
I'm appending a response I got from the Honda Pilot message board, in case you're interested:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------
You have to take the NHTSA rollover ratings with a grain of salt. There are two components to the test: a dynamic test that actually tests a moving vehicle, but the score is only pass/fail, and a purely static measurement of the height of the center of gravity which produces those percentages.
In the dynamic test, the vehicle is put through some maneuvers to see if it will tip its swheels. The test is done at specific speeds and is a pass/fail, based on whether the vehicle tips or not. It isn't done at progressively higher speeds to see if one vehicle is more likely to tip sooner than the other.
In the static test, the height of the center of gravity is measured versus the width of the vehicle's track. From this, the percentage probability of rollover is computed.
The Pilot benefits from having a very wide track, which does help stability and, on paper, helps reduce rollovers. I believe the Outback suffers because it has even higher ground clearance than the Pilot and is significantly narrower.
The problem with the NHTSA test is that with just a pass/fail test with a moving vehicle, it doesn't factor in enough of vehicle dynamics. E.g. in the pass/fail maneuver, one vehicle could well have been precariously close to tipping but just made it, while the other vehicle was rock-solid and could have been going 20 mph faster without a tip.
Nevertheless, the Pilot and its MDX brother both do very well in these tests.
it practically has to be tripped to roll.
-Dave
The other one was a driver on glazed ice roads using a cruise control at 65 mph. He lost control and went into the ditch (about 10 inches of heavy snow with large rocks) but over-corrected to get back onto the road. At a nearly-perpendicular, 50 mph slide, the car "tripped (as Dave put it)" on a rock and flipped on its roof (but did not roll, just flipped) and slid to a stop in the ditch. This time, the man nearly severed his thumb because the driver's window shattered on another rock as it flipped, but his wife (front passenger seat) was fine, if not a bit rattled.
The data is outdated already.
-juice
You're right, I checked the dimensions for 2005 and they are different, the car is wider. Sorry for my ignorance but could you tell me what do you mean with "clearance"?And also, does the track refers to the separation of the wheels?
Thank you,
Pichula
P.S. I sent you the question also in the Forester message board, but the moderator said he's going to delete my message so I'm trying to ask you here.
PF Flyer
Host
News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles
The Mazda Mania Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
The 2005s got a slight lift.
That hurts the rollover rating in theory, but then they moved the engine down to lower the center of gravity. They also use aluminum for the hood, tailgate, and roof rails. Putting lighter materials up high also lowers the center of gravity.
So my guess is the Outback will do better next time they evaluate it.
-juice
It isn't going to save you enough for a trip to Hawaii, but it might save you the cost of dinner in a decent restaurant over the life of the car and the wind noise is noticeably less.
On a Honda Civic I owned in the early 90s, racks really hurt the gas mileage.
Craig
Cheers,
-wdb
-juice
I am wondering if the driving lights I installed on the front rack will, though. The last trip I took to Anchorage, with just me and gear (about 250# total) on the way down, netted me 14.25 gallons over 355 miles - about 24.9 mpg running 70 in the 65 zones (90% of the journey), 60 in the 55s (8%) and 3-5 over in all others (mostly 45 zones). That was about .75 mpg less than a typical trip. On the way back, with wife, child, luggage, and groceries (total weight probably 550-600#), we netted 23.6 mpg. Some of that may have had to do with my wife being very tired of traveling. I had to keep harping on her to keep the speed below 75.... It was like trying to leash a rabid wolf. :surprise:
I also checked tire pressure just before heading back up. I was irradically low, so inflated them all to 35 psi. Prior to inflating, I was at 35(LF), 22(RF), 31(RR), 32(LR). I just checked them all 4 weeks earlier and put them at 35, so that darned RF must have a decent leak. Oh well, I'll have 70K on them come mid-summer, so it's time to replace anyway I guess. I just have to decide whether I want to split my seasons or continue to use an all-season. At this late in the game (age of car), I should probably just keep using all-seasons. Another set of 3-year tires will probably outlast the car.
Fill it back up to 35 psi. Unmount the tire, then spray soapy water on it. Look for the bubbles where the air leaks.
Caught a slow leak in my wife's tires a while back that way. Patched it myself with a kit from the auto store and no more leak.
-juice
-Wes-
thank you,
Steve
So, you've been around the area often
I'm trying to convince my parents to move within the next 5 years.
I'm afraid thereafter the nabe would become quite unsuitable for the age.
-Dave
I am wondering if the driving lights I installed on the front rack will, though. The last trip I took to Anchorage, with just me and gear (about 250# total) on the way down, netted me 14.25 gallons over 355 miles - about 24.9 mpg running 70 in the 65 zones (90% of the journey), 60 in the 55s (8%) and 3-5 over in all others (mostly 45 zones). That was about .75 mpg less than a typical trip.
I took two identical trips back to back (don't ask) of 350 miles, one with a Yakima RocketBox on the roof, and one without.
The difference in mpg was 1.1 mpg.
-juice
any other opinions on this? its too easy (or fun) to go over 4000 rpms with the turbo when merging on the highway, etc...
Yes, I still have my Triple Treds. They now have 9200 trouble free miles on them. They work great in rain, snow or dry. No, I don't have any problems with the T rating. T rating is for "Continuous speed not to exceed 113mph"....and I certainly don't exceed it (continuously;-)
I had mine installed at a local Perfection tire for $10/tire including balancing, and hand torqued. Les Schwab is another local tire dealer, and normally great people. However they refuse to mount tires that are bought at another dealer, even on-line. Best of luck with your new Triple Treds, and let us know how you like them.
Also, does anyone know any trouble spots of this year and model???
Craig
dino oil. Does anyone have experience with using synthetic in their vehicles?
Is synthetic really better than conventional oil? Your input is much appreciated.
Thank you
-juice
The only downside is it costs 4 times as much as "dino" oil.
If you drive moderately with moderate ambient temperatures, I don't think the synthetic pays for itself. You will probably get better results by using "dino" oil and changing it twice as often and some money.
I've not heard of many Subaru engine failures due to poor lubrication, so I have been using the "dino" oil in my 05 Legacy 2.5i.
I do use synthetic oil in my wife's Camry. Toyota has had some history of sludge build up causing engine failures. That, combined with my wife's frequent short trip driving in heavy traffic justify the investment in the expensive oil.
Just my $.02.
Jim W