Station wagons with manual transmissions are quickly going the way of the fedora. In fact, there are more gas-electric hybrids for sale stateside than row-your-boat wagons. If you want an all-wheel-drive model, the number plummets. Which makes me wonder: what's the point of the Subaru Outback five-speed?
Although I can't speak for Subie's Sapphic fans, sex appeal is NOT the Outback's raison d'etre. Oh, it's handsome enough; in a stern, trim, no grotesque affectations sticking you in the eye sort of way. Subaru's raised the beltline (to lose the Popemobile effect), added new lights (there was a sale on Japanese fish eyes) and stuck a Chrysler Pacifica logo on the snout. While the Outback now looks more expensive than it is, it's about as quirky as an accountant wearing different colored socks.
The interior is equally enthralling and twice as sensible. Fold down the Outback's rear seats and lifestyle load luggers enjoy almost as much schlepitude as Volvo's V70. Although Subaru's redesigned the Outback's instrument panel, "revised" the interior fabrics, added a telescoping wheel (yay!) and numbered the radio buttons from one to five, the cabin remains very much of a muchness. There's nothing tasteless, nothing tasty. Well, except for the meaty steering wheel…
The helm puts you in charge of Subaru's 170hp 2.5-liter SOHC aluminum-alloy 16-valve horizontally opposed four-cylinder engine. If Porsche went all Jaguar on us and tried to dip down market, this is the kind of engine I'd expect: smooth, free-revving and just about as gutsy as a four can be. But Outback drivers are never in any doubt that they're lugging around a couple hundred extra pounds of all wheel-drive (AWD) gear.
The Outback's ride is comfortable without the slightest hint of refinement. Dry road handling is exemplary, with predictable body roll and enough steering feel to tell you when to quit (early and often). Try to accelerate out of a couple of turns and the Outback's architecture tells you that the vehicle could stand another 80 horses– and the rest. The no-fun factor might be considered a plus in a wagon full and kids and dogs and things to be inflated, but it's a definite drawback when you're all alone and late for work. And then…
I was fortunate enough to test our base Outback on fresh powder and packed snow. The worse the conditions, the better it got.
Needless to say, I developed an immediate and intimate respect for Subaru's time-honed Symmetrical AWD system. While other drivetrain layouts have all kinds of 90 degree kinks to sap power and response, the Outback's in-line engine allows more direct power transfer to all the wheels. At the same time, the low-slung boxer engine provides a lower center of gravity, like bending your knees when you're skiing.
The Outback's four-wheel disc brakes, with ABS and electronic brake-force watching over each wheel, proved highly effective on the white stuff. More to the point (of the vehicle's existence), when traction is iffy, it's nice to have more options than merely stop and go. The Outback's manual transmission gives the set up more feel. Sure, you can crank the automatic's lever back and forth, but it's not the same as feathering the clutch, whipping up the revs or using the engine as a brake.
Taken as a whole, the Outback bites, rather than slides on, the snow; it felt like I had an invisible keel slicing through an unseen slot in the road. Although it doesn't have all the toys and [much of any] torque, the entry level Outback has still got the bad weather integrity that makes it an entirely justifiable for people who live in the… wait for it… outback.
Again, if you live in those parts of the country where you can get to grandma's house sans icy winds and killer snow drifts, and you're not likely to travel for hours on unpaved roads, the Outback is a different beast. Well, maybe "beast" is the wrong word. A different "animal:" one of those zoo dwellers that's odd but not terribly attractive. Though it's still adept at negotiating wet leaves, large puddles and the occasional hopped curb, the Outback's charms diminish in direct proportion to the civility of your driving environment.
The number of American drivers who favor a manual transmission is in the single digits and falling fast. But Subaru's right to continue offering a stick shift, low frills, Outback with a relatively anemic engine.
What's the reverse of a halo car? You know: a car that shows that a brand is still in touch with the austere competence that endeared its products to its original financially-challenged, mechanically savvy customers? The five-speed manual base Outback is it. Well done to Subaru for not pulling-up its roots. Now, if they could just strip and flip the STI…
75 Comments on “2008 Subaru Outback Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
so true that a real wagon, especially with a manual, is an exceedingly rare item in the US car market. too bad for those of us who want one.
the outback is a compelling choice for looks, reliability, size, refinement and safety. but even if one could get over the very serious fuel penalty for lugging around all that AWD equipment, subaru doesn’t offer stability control on the manual transmission models.
i know VSC is controversial in some circles, but it is purported to be the biggest safety advance since airbags. why do we have to suffer a slushbox in order to get it?
No mention of fuel economy, rated at 19 city/26 highway for the manual transmission. It's not all attributed to the AWD, part of it is the chassis weight. But in my opinion this isn't all bad, Subaru has a reputation for making safe vehicles, not lightweight ones.
And what about the quality of the interior? After looking inside the latest Impreza, I crossed it off my short list of potential commuter scooters. So, is the new Outback better or worse than the outgoing model in this respect? (Pssst – by the
99 percent of all SUV drivers would significantly benefit by switching to one of these. It just has to be more fun to drive that most SUVS and pickups. With good dedicated snow tires, it would do 100 percent better 100 percent of the time on 99 percent of the roads that most SUV buyers actually drive on.
I’m still waiting, though, for TTAC to puncture through the obvious lies that power the SUV craze.
I had a 1996 base model, 5spd, radio, A/C (crank windows) now I drive a 2001 base model, 5spd, radio, A/C Electric Windows (whew hoo), and they will be high on my list for my next one. I’ve NEVER had a car with an mush-matic and I’d like to continue that record.
modemjunki :
No mention of fuel economy, rated at 19 city/26 highway for the manual transmission.
Click on the “rating summary and performance review” link at the bottom of the review.
These things are simply THE car to own if you live in Canada.
My ‘02 Legacy GT with Artic Alpins is nigh unstoppable in the winter ice and slop. Its low center of gravity makes it a great car for occasional yuletime hoonage also.
my first car was an 85 GL-10 Subie wagon, poop brown with a 5-speed. Ran to about 190k and was a perfect 1st car that sold me on the merits of a (relatively) frugal manual wagon. Then one day I tried to drive it on the beach, and caused $900 of front-end damage. So when gas was cheap I bought a 5-speed 4wd SUV that could drive on the beach and tow my boat. Now I have that, and I’ll keep it for those chores. But I’ve always greatly admired Subaru for sticking with the basic, affordable, manual wagon format…and I will continually remain an interested and likely future customer.
These Subie wagons are in my opinion the most practical all-around vehicles that exist, and deserve way more popularity than they have.
I have a 2001 Forester 5-spd shod with the standard all-season radials that Subaru dealers install. The tires lack grip on snow. Without any sort of traction control, this car is IMHO far more dangerous than a 2WD model. It is far too easy to break all 4 driven wheels loose on low speed corners on snow covered roads. When that happens, you begin to move sideways. Me, I happen to love the drifting, and play along like I’m some sort of rally driver (at low speed). I don’t think I would send my wife out in this car unless I upgraded to truly good snow tires. Have they improved this behavior on the 2008 model?
This is the real CUV. Very good on snow and it’s a Subaru. When I first saw this car I thought it was taller and more durable looking than its predecessor and I won’t even call it a wagon.
A well made CUV for all generation to enjoy.
My wife’s 2007 Outback 3.0 R LL Bean is no fun to drive, but is safe, utterly reliable, comfortable, and utile. A nice car for the highway, even in foul weather. I wish that it had less wind noise, caused by the frameless windows. Fuel economy is mediocre, about 16 mpg in suburban stop and go, but about 24 mpg on the highway. My 2007 Subaru spec.B is fun to drive, but I prefer the Outback’s six-cylinder for its linear power delivery and smoothness.
Now that Subaru has officially ditched the manual Legacy wagon, this is all stick purists get.
Even in Hotlanta, you see far more of these than any other Subaru. Too bad Subaru can’t get the gas mileage up any. And yes, driving the XT ruins this car for you… if you want to get the base engine DO NOT under any circumstances drive the XT, you WILL decide you MUST have the turbo. Period.
Late 90’s Outbacks have been my wife’s favorite car. She sits high enough up to feel that she has command for the road, loves the sporty and clean design, and the four cylinder is rev happy enough to make her daily chores a bit more enjoyable.
I recently did a study on a certain dealership’s trade-in’s. Over 4000 vehicles were traded in and out of that sample, Subaru had the second highest percentage of trade-in’s over 150k (33%) and the second lowest number of trade-in’s under 100k (22%). They were also one of the very few brands with more 150k trade-in’s than sub 100k ones. Given that all but one of the 39 were 1997 or newer, this seems to indicate that Subarus in general are among the most ‘driven’ brands out there.
Of course, if you want an affordable AWD vehicle with a manual transmission and electronic stability, there’s always the Suzuki SX4.
The related 2005 Legacy GT was much more fun to drive. But they dropped the stick for 2006, then the Legacy wagon altogether for 2008. Seems too many people (myself included) said they’d buy such a car, then didn’t.
TrueDelta has been reporting results for the Legacy and Outback for some time now. Though there will be an uptick in the repair rate for the 2005 in this month’s results, these tend to be very reliable cars. The most notable problem area: wheel bearings.
Always looking for more participants in the research.
http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php
SLLTTAC “Fuel economy is mediocre, about 16 mpg in suburban stop and go..”
If this was a pickup, SUV, or the new marketing favorite CUV being reviewed, there would be 20 posts saying that there are X number of other cars you could drive that get X mpgs better, and you don’t need all that utility of the vehicle except for a few times a year.
I love wagons and I love manuals. But I’m not giving up my Jeep for city mileage like this. Regardless of its driving dynamics.
I have never understood Subaru’s penchant for crummy tires. My wife’s Forester rolled an OEM Yokohama Geolander 900 off the rim somehow — replacement Goodyear Assurance are worlds better in all conditions from dry concrete to deep snow, and seem to be wearing at a much more acceptable rate than the originals. I don’t think you can get your Subaru dealer to trade shoes pre-delivery, but ditch the original rubber ASAP.
Had a 2001 (last gen) Outback wagon with the 5-speed. Best car I’ve ever owned. Super quiet on the road, and could haul large amounts of stuff — from band gear to runs to the dump. Manual made driving a little more engaging, and garnered slightly better MPG. I got about 24 with mostly freeway driving.
Sold it after 3 years and 75k trouble-free miles because wife can’t drive a stick, and the MPG wasn’t what I wanted. I miss that car. Wagons (and small hatchbacks) are pretty much all I’ve owned, all but the latest with a 5-speed. I’ll not buy another auto — time to teach the wife to shift. :)
There were two reasons why I didn’t get this car last year. 1) Poor fuel economy (a 2.5 liter getting 19 mpg is ridiculous) 2) worst automatic ever. Yes, I wanted an automatic, and Subaru matches an ancient 4-speed to the base Outback. The 5-speed on the H6 and turbo models is somehow worse.
I had one of these as a rental two weeks ago, drove it from Lafayette, IN to Cincinnati and back. Didn’t have snow, but lots and lots of rain. What I liked best was the awesome acceleration from a dead stop. The 0-10 jump was like a sprinter out of the starting blocks. I also loved the handling. This thing sticks to the road and carves corners. The feel of connection between driver and road was awesome.
What didn’t I like? It was CRAMPED! Holy cow. I’m 6′2″, so the first thing I noticed was lack of leg space behind the wheel, but I’m also thin as a rail, so the lack of hip and knee room was really shocking to me. It made my ‘06 Malibu Maxx cavernous by comparison. It makes a Honda Civic seem roomy. Also, I know this was a no-frills rental, but the interior struck me as cheap and full of hard, unforgiving plastics and imitation aluminum (yuck).
The automatic transmission was just plain retarded (if you’ll excuse the political incorrectness). When I put the hammer down to pass, I got… nothing. Then about two seconds later, a two-gear downshift that throws me back in my seat. WTF? Maybe the previous renters abused it to the point of brain damage, I don’t know.
“99 percent of all SUV drivers would significantly benefit by switching to one of these. It just has to be more fun to drive that most SUVS and pickups. With good dedicated snow tires, it would do 100 percent better 100 percent of the time on 99 percent of the roads that most SUV buyers actually drive on.”
That may be true for the concrete commandos but the Subie won’t pull a 5,000 lb. trailer full of llamas like my Expedition will!
WildBillThat may be true for the concrete commandos but the Subie won’t pull a 5,000 lb. trailer full of llamas like my Expedition will!
No, but I believe the 3.0R is rated for 3,000 or 3,500 lbs. (can’t remember) which is enough for a small pop-up camper, or even a two-llama trailer. And I bet you can install an aftermarket towing package that will up that figure to compact truck territory.
I wear a fedora.
Not everyday, of course. But when I’m in a business suit and overcoat, and the weather is looking crummy, I bust out the old Borsalino. Funny thing is, it gets a bit of attention on the street, which I suppose this car does not.
When I started driving, the car I learned on was the manual tranny Subaru wagon that my parents had already beaten on for 8 years beforehand. She wasn’t neccesarily fast off the stops (but give me County Line Rd. on a night with no cops and I could get it up to 140, easy, and she stayed right there for me), but I hauled all the stuff for my band without a problem, and she could go -anywhere-, and I never gave a damn about the weather when I was behind the wheel of that car. Snow? Downshift. Sleet? Downshift. High Winds? Whatever, my centre of gravity is better than some tanks. Hail? Eh, the paint job’s shit anyhow.
This sounds very much like the successor to that old wagon, and I have to admit that I’ll be tempted to take a look at one sooner or later just for nostalgia’s sake.
Michael Karesh
The related 2005 Legacy GT was much more fun to drive. But they dropped the stick for 2006, then the Legacy wagon altogether for 2008. Seems too many people (myself included) said they’d buy such a car, then didn’t.
No, they all bought them, and unfortunately for Subaru, people drive ‘em to death. So they’re not buying new ones every couple years, which means no one bought new ones. Yeah, it’s sad, but let’s face it, wagons aren’t terribly hip right now.
TrueDelta has been reporting results for the Legacy and Outback for some time now. Though there will be an uptick in the repair rate for the 2005 in this month’s results, these tend to be very reliable cars. The most notable problem area: wheel bearings.
No way. Well, on both the reliability and the wheel bearings. Ours were damaged and replaced after the accident, haven’t had issues since then. But the brake rotors appear to be warped AGAIN and I’m not too thrilled about that. I always swear i’ll never buy the first model year of any vehicle, and then we went and did it with our 05 LGT and it has nothing but grief and pain. They tend to be reliable… as in, you either have a reliable one or you don’t. Some people don’t have a lick of trouble, some people have every single thing go wrong on the car. We appear to be in the latter group, unfortunately.
Well, fedoras are making a bit of comeback fashionwise, even if they are being a bit restyled into more of a ‘pimp hat’. Is that good news for wagon lovers?
Hey, the BMW 328 wagon can be had with a stick. In fact, I think that is the default… you have to pay more to downgrade to the automatic.
It surprises me to hear that the naturally aspirated four with a 5MT gets only 19/26, which is about spot on with the 19/25 that my XT (turbo) 5MT achieves regularly. Premium fuel (a bargain nowadays) and synthetic oil aside, the turbo, along with it’s extra 77 ponies) is worth every penny in juvenile grins alone.
The only downside to the Turbo in MT form is that those extra horsepower approach the threshold of traction an order of magnitude sooner in the snow.
Megan Benoit: Yeah, it’s sad, but let’s face it, wagons aren’t terribly hip right now.
Ironic, as mainstream America is clamoring for better fuel economy… yet unwilling to give up versatility of their SUV. In practice, wagons are an existing and well-validated solution. Methinks it’s a rebellion against the Europeans, who actually have it figured out the wagons are the real deal – performance and versatility.
Michael Karesh: The most notable problem area: wheel bearings.
Megan Benoit: No way. Well, on both the reliability and the wheel bearings. Ours were damaged and replaced after the accident, haven’t had issues since then.
Check the forums… wheel bearings are among the most problematic. I’ve replaced 2 already under warranty.
I had honestly not heard a thing about wheel bearings up until today. Bad fuel injectors, stinky clutch, burnt out ECU/ECMs, squeaky dash, RE-92 hell, engine shudder, etc, etc, all that stuff I’d seen bandied about on the forums… but not wheel bearings. Our rear ones were replaced (like i mentioned), but we’ve never heard a peep or a squeak from the front, which is where most people appear to be having the problem. Go figure. And here I had thought we’d had EVERY problem we could have with ours. :)
Wagons are actually making a comeback, but they’re calling them CUVs or something now.
My last Outback was a 2001 with the H6. Before I drove it back across the country from San Diego I put on new tires. A set of V-rated Michelin Pilot All Season. Wow! I mean, WOW! Totally different car.
When my brother bought his XT last fall, I urged him to upgrade the tires right away. He and his wife totally love what that did to the car.
In terms of mileage – I get 27 on the highway with my Spec. B. You just have to know how to drive ‘em.
Hope, though, that the diesel gets here soon.
Finally, they just released a software upgrade for the slush box which, I understand, makes a big difference relative to downshifts.
First rule for new Subaru buyers (non-Spec. B, non- STi): CHANGE THE TIRES.
Once you do that it is a totally different car.
Also, they just released an update for the software that controls the 5 speed slush-box. I am told that it makes a huge difference.
I enjoyed the review.
My wife and I are looking to get an 08 LGT. Most of the kinks have been ironed out and a few nice things have been added/made standard…and the pricing is hard to beat right now :)
The standard subies (i.e. the base impreza, outback, and legacy) are great general transportation. Their fuel economy is nothing great, but they consistently do very well with safety and offer good performance vs. their competitors.
But for me, cars like the LGT are really where Subie is shining right now. For 26-27k, I can get a 240-250 HP/TQ 5-speed sedan with heated, power leather seats, AWD, fold-down rear seats, and a number of other nice features standard. It still does 0-60 in sub 6 seconds and ~14.1-14.2 quarter mile…and it has great mid-range thrust, easy tunability, solid handling, and a nice ride.
A few things: It’s one of the few 25k+ cars to not have stability control. But I would ask, does this car need it? Stability control can’t overcome inertia. If you don’t have traction, stability control can’t do much. This is a very stable, low COG, AWD car. If you begin to lose traction, you can usually increase it by applying throttle. Sure, stability control might help, but it’s not exactly like this is the type of car that would truly benefit from it.
Gas mileage: City is abysmal. Modest speed highway (i.e. 70mph) seems to be decent, mid to upper 20’s. Not a strong point, but not really weak either.
Stock tires: Not suited for long-life, despite having the ability to live too long. Wear em for 20-25k, and then move on. No big deal.
Reliability: Subie, especially the N/A ones, are historically solidly-built, long-running cars with some quirks but typically a “keep-on-going” style. The new turbo ones tend to be less so, from anecdotal evidence. Still though, I don’t think 100k on a modern Subie, with proper maintenance, would be a problem. They aren’t 100k with-no-tune-up vehicles, but they don’t require timing belts either.
One thing no one has commented on: Have you ever noticed how SLOW the windows go down on the electric-window models? Holy cow….it’s like 7-8 mississippi’s to go from top to bottom…
Joe
That was a really nice review–lots of useful info, fun to read, and a nice conclusion. But what is this Subaru and lesbians thing? Is that real, or someone’s imagination? I know plenty of heterosexual women who drive them, and families, and a few single men as well, and even a few lesbians. But is there any real evidence that this is the hot car among gay women? Could it simply be that a lot of everyone in the Northeast drives them, especially progressives, perhaps, including gay women?
BEAT :
This is the real CUV. Very good on snow and it’s a Subaru.
Looks like a wagon to me. Walks like a wagon. Even quacks like a wagon.
define “CUV”. It’s marketing speak. Orwellian.
David Holzman: it’s for real. And Subaru has the highest percentage of its marketing budget go to gay/lesbian oriented media of any car maker.
We’ve put on a 120k miles in 8 years on our Forester: total problems: two rear wheel bearings, two sets of front pads, one set of plugs, timing belt. Dead reliable.
The Forester is definitely the more interesting vehicles of the two. When it comes to the ‘SUV-like’ vehicles in today’s marketplace, the only ones I would even remotely consider are the Forester and the last gen Xb.
Then again… I tend to love old Volvo 240’s, W124’s, and minivans that have 5-speeds. If I were any more quirky, I would have ended up working for Citroen.
The Forester–plug ugly, the plaid shirt of automobiles. But what great visibility! Every time I see one I get cognitive dissonance.
I seriously considered putting a 2.5 XT (Turbo) in my garage but in the end the cheapness of the interior and the boring driving experience kept me away. I respect Subaru for thier outstanding AWD system and solid reliability. I was coming out of an A4 Wagon at the time, it also being a beast in the white stuff, not quite the solid reliable vehicle that I would imagine a subie is though.
In the end the Passat 3.6 4 motion wagon had the nice blend of quality interior and driving feel I wanted. Maybe next time Subaru, but for now the Outback is just an AWD Corolla wagon.
Joe O
A few things: It’s one of the few 25k+ cars to not have stability control. But I would ask, does this car need it? Stability control can’t overcome inertia. If you don’t have traction, stability control can’t do much. This is a very stable, low COG, AWD car. If you begin to lose traction, you can usually increase it by applying throttle. Sure, stability control might help, but it’s not exactly like this is the type of car that would truly benefit from it.
*shrug* We’ve had ours over 3 years now and driven it in all sorts of conditions with no stability control, and I agree — no traction is no traction. Which is exactly what the RE-92s give you on anything but dry pavement. The lack of stability control doesn’t make the car more dangerous, the woefully inadequate stock tires do (you can see my review of the 08 LGT on the site, I think I gave it 4 stars). The AWD compensates nicely for the lack of stability control, but you can get the LGT with VDC now, you just have to spring for the spec.B. I believe there is legislation in place to make stability control standard on all cars past a certain model year, so you’ll probably see it soon. But do you need it? Probably not.
Gas mileage: City is abysmal. Modest speed highway (i.e. 70mph) seems to be decent, mid to upper 20’s. Not a strong point, but not really weak either.
My husband regularly gets 22-24mpg mixed, rarely less than that, and he drives backroads into downtown Atlanta every day and routinely gets stuck in bad traffic. But he has the stick, too. The automatic tranny kills the gas mileage, even with the fancy s-drive options, and is just plain no fun. On the open road, we can easily get 27mpg, and that’s at Atlanta speeds. When we took the LGT to Yellowstone a few years ago, we got low to mid 30s, and most people we know that live in mountain states get similar.
Stock tires: Not suited for long-life, despite having the ability to live too long. Wear em for 20-25k, and then move on. No big deal.
That’s the understatement of the year. I don’t think ours made it 20k miles… we had snow tires even, so they saw less wear than they should have, and we are not hard on tires (yeah, try to squeal the tires in one of these… if you try really, really hard you can ‘chirp’ them and that’s it). We ended up replacing them with Continental ContiExtremeContacts about a year ago, which are better tires at a fraction of the cost (replacement RE-92s are ridiculously expensive for tires that won’t last 20k miles). Also had Blizzaks for snow tires, but we gave those to a friend who also bought a LGT when we moved to Atlanta. Can’t endorse good snow tires for the LGT enough.
As for reliability, well, you’ve seen my earlier comments. The LGT spent two weeks in the shop a couple of summers ago because of a bad fuel injector that was on national backorder. TWO. WEEKS. That is simply not acceptable, and Subaru still will not admit there is a problem with the fuel injectors and issue a recall (hint: if you have a part on national backorder and it takes weeks to get a replacement, you may have a problem). Don’t wreck yours, either — getting genuine replacement parts will take weeks also. A newer one might have more of the kinks ironed out, but I would not call ours a reliable vehicle. When the lease is up, we’ll be replacing it with a spec.B or something else (the Civic Si is a frontrunner). But not another 05 LGT. That said, it’s still an incredibly fun car, and a great bargain. Just make sure you’ve got backup plans for when things start to go wrong.
Wow!
This is crazy!
I am on Subaru number 5. (SVX, Leg. GT, SVX 2, Outback VDC, Spec. B)
All have gone over 100k miles – mostly in New England – and my opinion – following the ownership of several BMW’s, Mercedes, Volvos and Jaguars is that Subarus are generally tremendously well engineered and built.
With the exception of the well known transmission issues on the first SVX, they have all been bullet proof except for wear and tear items, 2 wheel bearings, an alternator and a fuel distribution unit. Only the bearings did I have to pay for.
I will note that while I was living in Southern California, my 2001 VDC wagon had some strange problems: A/C solenoid burn-outs and a shorting fuel gauge. I let the dealer there replace the solenoid once but not work on the fuel gauge. When I got back to my dealer in RI (Pilgrim Subaru), those issues vanished. So I conclude that dealer variability is part of the experience equation with Subaru. Mine has been great.
Michael Karesh wrote: “The most notable problem area: wheel bearings.” My 1992 Subaru SVX went through two sets of wheel berarings. A friend’s SVX suffered failure of wheel bearings. My 1996 Outback, my 2006 spec.B, and my company’s two 2006 Foresters have not suffered such a failure. (By the way, each Forester is driven about 30,000 miles a year and each has been totally trouble-free.) Let us hope that this is no longer a weakness of Subarus.
Mr Holzman..
this is A Wagon…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wagon.jpg
Crossover Utility Vehicle – According to Leo Burnett specializing in consumer behavior. CUV is just a marketing lingo but in fact it is still an SUV. hey just like saying P-Diddy was Puff Daddy
get me?
How can a CUV drives like a car when you can’t even do 45 to 65 mph on U-pin curve? try doing that and post it on You Tube.
Do you know about AUV? It’s a marketing lingo
I have an ‘05 Outback XT LTD with a 5MT and really dislike this car. I agree with Bolhuijo: the rear end of this car slides out in the snow. And that isn’t just when it goes around corners… it is squirmy on slick roads trying maintain a straight line. I have replaced the horrible Bridgestones with Goodyear TripleTreds and that marginally helped. This season I put Blizzaks on it and it still slides out. Consumer Reports has repeatedly cited this car for rear end slide out and they are right. I personally do not feel safe in this car in the snow at speeds over 30. I never had this problem with my ‘98 A6.
In addition, the interior is cramped, the driving position too low, the gas mileage is very disappointing, the paint durability is crappy, the hatch overhang makes it difficult to put things on the too narrow roof rack, the clutch on the XT is incredibly heavy and the shifter is clunky.
On a positive note, nothing has gone wrong with this car in 40k miles. If Audi could give me this kind of reliability, I would ditch the Subaru and go back to Audi in a heartbeat.
GaryM and Bolhuijo, you may be interested in this thread on low-traction stability problems:
http://www.subaruoutback.org/forums/showthread.php?s=d142bdcaf2a3eec17765ac2af54759a4&threadid=11267
Interesting – lots of Subie owners here at TTAC, based on the level of responses. Notably, we all like to kvetch. However it’s interesting to note that for all the quirks, they stand out above the rest of the crowd in terms of reliability and overall value (witness the numerous Audi owners and the same story – Audi builds a nicer car, but reliability sucks).
SLLTTAC
I like Subaru TOO and this is the only car that can compete with the Evo’s in rally events. I’m just wondering about the problems that some posters mentioned.
The Question:
If Subaru is not a high quality product how come it can compete in Paris to Dakar Rally, used for drifting competition, used in heavy snow in New England (beside the Saab)etc etc?
My Friend’s mother drive a Subaru Outback for 9 yrs and the only problem she had was running OUT of gas in the middle of a winter storm on I-95.
She cares about his Subaru or should I say car.
Some High Performance mechanics mentioned to me that the Bad drivers don’t care if they running flat, don’t care if the headlight is busted, don’t care if they don’t have a break light bulb change and complain about a car all the time.
And by the way, bad drivers drive very fast on the slow lane just to pass cars on the fast lane.
Believe it or Not
I know I am beating a dead horse here, but they either need diesel or better economy (which may neam 2wd?).
Too many parts of the country do not need AWD. I like the height for floods, but I won’t buy a car like that which only gets 19 city. Forget it. I also like the drive and room that are not offered by camry and accord.
rpn453- thanks for the link to the Outback forum discussion on the Outback’s stability problems in snow and ice. Anyone interested in buying an Outback should read this thread. It looks like a lot of owners are experiencing it.
This thread (http://www.subaruoutback.org/forums/showthread.php?s=d142bdcaf2a3eec17765ac2af54759a4&threadid=11267) is not worth much. Too many different cars, folks with non-standard sway-bars and all kinds of tires.
A couple of cogent facts: Subarus each come with one of three distinct AWD systems. The one for manual cars is different from the one for the 4-speed transmission and that is different from the one with the 5-speed transmession. Some manual cars have VDC (vehicle dynamics control), most dont.
Sway-bars can cause problems. A stiffer front bar will cause understeer (front end hits the wall) and a stiffer rear bar can cause oversteer (rear end hits the wall).
Ice – especially patch ice can wreak havoc with some awd systems and is easier for fully electronic systems to cope with.
All that thread says is that sometimes the going is particularly difficult. I don’t think there is enough uniform experience there to support the theory that Subaru has a design or handling problem.
Consumers Union has complained about Outback rear sliding, perhaps because Subaru biases the AWD for 55% rear, and due to suspension design. In any event a tail-happy car in ice and snow scares me to death. I drove all 3 ‘08 Outbacks and none of them respond well to the accelerator or downshift without long pauses, and the XT in city driving proved to be a bucking bronco with its turbo lag (no, I do not drive hard – my Malibu Maxx has no such lag issues).
I like the Outback concept, the AWD and its interior’s attractive, but will probably wait for the ‘10 version which will be all new with many improvements such as the 3.6HI engine (no more premium gas, I hope!).