By on April 3, 2014

subaru-outback-teaser_1035

Here’s the new Outback. What do we know about it? Nothing — other than the fact that it’s unlikely to have checkerboard seats for the American dude.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

147 Comments on “Here’s The Outback...”


  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Pointless crossover #802 please come to the service desk. Thank You.

    • 0 avatar
      Richard Chen

      Other that that it sells at 5x the rate of the VW Sportwagen, yep

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Not an accurate comparison.

        • 0 avatar
          Richard Chen

          CUV? it’s just a Legacy Wagon with a lift kit and plastic cladding. I suppose then fair comparisons are the Audi allroad and Volvo XC70.

          Call it the new Badge Engineering: minimal investment for maximum return. The Outback and XV Crosstrek accounted for more than than 1/3 Subarus sold stateside last year.

          http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/subaru-of-america-inc-reports-best-december-ever-and-all-time-record-sales-for-2013-238618831.html

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            That’s my point. If everybody else phones it in and you do too you give people no incentive to buy your product over a competitor.

          • 0 avatar
            Richard Chen

            To paraphrase: “I like high H-points and I cannot lie”. The market has spoken.

            There are different degrees of phoning it in:

            http://www.toyota-europe.com/cars/new_cars/urban_cruiser/
            http://www.fiat.com/com/panda-4×4

    • 0 avatar
      sitting@home

      Yeah but it’s the original Crossover, or “Sport Utility Wagon” as the Paul Hogan ads used to say.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        …and now its time for Outback to move on. When everybody in town sells what you sell, why chose you over someone else?

        • 0 avatar
          gtrslngr

          Because …….. Its the best in class .. period … point blank … no disputing the fact … there it is in B&W . And why should it move on when in fact no one else offers anything even close ? Fact is as well Subies got entire markets locked up … due in no small part to the Outback et al . That answer your question oh ye of little knowledge of all things Subie ?

          As far as Xovers in general though 28 ole bean . Wake up and take a good deep breath of reality . Xovers are the only automotive sales segment on the rise worldwide . And … if you look at what wagons/estates used to be before the designers took over and eliminated 80% of their usability /practicality … and then compare that to todays Xovers … youd realize/comprehend/understand toot suite that todays Xovers ARE in fact the wagons/estates of yesteryear .

          History ole bean . That and a bit of context going a long long way towards better understanding the present . Not to mention killing off a whole lot of uninformed prejudice

          BWTM – If you had an Outback .. perhaps you wouldn’t need 28 cars ole bean [ no insult implied or inferred : but humor most definitely intended ]

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            While you make valid points, my point is as a niche player you should go back to the drawing board and innovate instead of just releasing more of the same. My .02

            Nice quip at the end, btw.

          • 0 avatar
            tedward

            gtrslngr

            sorry man, but I’d say that the Outback has been seriously slipping. I’m (historically speaking) a fan of the Outbacks and Legacy wagons, but the ones that punched above their weight aren’t on the market anymore. Besides, the Outback in a class of two with the Sportwagen, every single other wagon is a premium brand vehicle.

          • 0 avatar
            Ryoku75

            Oh….hey….the….turtle…is……here.

        • 0 avatar

          You really want them to stop selling one of their best selling vehicles because you personally are bored with it?

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      You mean original crossover?

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Yup and time for a change.

        • 0 avatar
          Ryoku75

          Time for carmakers to stop aping the AMC Eagle over and over.

        • 0 avatar

          28, I just don’t understand your reasoning whatsoever.

          Subaru has three very successful vehicles: the Outback, the Forester, and (now) the XV. Why on earth should they eliminate their most successful products because you are bored with them and have determined them to not be competitive?

          Speaking of not being competitive. They offer excellent fuel economy for the class, excellent amounts of storage, excellent AWD, excellent reliability, and have an incredibly well-developed brand recognition. CR loves them, and resale value for Outbacks is unbelievable. It’s the dream product, and Subaru knows it. Why don’t you?

          Unless you are just trolling.

    • 0 avatar
      Signal11

      More pointless complaining from a pointless complainer.

    • 0 avatar
      Ryoku75

      If you ask me one of the key reasons cars aren’t selling as well is the simple fact that most of them have become clones, CUV-things too. Toyota will always win with CUVs and beige tacky FF 2 litre carsCUVs, their name goes hand in hand with reliability to the lazy-minded, and we know how lazy the average citizen is.

      I’d rather have the OutbackLegacy sedan of the 90′s than this Taurus thing, those actually look pretty neat.

      • 0 avatar

        I think that CUV’s are so popular because being seated higher makes people feel more powerful, in control and safer. That is something that Ford learned in their research for the original Explorer (there’s a New Yorker article on it several years back).

        Conversely, I believe that, if you are not driving some jacked-up something you must be a)unable to afford such, b)a competent and confident driver, c)wealthy enough to afford something very sporting.

        • 0 avatar
          Kenmore

          Well, you don’t need to ascribe the desire for a higher seating position to some unresolved developmental trauma.

          It’s just a way to see more of your surroundings when every 80 IQ d1ckhead out there is running a lifted 4×4 and his woman has an Enclave.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            I usually drive cars (but sometimes drive a 4×4 pickup or a CUV) and I can’t say the higher seating position has ever been particularly desirable or advantageous. So everyone has a tall vehicle now, so what? I don’t need to see *over* them. As for crashworthyness, the sedans I’ve been driving lately fare well in crash testing against SUVs, so I’m not seeing a benefit there either.

            Consumer preference is what it is and that’s fine, I just don’t agree with it.

          • 0 avatar
            Kenmore

            I’m recusing myself from this topic because my judgement is indelibly colored by the desire for a driver’s seat at the same height as my butt. Or higher. Arthritis sux.

  • avatar
    carguy

    “What do we know about it? Nothing”

    I won’t spoil it for you but a raised Legacy Wagon with the 2.5 and 3.6 engine mated to a CVT and the familiar symmetric AWD system are probably a safe bet.

    • 0 avatar
      gtrslngr

      Oh dear . So TTAC is playing the manufactures ” Teaser ” games as well . Dang ! Id of thought better of them . But youre right . I mean … what else would anyone with a modicum of knowledge assume the new Outback would be … other than a raised and body cladded Legacy with the appearance of being on steroids and the pretense of genuine Off Road capabilities ?

      Oh well . Subarus still IMO the 2010′s Automotive superstar [ full discloser we do not nor are we planning on owning one ] Subaru having come back from the brink sans bailouts etc to now be the fastest growing automotive company doing business in the US with the one problem every other manufacture [ especially GM and Cadillac in particular ] wishes the h*ll they had . That being demand exceeding all supply capabilities across the entire range [ well .. excepting the ToyotAru BRZ ] and thru out the US

      • 0 avatar

        > Oh well . Subarus still IMO the 2010′s Automotive superstar [ full discloser we do not nor are we planning on owning one ] Subaru having come back from the brink sans bailouts etc

        I recall you were just in the other thread hating on gubmint intervention.

        http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/04/department-of-energy-looking-at-suppliers-for-revamped-fuel-efficiency-loan-program/#comment-3044921

        It’s odd how someone largely clueless about how the japanese car industry (say, Fuji heavy industries) works carries so much swagger in their comments.

        • 0 avatar
          Skink

          The password this decade is (swagger).

          • 0 avatar

            Shiiiiit, the 2bit word-hitler’s here. Imma #yoloswag his five-0 ass.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            More cliches, please, Mr. Speak and Say.

          • 0 avatar

            > More cliches, please, Mr. Speak and Say.

            So that’s what the linguistically clueless are calling code switching these days.

            Don’t worry, I’ll be using terms simple enough for you to wiki this time.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            No, I was speaking of your evergreen not use of ‘swagger’. You’re in a linguistic rut, and your code switching is played out, as well. Try using your other hand for a while. Make yourself a stranger.

          • 0 avatar

            > Make yourself a stranger.

            The record above shows you shadowing me. We’ve already covered trite pedants last time, but I distinctly recall you were also throwing around “intellectual dishonesty”. Please wiki what those words mean, too, and how they might apply to this conversation.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            Shadowing. What self-regard. When you evoke Hitler, you’ve lost. Try rotating among several different epithets. Pull the string. You’ll be a more interesting read.

          • 0 avatar

            Sorry, I’m trying to determine if you really can’t come up with any meaningful thoughts, or just have trouble articulating them. Maybe you can help resolve this question by demonstrating one way or the other.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            If you’re referring to the meaning a speaker is imagining while using the wrong words, there’s no confusion of intent here when some ignoramus writes, ‘would of’.

            My use of ‘ad hominem’ in refernce to your insult of another poster was correct.

          • 0 avatar

            > If you’re referring to the meaning a speaker is imagining while using the wrong words, there’s no confusion of intent here when some ignoramus writes, ‘would of’.

            To be honest I’m conflicted whether to heap on more ridicule or give a gold star here.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            Imagine my indifference.

        • 0 avatar
          Skink

          “I recall you were just in the other thread hating on gubmint intervention.

          http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/04/department-of-energy-looking-at-suppliers-for-revamped-fuel-efficiency-loan-program/#comment-3044921

          It’s odd how someone largely clueless about how the japanese car industry (say, Fuji heavy industries) works carries so much swagger in their comments.”

          Shadowing. Gratuitous ad hominem attacks. Pot, meet kettle.

          • 0 avatar

            > Shadowing. Gratuitous ad hominem attacks. Pot, meet kettle.

            Again, please consider looking up what words mean before using them. This is as much for your sake as everyone else’s.

            Shadowing means following someone around, often to avenge some previous bu++hurt, not connecting two related comments in parallel threads.

            Ad hom is a logical fallacy which didn’t occur here. Don’t worry too much about this one, “logic” isn’t something which can be learned through wiki.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            You suggest I look up words I used properly when you are allergic to learning the difference between, ‘of’ and, have’, after rising to suggest their interchangeability? You look them up if you think I’m wrong.

            I wasn’t looking for you. Don’t flatter yourself. I was reading a thread when I noticed someone using the same attack on someone that was used on me. Your attack was gratuitous, haughty, condescending, and self-aggrandizing, and tiresome.

          • 0 avatar

            > You suggest I look up words I used properly when you are allergic to learning the difference between, ‘of’ and, have’, after rising to suggest their interchangeability? You look them up if you think I’m wrong.

            See, there’s a difference between meaning and grammar. Unfortunately wiki is also of no help to those unaware of distinctions in depth.

            > I wasn’t looking for you. Don’t flatter yourself. I was reading a thread when I noticed someone using the same attack on someone that was used on me. Your attack was gratuitous, haughty, condescending, and self-aggrandizing, and tiresome.

            That pretty describes any possible conversation between you and anyone past the grammar phrase of learning language.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            “See, there’s a difference between meaning and grammar. Unfortunately wiki is also of no help to those unaware of distinctions in depth.” LOL. You’re so deep, defending the notion that ‘of’ and ‘have’ are interchangeable, and only vary in ‘depth’. This pseudointellectual babble is the only demonstrable, though not marketable skill of legion baristas and cab drivers consigned to a lifetime of working off student loans. I love it.

          • 0 avatar

            > LOL. You’re so deep, defending the notion that ‘of’ and ‘have’ are interchangeable, and only vary in ‘depth’.

            Yes, meaning is deeper than grammar by definition. This isn’t a debatable point.

            > This pseudointellectual babble is the only demonstrable, though not marketable skill of legion baristas and cab drivers consigned to a lifetime of working off student loans. I love it.

            This also isn’t the way to take pride in swimming in the shallow end. I’m not claiming to be deep, though I can see how it might appear that way from where you’re standing.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            You’re the one standing in the shallow end of meaning, defending the debasement of the meaning of words by the ignorant. There’s nothing deep, or even intellectually fashionable in defending ignorance as you do. You’re down there at the low end of the bell curve, defending change for no reason other than it’s on the trailing edge of literacy, but at the leading edge of moron culture. I’m all for the notion that language should and will grow. You mistake atrophy and entropy for growth.

          • 0 avatar

            > You’re the one standing in the shallow end of meaning, defending the debasement of the meaning of words by the ignorant.

            No, I only claim that pedants are worse than grammar mistakes. It’s apropos & funny that “meaning of words in the dictionary” here is not what was referred to by “meaning”.

            > There’s nothing deep, or even intellectually fashionable in defending ignorance as you do.

            It was never claimed that point and laughing at the shallow end is “deep”, only that meaning is “deeper” than grammar. The two deep’s here refers to different things even though they’re spelled the same. Someone so proud of their ability to use the dictionary shouldn’t need this explained to them.

            > You’re down there at the low end of the bell curve, defending change for no reason other than it’s on the trailing edge of literacy, but at the leading edge of moron culture. I’m all for the notion that language should and will grow. You mistake atrophy and entropy for growth.

            This is turning into a Dunning Kruger field-test of how long it takes before the subject is aware of their incompetence. You’re mocking “moron culture”. I’m mocking someone who can’t use the dictionary as well as they believe. Perhaps you can explain how a moron conflates these two distinct issues.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            In discussing the difference between ‘of’ and ‘have’ you remain the obdurate puppy who resists acknowledging the meaning of those two little words. Yet, when it’s helpful for you, you suggest to others to look up a meaning in a dictionary.

          • 0 avatar

            > In discussing the difference between ‘of’ and ‘have’ you remain the obdurate puppy who resists acknowledging the meaning of those two little words. Yet, when it’s helpful for you, you suggest to others to look up a meaning in a dictionary.

            Again, me mocking you has little to do with you mocking someone else. Just because you can’t understand the former doesn’t automatically make it the same thing as the latter, even if they both happen to share the word “dictionary”.

            In this case, it’s perhaps true “moron culture” doesn’t know how to use one, but neither do you.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            No, I am mocking you. You can’t bring yourself to directly respond. You’re the one with the swagger problem. You are infected with undue and unearned self-esteem.

          • 0 avatar

            > No, I am mocking you. You can’t bring yourself to directly respond. You’re the one with the swagger problem. You are infected with undue and unearned self-esteem.

            You must be new to this mocking bidness. The rubber-glue argument which served so well on the playground doesn’t work here.

            It’s obvious the subject grasps neither the joke nor the response embedded within, and it’s evident explaining either is futile. However, I concede my own role is nothing to be proud of: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Co-moron

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            OK. If you’d prefer to say I haven’t been mocking you, that’s fine. When you were moaning about my big mouth, that must not have been pique. It must have been some kind of romantic ideation on your part. For that, you should go to another room.

          • 0 avatar

            > OK. If you’d prefer to say I haven’t been mocking you, that’s fine.

            Look, it’s pretty obvious you’ve been trying at it same as with the dictionary, but regrettably with similar results. It seems clear in your world trying=succeeding due to easily attainable gold stars & lack of any competition, but away from the special playground that’s not how it works.

            Lesson hopefully learned & not repeated again for the mess above:

            Much like in the economic sphere with the american “middle-class”, in edu there’s similarly those who attain enough basic literacy that they can look down on those slightly lower on the totem pole. While it might be tempting as part of some egalitarian ethic to level with them, it’s better to cut line after a brief laugh and move on.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            “Much like in the economic sphere with the american “middle-class”, in edu there’s similarly those who attain enough basic literacy that they can look down on those slightly lower on the totem pole. While it might be tempting as part of some egalitarian ethic to level with them, it’s better to cut line after a brief laugh and move on.”

            What a challenge it must be for elitists to be patient with non-elitists.

            For as inarticulate, elliptical, evasive as you are it’s breathtaking to witness your self-satisfaction. You can’t articulate a single cogent relevant point as we proceed here.

            It really appears , though, that you’re out of your element on this site. Some of your posts are are redolent with gratuitous disdain for others. Maybe you should cut the line on this site and interact with those you consider your peers – those who you consider worthy of the pearls of wisdom emanating from your fingertips. If they’ll tolerate your smug swagger. Bon Voyage, Skipper.

          • 0 avatar
            alsorl

            That was entertaining. Thought I was in the Nickelodeon site for a minute.

          • 0 avatar

            > Ha ha ha! For as inarticulate, elliptical, evasive as you are it’s breathtaking to witness your self-satisfaction. You can’t articulate a single cogent point.

            > I don’t see anything in that link where I mention Godwin. I wasn’t invoking him. I wasn’t familiar with him. Godwin doesn’t own exclusive rights to opinions on jerks who use Hitler- or Nazi-comparisons.

            Argumentum ad incredulitas for dummies:

            “I don’t get it, so it doesn’t count”.

            So funny.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            ‘u mad scientist’. It’s a troll badge: “U mad?”

            Sad little troll, you couldn’t bring yourself to say anything meaningful, but you did keep the ball in the air. Hitlerbaiter=loser. Automatic disqualification. Case closed.

          • 0 avatar

            > ‘u mad scientist’. It’s a troll badge: “U mad?”

            “B&B”

            > you couldn’t bring yourself to say anything meaningful,

            Not to a black hole of meaning.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            When you write to your peers, do you use ‘would of’, or, ‘would have’? ‘Could of’, or, ‘could have’?

            Answer directly and clearly. Concentrate. This will count for your final grade.

          • 0 avatar

            > That was entertaining. Thought I was in the Nickelodeon site for a minute.

            You too? I can’t shake the impression I’m the host.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            I can’t shake the conviction I’m the parent.

          • 0 avatar

            Lemme guess how this goes, in your own words:

            > When you write to your peers, do you use ‘would of’, or, ‘would have’? ‘Could of’, or, ‘could have’? Answer directly and clearly. Concentrate. This will count for your final grade.

            The only thing worse than a word-hitler is a grade school grammar-nazi.

            —The Future—
            > I don’t invoke Godwin; you did. I didn’t assert Godwin said what I said. I just said that anyone who brings up a Hitler- or Nazi comparison is a loser. You’re a loser.

            > you couldn’t bring yourself to say anything meaningful, but you did keep the ball in the air. Hitlerbaiter=loser. Automatic disqualification. Case closed.

            > I can’t shake the conviction I’m the parent.

            > No, I am mocking you. You can’t bring yourself to directly respond. You’re the one with the swagger problem.
            ——

            http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131001135318/walkingdead/images/0/0c/Double_facepalm.jpg

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            When asked,

            “When you write to your peers, do you use ‘would of’, or, ‘would have’? ‘Could of’, or, ‘could have’?

            Answer directly and clearly. Concentrate. This will count for your final grade.”

            You answer:

            “The only thing worse than a word-hitler is a grade school grammar-nazi.”

            Busted. You failed, but you never fail to disappoint. It’s cowardly.

            See, everybody. The elitist wants us to believe ‘would/could of’ has great “depth” of “meaning” but is afraid to say whether or not the elitist uses it.

          • 0 avatar

            > You failed, but you never fail to disappoint. It’s cowardly. You can’t bring yourself to answer that question.

            A quick clarification for everyone not familiar w/ the history here: I’m not even the one who committed the error.

            But on the bright side I guess now we know how the SS picked instructors for their grammar schools.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            “A quick clarification for everyone not familiar w/ the history here: I’m not even the one who committed the error.”

            No one here said you did. But, that issue is irrelevant.

        • 0 avatar
          tedward

          I wonder if Subaru’s recent success has much to do with the for real winter that just swept the nation. It would make an interesting article whatever the conclusion.

          • 0 avatar

            Only if that winter was 26 quarters long. But – given global warming – a 26 quarter long winter is impossible.

            No, I think it has more to do with Americans deciding that, while they like the security of AWD, Explorers and their ilk are too inefficient at $4.00 per gallon. And that Subaru made the Legacy much bigger inside at just the right moment in the petro-price cycle.

      • 0 avatar
        Skink

        “Sorry, I’m trying to determine if you really can’t come up with any meaningful thoughts, or just have trouble articulating them. Maybe you can help resolve this question by demonstrating one way or the other.”

        Yes, that’s what you say when you have nothing.

        • 0 avatar

          Again, since you seem to be aware of Godwin’s law, however wrongly, this question is analogous to Poe’s law except it’s between extremely shallow or faking it:

          > Yes, that’s what you say when you have nothing.

          Since you took that opportunity to unintentionally self-inflict maximal irony, the answer appears to be clear.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            I wasn’t saying yes as a response to your lame invitation, but as a note of recognition of that lame ploy you use when you have nothing to say as a direct response.

            Go on calling someone Hitler when you can’t come up with a more nimble response. It’s just so rhetorically tone deaf. What a disappointment you are.

          • 0 avatar

            > I wasn’t saying yes as a response to your lame invitation, but as a note of recognition of that lame ploy you use when you have nothing to say as a direct response.

            Yet here you are trying real hard not to fail. Btw, was a direct response to this tripe:

            “Shadowing. What self-regard. When you evoke Hitler, you’ve lost. Try rotating among several different epithets. Pull the string. You’ll be a more interesting read.”

            > Go on calling someone Hitler when you can’t come up with a more nimble response. It’s just so rhetorically tone deaf.

            LOL, a dictionary word-hitler personified. I love being right.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            You love losing, Hitlerbaiter.

          • 0 avatar

            > You love losing, Hitlerbaiter.

            I thought I learned from the mistake of jokes too highly placed, but we have many the limbo master here.

            Now the interesting question is whether to debase myself by lower the bar further still.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            There was no joke there. There was merely the dull restatement of a losing rhetorical evocation of Hitler.

          • 0 avatar

            > There was no joke there.

            A word-hitler incapable of grasping it makes it even funnier. Same word-hitler invoking Godwin with “When you evoke Hitler, you’ve lost.” makes it funnier still.

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            “Same word-hitler invoking Godwin with “When you evoke Hitler, you’ve lost.” makes it funnier still.”

            What a fool you are. I don’t invoke Godwin; you did. I didn’t assert Godwin said what I said. I just said that anyone who brings up a Hitler- or Nazi comparison is a loser. You’re a loser. I’m not trying to force fit my opinion into conformation to whatever Godwin said. That you think anything that makes you think of Godwin must conform to Godwin is laughable.You made a logical leap there and failed, Hitlerbaiter.

          • 0 avatar

            > I don’t invoke Godwin; you did.

            Sigh. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/04/heres-the-outback/#comment-3050489

          • 0 avatar
            Skink

            Sigh all you want, snowflake. I don’t see anything in that link where I mention Godwin. I wasn’t invoking him. I wasn’t familiar with him. Godwin doesn’t own exclusive rights to opinions on jerks who use Hitler- or Nazi-comparisons. I don’t particularly care what Godwin thinks of jerks who use a Hitler or Nazi accusation against someone. Imagine whatever you want, but it’s just you jumping to conclusions. Imagine a meaning. Knock yourself out.

          • 0 avatar

            > I don’t see anything in that link where I mention Godwin. I wasn’t invoking him. I wasn’t familiar with him.

            Argumentum ad incredulitas. Story of this thread.

      • 0 avatar
        Skink

        No one here said you did. That issue is irrelevant.

    • 0 avatar
      JKC

      CVT in, towing capacity out. I’m not saying that the next Outback has to compete with a Super Duty Ford, but it would be nice if the could at least pull a small utility trailer or maybe even a pop-up camper trailer.

  • avatar
    7402

    Don’t waste your time. Buy a Forester.

    • 0 avatar

      Different platforms, each excels at different things. The generation of OB I owned (the attractive 3rd gen) was *significantly* more refined than the otherwise excellent Forester. Better interior, more refined ride quality, more sound insulation.

      • 0 avatar
        Carfan94

        Agreed i’d much rather have an Outback than a Forester.

      • 0 avatar

        Quite. The previous Forester had a dismal interior, one that kept right up to the 2014 WRX/STI.
        Also just wanted to see what our avatars looked like together.

        • 0 avatar
          Dave M.

          Apples and oranges. The Outback is more refined and car-like on the Legacy chassis. The Forrester is more upright with a cheaper interior (and mostly lower price point) on the Impreza chassis.

          • 0 avatar
            wagonsonly

            And is also significantly slower and worse on gas than the Forester. (A family member owns an Outback; my wife and I have had first-gen Foresters and a 2.5L Legacy; and she still drives a Baja.)

            The Forester was the most practical in terms of carrying capacity and gas mileage; the Legacy sedan was the most refined. The Outback might make sense if we needed to fit car seats as the rear seat is wider across.

    • 0 avatar
      alsorl

      Both are almost the only option for people living in the snowbelt. And for the people that do there thinking via Consumer Reports they will both be worshiped.

      • 0 avatar
        Kenmore

        Honey, Ima brotchoo a dikshunary home. It on tha kitchin tabol.

        Go ovuh their an git it. We goan lernta rite edjukated.

        • 0 avatar

          Somebody page Skink, we’ve got some gassable offenses here:

          > snowbelt. *And* for the

          > do *there* thinking

          Not sure about this one, but it does look different and we wouldn’t want to be seen as cowardly:

          > Honey, Ima brotchoo a dikshunary home. It on tha kitchin tabol. Go ovuh their an git it. We goan lernta rite edjukated.

  • avatar
    Tim_Turbo

    One thing I do know is it is no longer going to be available with a manual transmission. Which is too bad.

    • 0 avatar
      PenguinBoy

      I was told by a Subaru employee at our local car show that there would be a 6MT Legacy available in Canada.

      Don’t know if that is confirmed, or subject to change – nor do I know if the 6MT will be restricted to the plastic hubcabs base model only, but it is encouraging.

      In Canada, you can still get a MT equipped Forester “Touring” package (which is a bit nicer than the US “Premium”, but not quite as nice as the US “Touring”), while I understand you can no longer get a MT with a sunroof on the Forester in the US. So maybe the take rate for manuals is higher in Canada.

      I’ve bought two MT equipped Subarus (Legacy Wagon, Forester), and I really like their AWD system – but I think a CVT would be a deal breaker for me. If I have to take an automatic to get AWD, I’ll shop elsewhere and get a conventional automatic rather than a CVT.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        Fortunately the Impreza is still available with a manual in multiple trim levels and the Impreza has gotten quite large on the inside.

        Unfortunately the non WRX Impreza only has 5 gears in its manual transmission. I really like a sixth gear for lowering the RPMs if you’re running flat out.

        • 0 avatar
          PenguinBoy

          I like the Imprezza hatch a lot, there are two things that kept us from replacing our Legacy Wagon with one:
          -Even with the hatch, the luggage room wouldn’t ~quite~ meet our needs.
          -The NA 2.0 lacked torque.

          The front seat room was adequate, I don’t really care about rear seat room but I expect that was fine as well.

          It would be nice to see an Imprezza with the 2.5 / 6MT as a halfway step between the “regular” Imprezza and the WRX. I doubt the real world highway mileage would be that different than the 2.0.

      • 0 avatar
        Tim_Turbo

        The Forester Premium 6spd adds a sunroof for 2015 here in the US.

        While I know trim levels are different for Canada (trim levels can even be different between Subaru of America and Subaru of New England) I would be very surprised if they would end up being mechanically any different as they have not been in the past to the best of my knowledge.

        I also work for Subaru.

  • avatar
    Scott_314

    None of us on TTAC know why Subaru is gaining popularity. Seriously it’s weird. The AWD thing, ok, but lots of cars have that now.

    Oddly enough, my parents are mightily impressed by Subaru. It has some kind of ‘je-ne-said-quois’ for non-enthusiasts!

    It’s the opposite of a hot hatch like the Fiesta ST, where we drool but the normal public is like “I don’t get it”.

    :)

    • 0 avatar
      onyxtape

      It’s popular because it’s the only wagon with AWD under $30k. The Sportwagen is not AWD, and is a VW (TTAC is the only place online where Subaru reliability is somehow compared to VW’s – despite Consumer Reports consistently placing Subaru alongside Honda and Toyota in the last several years).

      This newest gen, it’s a bit murky whether it qualifies as a wagon. But it definitely was a wagon as recently as from 2005-2009 (3rd gen).

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Its a CUV, not a wagon. Subaru can call it whatever they want, but a jacked up Legacy Wagon + plastic cladding/rugged looks = CUV.

        • 0 avatar
          Tim_Turbo

          Funny I have a lot of people who come in to my dealership, see the Outback and screech-”I don’t want that, it’s a WAGON”. It’s a perception thing. I would tag it as a crossover as well, but in the real world I have heard many more people call it a Wagon.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            That’s true. I actually like the Outback. I would buy one, but my wife doesn’t like the seats, IP, or infotainment system. She’s happier in something more luxurious.

            I think it works the same way the current Explorer works though. The legacy wagon and Taurus X weren’t the best sellers in the US even though they were good vehicles. Raise it a bit and give it styling and you have profit. The Explorer takes it to the next level though.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Its winthin spitting distance of all Ford Edge exterior measurements, including ground clearance. The Edge is also the most CUV of the CUVs. Style trumps all.

    • 0 avatar
      srogers

      I just just bought an Impreza and my reasons are that it’s not a clone of every other compact- it has a boxer engine, awd (which I don’t necessarily need, but will appreciate in out 8 months of winter climate) and has a history of being a ‘character’ vehicle.
      It also rates highly for retained value and reliability. And around here, they are lot rarer than Matrices and Mazda3s.
      O yeah, also because it’s a hatch.
      I’d love a WRX except that they are beyond my budget and use too much fuel for my tree hugging inclinations.

  • avatar
    Drzhivago138

    Hmm. It seems Subaru is now jumping on Ford’s “Kinetic Design,” aka “Catfish Mouth,” bandwagon.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      More like the hexagonal shaped grill bandwagon that was started by Hyundai.

      • 0 avatar
        wmba

        When did Hyundai start with the hexagonal grille? My ’08 Legacy has a hexagonal grille and it’s pretty obviously so – cleaned snow off it enough times this winter. Of course it isn’t outlandishly large like these modern cars.

        I really have wondered where Subaru has gone in recent years, as the cars are now rubbish drives in my opinion. Legacy, Impreza, Forester, Crossdreck are all serious underachievers in my book. The salesmen insist on me having a drive when I drop in for service as I’ve known them for years back to their Audi days. As the cars got worse, so they sold more. Amazing – just the manifestation of the enthusiast’s priorities versus Mr and Mrs Average, I guess.

        But at least I got to poke and prod the new WRX and STI today, and they seem more down my street. Now I have to wait for a drive as all three they have are sold. The thing that surprised me is how high in the chassis the engines are mounted, negating all claims to low center of gravity. The one in my Legacy is a good six inches lower.

        Oh well.

        The current Outback looks like a Sears garden shed on wheels from the side. With a modicum of luck, the new Outback might look a little less utilitarian, but that’s a guess.

        • 0 avatar
          CRConrad

          @wmba: “The thing that surprised me is how high in the chassis the engines are mounted, negating all claims to low center of gravity.”

          Really? Are you sure — I mean, that sounds like so humongous an amount that it’s hard to imagine they’d do that. And why would they? They’d have to be turning the Impreza into a full-fledged offroader to compete with the G-Wagen, or something… Did you look down at the stuff under the bonnet/hood, or did you actually measure the height from the ground to the lowest heavy greasy bits?

          Six inches higher than the Legacy sounds like so incredibly much that I’m guessing your eye might have been fooled by a new higher intake plenum or something that raises the upper height of the (relatively light) plastic lids and whatnot that constitutes the *upper* surface of what we perceive as “the engine”.

          [Edit: Huh? That was not what I intended to write *here*... Fixed.]

    • 0 avatar
      VCplayer

      My first thought was that the grill looked like the Taurus.

  • avatar
    Ron B.

    Why is sooby becoming More popular? The kids who used to sit on the couch all day playing video games featuring WRX imprezas are now old enough to get to get a mortgage and they think they are buying a reliable rocket ship built in Japan to exacting standards and if you hit something you simply press restart and off you go again… thats why.

    And calling it Outback gives the impression that the citizens of Australias Outback would buy such a car.. No they dont,toyotas rule in the bush because the cruiser light trucks etc have a proven record and great resale value. No crossover will survive out west.
    The pic of a car sitting on the USA’s lake Muroc surface simply adds to the illusion.(and marketing fraud ).Australias Dry lakes are salt ,white and smoothish.

    • 0 avatar
      Wraith

      It’s been called the Outback for like 20 years now. If a potential customer thinks “it’s called the Outback, this must be what Australians drive in the real Outback,” that’s their fault (they’re gullible and a bit dim). Showing a picture of it on a dry lake bed is not “marketing fraud.”

      It’s just a brand.

      • 0 avatar
        Tim_Turbo

        Dodge Durango-Durango, Colorado

        GMC Denali-Denali Nat’l Park, Alaska

        GMC Acadia-Acadia Nat’l Park, Maine

        Buick Rainier-Mt. Rainier

        Chevrolet Colorado, Tahoe, Malibu.

        Chrysler Aspen

        GMC Yukon

        And finally-Subaru Baja and Tribeca.

        And those were just off the top of my head, sure I missed a few. It is just marketing.

  • avatar
    slance66

    I like Subarus in general and our Tribeca was problem free for several years and handled very well for a CUV. But…the ergonomics are terrible. They really need somebody to redo the ergonomics of all their cars. No usable armrests on either side, things in the wrong places, steering wheels that don’t telescope… If they fixed that stuff, the Outback would jump up high on my list.

    • 0 avatar
      Wraith

      Looks like the Tribeca is the only U.S. model Subaru without a telescoping steering wheel. Doubt they’ll make the same mistake with whatever model takes the Tribeca’s place (if any).

  • avatar
    340-4

    Hm. I like the styling so far.

    The interiors on the current gen cars are just not good. Particularly the ‘cloth’.

    But a 3.6 and CVT? Interesting if true.

    If they keep the pricing as is, they’ll continue to sell every one they build.

    While, amazingly, the ‘domestics’ continue to ignore the AWD segment.

    Except for Dodge. I love my Charger.

    The Regal? Have you even seen an AWD model? And look at the price. Ye gods.

    At any rate, I lament the final disappearance of the manual transmission from Subaru.

    • 0 avatar
      Wraith

      Legacy and Outback most always have the same trim levels and powertrain options. The Legacy has already been unveiled (a month or two back?) and it does, in fact, offer 3.6L H6 with CVT (as a step up from the standard 2.5L w/ CVT). Replaces the 5-speed auto mated to 3.6L on the current gen Legacy/Outback.

      As for the Regal, the configurator puts a Regal Turbo AWD (non-GS) starting at around $32k, last I checked. That’s similar to the Fusion AWD (2.0T) and the new 200 AWD (V6). (Maybe dealer lots only have higher trim / optioned-up models available, I don’t know.)

  • avatar
    Mandalorian

    As an Outback owner, I love just how much the plastic cladding and 2″ lift manage to upset so many people. Seriously, the only thing they do is make it easier for me to get in and out of the car and not have pebble dents in the paint.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      Actually the rear end of the current generation is hideous, needs about 50% more window in the rear to actually look wagon-ish enough to me that I don’t get mad about the loss of the Legacy Wagon.

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      The 2″ lift is appealing and the plastic cladding doesn’t offend. However, the current generation is incredibly ugly and the enormous front end overhang kills the approach angle and makes it no bueno on the dirt roads I want to get it down. Which compromises the entire reason the 2″ lift is appealing in the first place.

      • 0 avatar
        Tim_Turbo

        I like to go off roading myself, and have a Cherokee with a small lift to do so. But I think for 99% of the population the Outback would do just fine.

        Well I had posted a youtube link but I guess they don’t show up. Still kinda new here. But go to youtube and search “Subaru Outback offroad”.

        I can’t help with the ugly factor though. Subaru is the butterface of cars.

      • 0 avatar
        Wraith

        If the Legacy’s design is any indication, the new Outback will be “less ugly, still boring.” (Personally “boring” doesn’t bother me. I’m not buying a sports car.)

  • avatar
    Tifighter

    Looks like a lifted Levorg wagon. No further reveal needed.

  • avatar

    I look at it this way -

    Subaru have had 20-odd quarters of growth. Growth-wise, they are kicking Detroit’s arse. Do I like the fact that that the Legacy has gotten bigger, puffier? No. Do I like that fact that there is no turbo? No! Do I wish there was a turbo 4 Spec. B. Wagon with 6-MT and DCCD? Hell yes!

    BUT, you simply cannot argue with the successful business they have built by leading – L.E.A.D.I.N.G. – the market in relatively efficient AWD transportation.

    Now, if they’ll take some of the profits and make a proper hot, GT saloon – again – I’ll be happy.

    • 0 avatar
      PenguinBoy

      “Growth-wise, they are kicking Detroit’s arse.”

      Really??

      I am a satisfied repeat Subaru owner who hasn’t owned a Chrysler product in many years, but I think Chrysler’s post bankruptcy growth is much more impressive. Chrysler has shown consistent growth since the bankruptcy. They have been #1 in Canada so far this year, and seem to be fast closing in on Toyota for the #3 spot in the US.

      Subaru has shown a larger percentage growth some months, but it is easier to show a large percentage increase when you are starting from a small base.

      I like Subaru (MT/AWD FTW!), but you have to give credit where credit is due…

      • 0 avatar

        % Growth rate is the only way you could logically compare concerns of such disparate size. I mean, one sale is one sale. It’s not at all unreasonable to make the argument that it is more difficult for a less popular brand to make a sale than it is for more commonplace marques.

        I guess that, if this is keeping you up at night, you could compare just, say, the Jeep division’s 26 quarter history growth to Subaru’s. But, you know, I suggest that you simply enjoy the fact that you’re driving the product of a non-bailed out winner making cars at the world’s first zero-waste plant: show’s others how far ahead of the curve you are.

        • 0 avatar
          geozinger

          Love this logic; you can’t win with solid reasoning, so the BK’s have to be dragged into the discussion. Comparing hardware to hardware isn’t good enough, I guess.

          Subaru would truly be a winner if they competed on all fronts, not just a niche within the market. Where’s their pickup truck? Where’s their minivan? Where’s their hybrid? Where’s their brown diesel station wagon? Lots of other companies do all the same things that Subaru does on a much wider front, and probably give more to the Humane Society without having their marketing spout about it…

          And the first zero waste plant? How many do all of the other carmakers have? (hint: lots of them) Some of the (D3 and others in NA) plants in addition to being zero waste also put energy back INTO the grid. Or, at a minimum, use landfill gases and other alternative energy sources to power their processes.

          Separate the marketing claims from the reality. You’ll see that they’re doing well for what they are. But hardly a giant killer. Wait until Toyota gets their hooks into them further…

          • 0 avatar

            Interesting. I think it is hard to argue with Subaru’s success in the market. They may no-longer be so much the line that I was attracted to but, unlike Saab, they are still here, blooming and offering at least two cars which I am considering.

            Looking at their success another way, if you invented a new three hole punch, made great profits and grew share while other three-hole punch makers across the industry were on tough times, would you be unsuccessful when called out for not also making a one-hole punch?

            Second point: First is First. All I said was “First.”

            Third point – The spectre of Toyota swallowing Fuji Heavy – with their – what 16% share – has yet to be realized.

            Ok. You’re turn to rant.

          • 0 avatar
            geozinger

            I didn’t make my initial point clear; if you’d said that they were kicking Detroit’s arse in THEIR SEGMENT, I would not take issue with the claim. What you would say to a car company that only sells SUVs/CUVs? These things have a life cycle, once we (collectively) get tired of driving SUVs/CUVs, then what? Using the three hole punch analogy again, what happens when the market moves to a five hole punch? I agree they do well in their segment, but fashion and fortune can change rapidly. How out of date is a minivan now? Or a brougham?
            WRT to the lone assembly plant in the US: First. Woo. hoo. Everybody is an environmentalist now and while they’ve done a good job of hitting the ISO standards and being a backyard, are they giving back? Does their solitary plant create it’s own energy or even put power back into the grid? Like other kinds of fashion, the environmental ploy is very much a “what have you done for me lately” arrangement. The stakes get higher all the time. Many of the D3 plants are doing this in urban areas, not greenfields chosen for their particular scenery. Actually, if you hadn’t gone OT, you never would have run across one of my least favorite aspects of Subaru marketing in the last 20 years. I find this advertising environmental breast-baring a diversionary tactic when they really don’t have a unique selling proposition for their product.
            Toyota had been on ambitious path up until the SUA controversy several years ago. While they may never own Subaru outright, I’m sure they will influence parts of their operations, some more than others. But, time is on Toyota’s side, the book isn’t written yet.
            I’d be a lot more impressed with them if they had a more comprehensive line of vehicles than Kia. They’re making money now, but fashions change.

          • 0 avatar

            Well, they are not kicking arse (anyone’s) in segments where they don’t play. Pretty obvious, that seems.

            I mean, do I have to say that Brett Favre kicked arse on the football field but not the baseball, basket ball, lacrosse, soccer or cricket fields?

  • avatar
    peekay

    I really really want to like Subaru… with the “Symmetric” all-wheel drive and the flat-4 and flat-6 engines. The engineering basics are there, driving dynamics are pretty good. But… the homely awkward styling keeps me away. I did own one once, thinking it might be the logical heir to the old VW values that I remembered from long ago, but that Subaru was the most finicky and fragile and trouble-prone vehicle I’ve owned in the last 40 years.

    So as much as I’d love to love Subaru, they just keep chasing me away.

  • avatar
    TK421

    Years ago I joined the subie cult and re-upped after the next major snowstorm. What they didn’t tell me was that the horizontal orientation of the 2.5 boxer makes it prone to head gasket failure, which I just paid my mechanic a pretty penny to remedy. Still love the car (03 forester with 82k) but the “reliability” myth is shattered.

    • 0 avatar
      Dave M.

      Understood. I believe the head gasket issue was remedied in ’05, but their image has taken a dent.

      • 0 avatar
        Ubermensch

        It was not really remedied in 05′ but Subaru did attempt to help the issue with a redesigned gasket and a coolant additive. It wasn’t fully addressed until the new 2.5L FB engine debuted in 2010.

  • avatar
    CRConrad

    Well, we do know it tries very hard to look like an Audi, at least from the front.

  • avatar
    mjz

    Hey VW, why not copy the Outback formula? Take a Jetta (soon to be Golf) wagon and also introduce a Passat wagon (why not, plenty of production capacity at that Chatanooga Passat plant). Add AWD, some body cladding and raise the ride height. Call ‘em the Golf and Passat Black Forest editions. This could be a good interim move while waiting for all those darn new crossovers to come out.

  • avatar
    KrohmDohm

    Check the sales figures on the 2010-14 model Outback. It’s Subaru’s biggest selling vehicle ever. Does anyone here really expect any automaker to stop selling their best selling vehicle? Subaru innovated one new vehicle. The Tribeca. Disaster. They since pulled back to their core lineup. Impreza. WRX. Forester. Outback. Legacy.

    They have two new vehicles. The Crosstrek. Which is essentially the Outback Sport rebranded.

    And the BRZ. Nice little sport coupe.

    and now they have a Hybrid as well.

    and they also introduced the first chain driven CVT on production cars.

    and they are constantly refining and re-designing their industry best AWD systems.

    Although I suppose it is about time for the Accord and Camry to be put out to pasture.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India