It never had a chance.

I’m worried about the STi that I intendt to replace my Spec. B with in April. Its doors are framed too!

Subaru’s position (niche) is simply this: “Different and Better” If they stray from that and don’t attract cross shopping against A4s and 3Series it’ll be over.

If Toyota take the reins completely – which I doubt will ever happen – it’ll be instant death. I don’t see Toyota bringing any economies of scale for building horizontal 4 cylinder engines. And Subies are WAY more fun and dependable.

So we want it to look the same as everyone else but be distinctive? Hmmm.

The first versionw as okay, the second prob a little nicer but I’d drive the first version too.

I think we are being a bit too hard on the car manufacturers here. Yes a vehicle must WORK as advertised and last and last and last. We need to cut those who break away from the styling herd a little slack though because we live in a herd of sameness on the roads today.

I think the retro cars (SSR, Beetle, Mini, PT, HHR) are great because even though they are normal cars under the skin, they dare to be styled different. I wish we had more at a reasonable price (I really like the SSR but I’m not going to put THAT much money in a vehicle…)

Maybe manufacturers need to sell the same vehicle with multiple styling cues… WAIT! That’s called badge engineering…

Wrong.

Everyone seems to be enjoying piling on here. The Tribeca isn't a beauty (I like the funky looks), but it's a pleasure to drive, the gas mileage is as advertised, and it's quiet and roomy.

My wife and I much prefer it to our previous Forester XT, especially for freeway driving, where the Forester felt very twitchy.

And so, maybe they heard you wherever Subaru has its design department and there you are: influencing design.

Thing is, the dashboard and instrument panel still look like something off the Starship Enterprise. And unless the throttle response is better than the 2006 edition I drove last year, the vehicle whose front end it emulates, the Chrysler Pacifica, has such better throttle response, with adequate handling (who buys one of these things for the handling anyway?) I’d tell people to buy the Chrysler. Yes, I said it and I’m glad: buy the Chrysler. Just make sure to grind the dealer down from the 38 grand of the Pacifica (as “tested”). I wonder at what point will all of this SUV stuff cease and the bulk of America go back to sedans, hardtops (remember those) and coupes?

Why they dropped the B9 name when they actually created a benign front end. But atrocious handling in a Subaru is a shame. I love the Outback, and handling is its strong suit. Just doesn’t have any grunt.

I keep wanting to like Subarus, but every time I get in one I’m disappointed. When we went wagon shopping last year I looked at the turbo and non-turbo Outbacks. They go and handle OK for what they are, especially the turbo. My wife and I thought they were nice—for the first 20 minutes of a 40 minute test drive. Then we couldn’t wait to get out of the car with its jiggly ride, rock-hard seats and confining interior.

Turned us off so much we didn’t even look at the pricier Tribeca. And we were looking to get out of SUV mode anyway. And once I confirmed neither car would be much of a fuel mileage improvement over our old Exploder we went away.

They’ve always been quirky cars, and that’s OK (I’ve had Saabs for 23 years, so I know quirky), but Subies are quirky without much redeeming value, unless AWD is important, which it isn’t to me.

If Toyota becomes the full-fledged owner of Subaru, I see great times ahead. But right now Subaru is losing a lot of customers due to their high prices.

Just an FYI, I think a Subaru/Suzuki dealership with a nearby motorcycle showroom would be a fantastic combination.

So you understand how Subaru went full bore with the B9. Of course they are having teething pains with a segment that is very competitive. Hopefully, Toyota can aid them in the future.

All Subies get sub par hwy mpg because of the all wheel drive and unaerodynamic tall body styles. Ironically not taking advantage of the low center of gravity boxter engine.
My 1.8 T A4 quattro can achieve 33 hwy mpg on a good day. I avg. 28-30 hwy mpg.

You did the company a favor by pointing out a costly styling error that should have been caught long before it went into production. I have to wonder how much money Subaru lost by making this mistake.

I’m sure that they were borrowing from a horrible misinterpretation of Alfa’s styling cues. (See the link below.) But now it seems they’ve moved on to an even lesser role model. Emulating the looks of a builder of rental cars isn’t an example of playing your best card in your hand.

Subaru’s niche remains small in part because it lacks a unifying styling theme for its products that would create linkage between them. It would help them greatly to find one, but of course, it would be better if the theme was actually worthwhile…

Alfa 159: http://www.webwombat.com.au/motoring/news_reports/alfa-romeo-159.htm

But then, that’s why I love TTAC.

1) Where are we going?
2) Why are we in a handbasket?

B.T.W. – Give ‘em HELL, Robert!!! Those sanctimonious rear-ends need a dose of the truth every now and then – In their case, you should quadruple the dosage…

16 mpg is 6 less than I get in town in weather above + 20F. For some reason, I can’t get above 20mpg in town when the weather’s below 20F. My very worst so far has been 17.9 in below-zero weather–still 12% better than this junker at normal temp.

My old ‘91 Grand Caravan AWD got mileage that bad when it had 170K+ miles and one misfiring spark plug. Superior Japanese Engineering, my ass!!

Finding out about the canning from the newspaper under dealer pressure finally turned me from a lurker to a user.