By on February 15, 2018

2019 Subaru Ascent Limited, Image: Subaru of America

Subaru’s new range-topping crossover just dropped its pricing list, adding a new entry in the remarkably tight base MSRP battle waged among three-row Japanese midsizers.

The 2019 Ascent, a seven- or eight-passenger crossover with familiar styling and unsuspectingly large dimensions, doesn’t seem worried by the healthy sales enjoyed by its competitors, and certainly doesn’t feel the need to arrive at dealers this summer with a discount tag hanging from its sleeve.

In fact, its base price tops that of three well-established rivals.

The Ascent, which boasts a 113.8-inch wheelbase and 153.5 cubic feet of passenger volume, starts at $32,370 after delivery. This price gets you a base model with a standard second-row bench seat and the same continuously variable transmission and turbocharged 2.4-liter flat four (260 hp, 277 lb-ft) found in other trims. That’s nearly ten grand more than a base Forester.

Compared to its competitors, the Ascent is just a tad pricier than the Toyota Highlander ($32,025), Honda Pilot ($31,875), and Nissan Pathfinder ($32,015). Only the semi-upscale Mazda CX-9, which isn’t known for its third-row space, outflanks the Ascent in price, at $33,105. As we said, it’s a tight race.

2019 Subaru Ascent Touring, Image: Subaru of America

Of course, Subaru has good reason to feel confident, even though its first midsize crossover — the B9 Tribeca — met with failure and, um, controversial quips over its appearance. As the U.S. new vehicle market continues its modest contraction, Subaru volume appears to know no ceiling. After selling 187,699 vehicles in the grim days of 2008, Subaru’s U.S. sales skyrocketed to 647,956 units last year — a 5.3-percent increase from 2016. Even January saw a year-over-year sales increase of 1.1 percent.

Subaru seems confident it knows what Americans want, and that they’ll find it in a vehicle offering full-time symmetrical all-wheel drive on all trims — something its competitors can’t boast. The Ascent’s Subaru Global Platform promises a stiff body and reduced road noise. Also standard is adaptive cruise control and emergency pre-collision braking, among other nannies, though you’ll need to shell extra cash for the full suite of safety aids.

2019 Subaru Ascent Touring interior, Image: Subaru of America

Buyers can expect a familiar trim ladder, with Premium and Limited models offering both seating configurations. The top-spec Touring model is seven-passenger-only. Subaru claims its interior, when outfitted in seven-passenger guise, is the most adaptable in the segment.

The Premium range starts at $35,170 after delivery, adding blind-spot detection and rear cross-traffic alert, plus an 8.0-inch multimedia screen (base models get a 6.5-inch screen). A host of extra standard or available features appears at this level. Moving up to Limited costs a minimum of $39,970. There, you’ll find standard leather, 20-inch wheels, lower body cladding, keyless entry, push-button ignition, and steering-responsive headlights.

At the Touring level, the Ascent offers extra chrome and interior furnishings, including enhanced audio, every connectivity feature in Subaru’s toolkit, and a 180-degree front camera. This model will set you back $45,670 after delivery.

The Indiana-built Ascent rolls into dealers this summer.

[Images: Subaru of America]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

105 Comments on “Subaru Ascent Pricing: When You’re Confident, You Don’t Need to Undercut the Competition...”


  • avatar
    jalop1991

    In a world where Toyota Highlander exists, I say, “good luck, Subaru.”

    • 0 avatar
      deanst

      And I thought don lafontaine was dead……..

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I suspect this will quickly move to second or third in the pack. Toyota will likely retain the crown for now, and Nissan may be ahead due to their incentives and historical subprime practices.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Having owned both a 2008 Japan-built Highlander V6 and an Imported from Detroit 2012 Grand Cherokee V6, I cannot get excited about a 4-banger Boxer-CVT motivated Ascent. Not at any price.

      • 0 avatar
        ToddAtlasF1

        If you could see the turbo Subarus waiting in the remanufactured engine queue at my shop, you’d laugh every time someone buys one because they know something mechanics don’t about cars.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          ToddAtlasF1, in the hilly/mountainous country of SouthCentral NM where I live, turbo’d vehicles (of all brands) are very popular (especially at altitude 9K ft and up).

          And the nearest Subaru dealer is in El Paso, TX, some 120 miles south.

          I know of no automotive repair shop that would tackle a reman in my area.

          When my friend’s Murano blew the CVT years back, they ran the Murano on a flatbed up to Albuquerque because Melloy was the only shop qualified to do warranty repairs.

          IMO, many automotive problems are caused by IUIQ (Insufficient User IQ).

          If someone treats a vehicle with respect and within the envelope it was designed for, it should last them a good long time.

          Even a turbo Subaru.

          Remember the turbo Porsche Carrera? A friend of mine brought one back from Germany in the early eighties and still drives it today as his Sunday driver.

  • avatar
    marc1070

    We are ending our first year in our Outback, 12 months and over 25,000 miles of secure solid driving. It is a nice big heavy wagon. It may be the nicest car we have ever owned. Fantastic dealer experience. If I needed a larger vehicle, (and I won’t) this Ascent would be the first place I would look. Premium for me please.

    • 0 avatar
      willhaven

      2.5 or 3.6?

      • 0 avatar
        marc1070

        Our outback is the 2.5. It is adequate. The car is my wife’s daily driver, and she made the decision. I would have purchased the 3.6. But the 2.5 still seems fine taking down highway miles at 75mph.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Boring.
      First, they don’t even have same great AWD as pre-CVT. This is same FWD-biased car as many others
      Second, 6-inch taller CX5 has lateral acceleration 0.81 g vs 0.78
      Third, its a second slower, and its slow period – 9.4

      • 0 avatar
        30-mile fetch

        “Boring” is reading some random guy sh*t all over another person’s positive experience simply because it isn’t Random Guy’s favorite brand.

        How about you let the dude like his car?

      • 0 avatar
        newenthusiast

        I’m not sure the latter two are things people who buy an Outback care about.

        Or most people who buy most cars.

        If it fits his needs, and is the nicest car he has ever owned, then why does its lack of (subjective) performance specs mean anything?

      • 0 avatar
        Cactuar

        Who uses lateral acceleration as a metric when deciding which car to buy!? These comments sometimes…

        • 0 avatar
          Sub-600

          Lateral acceleration can be a deal breaker for drivers of large, three row CUVs. Most of these vehicles will be involved in high speed cornering while careening through city streets. You don’t want to fly into oncoming traffic if you hit the apex without enough power. I would test drive one of these on a slalom at about 45 mph, then make my choice.

          • 0 avatar
            Cactuar

            Sub-600 not sure if trolling or not? No one who buys 3-row crossovers thinks about lateral acceleration. Slaloms are only good at entertaining folks who still watch Motorweek.

          • 0 avatar
            Sub-600

            @ Cactuar, I agree with you, I was just kidding around. Nobody who buys these things cares about lateral acceleration.

          • 0 avatar
            slavuta

            New Volvo XC60 – 0.87g. Some think its important if they make their SUV do it

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “Second, 6-inch taller CX5 has lateral acceleration 0.81 g vs 0.78”

        lol, Mazda fans.

      • 0 avatar
        VW4motion

        @ slavuta, I don’t frequent this site very often. But, when I do the “slavuta” is always trolling. Honestly man, about 99% of what you post is just rude childish remarks.

      • 0 avatar
        Dave M.

        Very few people are going to shop the CX-5 when checking out the Outback. The CX-5 has a considerably smaller cargo area.

        The Ascent is for consideration for Outback and Forrester owners who want or need something bigger. Subaru has been losing them to everyone else. As my kid is nearly ready to inherit my Outback I’ll be looking closely at the Ascent, Atlas, and Highlander Hybrid. One thing I loved about the Ascent I recently saw at the car show is the seat cushion extender. Finally!

        I think the CX-9 is a great vehicle…until you get to the vertical front end. I just can’t get over it and could never get used to it. It takes away from the flowing lines of the rest of the design.

        • 0 avatar
          ldl20

          Umm, what seat cushion extender? I’m 6’3,” and one of my biggest gripes with my 2015 Outback is the short seat length. Is this like what BMW has in their sport-package cars?

          • 0 avatar
            Dave M.

            At 6’3″ as well, I hear you! The Ascent on display at the Houston Auto Show had a seat bottom that adjusted up to 6″ inches forward or so. Sometimes its the small stuff that excites me….

      • 0 avatar
        Syke

        And “boring” is where the car companies make their profit.

        People like us are complete losers for the car manufacturers. In the first place, we rarely buy new because we’re way too “smart” , er, cheap. In the second place, we’re so damned picky that any car company that follows what we want are headed on the expressway to bankruptcy. And finally, we don’t matter, except in our own egotistical minds.

      • 0 avatar
        marc1070

        Hi Slavuta,

        I’m not sure your Boring comment was related to my car or my comment, but if to my car, I agree 100%. The car is boring! It is not an enthusiast car at all.

        If to my comment, then I guess I did get off track, you are correct it is not perfectly correlated with the article. I was trying to make the point that the car may be successful even it is not tops in its category for price or other statistics. It may be successful enough just by giving current Subaru customers the ability to upgrade.

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          Marc,
          I was referring to a car. Anytime someone says “12 months and over 25,000 miles”, I need to say something. What I mean, there are much more exciting cars that would also not have issues in 1 year and 25K miles. I just realized yesterday that I have 210K total miles, 16 total years on my 3 Mazdas and total of 0 issues. Many people pick Subaru for reliability, but according to consumer reports, this is one of the worst brands for long!!-term reliability. My friends with Subarus, all like one, had gasket issues, etc.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      marc,
      I have a friend who’s a Subaru convert like yourself. He only has a Forester with the 2.5 and he’s happy with the power it makes.

  • avatar
    conundrum

    It’s a big dawg and Subaru will be happy if they flog 50,000 a year. They have no factory space to make more.

    Beating the anodyne Highlander in sales was never on the agenda. Making an awkward looking big wagon that signals Subaru-ness for the faithful will let them meet their goals.

    If we’re lucky, the engine might turn out a bit nicer than the Mazda turbo in the CX-9 and actually rev beyond 4500 rpm with some alacrity and get stuck in an upper trim Legacy as well. But a Subaru interior will never match the latest Mazdas.

    Swings and roundabouts.

    • 0 avatar
      marc1070

      I agree, this is for the Subaru repurchaser that needs a bigger SUV. It lets them stay in the brand. I don’t think it is meant for conquest sales over the competition.

      • 0 avatar
        87 Morgan

        The reality is the Ascent will lead to conquest sales. The subie owner who has two kids, and finds themselves with another will need/want a 3 row SUV. Currently, the Subie store has nothing to offer now they will.

        I respectively submit the Subie owner who needs a 3 row SUV currently heads directly to the Toyota or Honda showroom for a Highlander or Pilot and then perhaps the domestic show rooms later if they don’t purchase the afore mentioned.

        So, I think the Ascent is 100% conquest sales over the competition. Honda and Toyota should be very concerned with the introduction of the Ascent.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    I had some sitting time in this. Nothing exciting. If you ever been inside Outback, you will not tell the difference, if you don’t see third row. It even looks like it, just bigger. At least sitting in CX9 makes your blood going.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      Nobody looking for a 3 row mainstream crossover is looking for something to get their blood boiling. Your complete lack of understanding of the auto market is amazing.

      • 0 avatar
        Dave M.

        I’m gonna disagree on that one…the Highlander is one of the best designs I’ve seen in SUV-dom in a long time. IMO nothing comes close. Interior wise the Atlas and CX-9 are great. I always shop for a cohesive design that will age well. Nothing too radical.

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        sportyaccordy,

        if people don’t care about things you say they don’t than why not buy a minivan?

        • 0 avatar
          sportyaccordy

          Because they don’t want one? Not wanting a minivan doesn’t mean you want something to get your blood boiling.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            3 row CUVs are minivans. People just don’t want something marketed as a minivan. Because that might suggest you have kids, or like to pragmatically carry cargo. Which is shameful.

          • 0 avatar
            Maymar

            Eh, what practical advantages does a Highlander really offer over an AWD Sienna? 3 row crossovers are a segment primarily justified by a lack of sliding doors. I don’t think I’d say the CX9 gets my blood going, but at least it’s distinctly nicer (at least in the journalist-baiting high end spec ones I’ve sat in).

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            If you have to have 8 in of ground clearance that would be the advantage of the Highlander.

          • 0 avatar
            geozinger

            Danio: Post of the week. Thanks, I actually laughed out loud…

    • 0 avatar
      Ryoku75

      I fail to see how a Mazda badge makes a large FWD-bias CUV suddenly exciting, unless if you have some abnormal attraction to the brand.

  • avatar
    make_light

    I like Subaru’s and have owned a few, but I can’t see purchasing anything else in this class when the CX-9 exists. I’d even call it downright sexy, and not just for being a 3 row crossover.

    • 0 avatar
      VW4motion

      CX-9 is great looking suv. But, I’d give that new 2.5 turbo a few years of real world driving before opening up that checkbook.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      I only wish they had that 3rd row optional. It would be perfect 2-row SUV

      • 0 avatar
        sportyaccordy

        No, it’s far from perfect. If it were a two row it would be about a foot and a half too long. The engine takes the Skyactiv school bus sound and pairs it with a school bus power curve. And at the end of the day it’s still a front wheel drive based 5.5 for tall two ton plus vehicle. Far cry from something like a Macan or other crossover that would “get ones blood boiling”

  • avatar
    HotPotato

    The nose on that thing looks way out of proportion to the rest of the car. Shrink the lights and grille and take the wheel size down an inch and it would look OK.

  • avatar
    Veeg

    This will dominate New England and the PNW and be an afterthought everywhere else.

  • avatar
    ernest

    #1- Subaru was the largest selling passenger car brand in Oregon last year. Let that sink in for a moment.

    #2- The only people who care about how nice the Mazda CX-9 is are the 2,336 who bought one last month. Subaru sold 14,000 Outbacks, Ford sold 18,000 Explorers, and Toyota only delivered 15,000 Highlanders in the same timeframe.

    I personally think the only question will be how many Subaru can build, not how many they can sell.

    • 0 avatar
      VW4motion

      +1

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Outbacks, Explorers, Highlanders – how exciting!
      You live one life. If BMW is too expensive – get Mazda. This is as close as you can get for cheap

    • 0 avatar
      bullnuke

      @earnest – I believe you are correct. The much praised CX-9 seems to be Mazda’s Tribeca (without standard AWD which is another $1.8k) – an externally large exterior with a mico-sized third row “penalty box” but needing premium fuel to utilize its full power potential for a vehicle that very few purchase. The VW Atlas also highly regarded by many commenters sold double the CX-9 numbers but still a relatively small number and requires the upgraded engine to obtain another additional cost of AWD. Regardless of the comments that Subaru all-wheel drive systems, “don’t even have same great AWD as pre-CVT. This is same FWD-biased car as many others.”, Subaru continues to offer its current (since 2010) AWD system on all models as standard equipment with the exception of the BRZ and owners seem to like its capabilities just fine. In January of this year Subaru was the seventh (7th) best selling manufacturer nationwide in the US which appears to be due to significantly more sales outside the usually noted Northeast, Northwest, and the Rock Mountain Regions. They will sell every one of the Ascent’s produced and, as a consequence, this model will be very scarce on dealer lots for customers to inspect and test drive for a couple years.

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        “Subaru continues to offer its current (since 2010) AWD system on all models as standard equipment with the exception of the BRZ”

        Sorry, but Subaru uses at least 4 different AWD systems with best of them sitting in WRX models.

        • 0 avatar
          bullnuke

          @slavuto. The CVT AWD (clutch pack) is virtually the same as 2010, the 5MT and 6MT AWD is the same (50-50 split viscous center differential) since 2010, the standard WRX with MT is 50-50 AWD the same since 2010, and the WRX STI AWD hasn’t changed its dial-a-mode. The balancing in the CVT vehicles front to rear (yes, it is a bit FWD-biased but not even close to being fully FWD) was modified a few percent for fuel mileage increases as well as adding the fake shift-feel in ’15 and the X-Mode logic but that’s about all that has changed in the last 8 years. I’m very happy with my full-time 50-50 split with the traction control off. My wife is happy with her CVT and its variable split between axles with traction control on. We both have been driving a lot of unplowed snow-covered roads this year without problems. So, I guess that’s three different AWD systems (I guess maybe 4 if you’re counting the smaller units in Imprezas) that haven’t changed much in eight years. Is the STI system better? Probably but unneeded in 99% of bad-weather situations.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Yeah Subaru will not have a problem selling a reasonable number of these in just a handful of states like WA, OR and CO and they will probably mostly be the top trims. If for no other reason that the dealers will stock those early on and they won’t have a problem getting top dollar for them, at least in those 3 states.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        Subaru sold a number of the Tribeca. But not enough to make production a profitable, self-sustaining operation.

        My recommendation to Subaru would be to install the H6 in the new Ascent.

        That might draw some new blood to the Subaru brand. The Outback H6 is super popular and hard to get in my part of the US. The power to weight balance is near perfect with the H6, even with the rubber-band CVT.

    • 0 avatar
      87 Morgan

      I could not agree more on the Mazda issue….who cares about the Mazda? It doesn’t sell.

      Mazda would make more $$ by calling up Subie right now and offer them up the factory line building the CX9 for the Ascent and charging $500 per unit to do it. Turn the volume dial up to 3 shifts 24 hours a day and watch every single one of the Subie’s sell.

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        their sales improving. Thanks to cx9. 10K more of these sold in 2017 than 2016. 1/2018 was 700 units better than 1/2017. There is some progress. Even if 100K people wanted these, Mazda couldn’t deliver so many.

  • avatar
    Oberkanone

    If this were a pickup I’d be excited.

  • avatar
    kurtamaxxguy

    First year Subies of late have had teething issues (the ’14 Forester XT’s turbo engine won awards but had durability issues), and the Ascent’s engine’s new. Whether 260 HP’s be enough to move the Ascent the way its drivers wish remains to be seen. On other hand, the prototype seen at Portland’s auto show had a nice interior and many thoughtful touches.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Subaru engines had durability issues forever at this time. If you have recall for replacing engine block, I think, this is big issue

      • 0 avatar
        bullnuke

        I had the short block of my FB replaced – I was using an awful lot of 0-20W oil. About 11 or 12 ounces in 1200 miles, or, about a quart in 3000 miles which Subaru considered excessive. Twenty years ago using a quart of 10-W-30 oil between the then-common 3000 mile regular oil change schedule was common and not considered a problem by most owners and manufacturers. That being said, Subaru replaced the short block, without cost to me, in one day and without any hassle. For comparison, look up oil usage for a couple of recent new “quality” cars with oil usage issues (BMW comes to mind) and compare my numbers with theirs. A comment here on TTAC said that BMW owners were sold a rack to trunk-mount oil containers and I don’t believe they were offered free repairs to correct the problem. The notorious EJ in my wife’s 7 year-old car is still running strong at 122k miles as is its CVT. The head gaskets and CV joint boots are fine also.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    My friend has a Subaru Forester with a 2.5 in it. It cost him about $32 000AUD for a midrange spec’d version.

    He has stuck with Subaru now for his last 3 vehicles and he’s happy with them.

    It seems quite reliable and it’s Japanese made, so the quality is quite good.

    I don’t think we have this Ascent in Australia.

  • avatar
    redapple

    I bought a Forester in DEC. Premium with Eyesight.
    $28k out the door.
    30.5 MPG in the first 2000 miles. (gallons in the tank / miles driven). Reports of this car being a gas hog is FAKE NEWS.
    2.5 engine is fine. CVT is fine. NVH is lower than my 2012 Equinox.
    Car is more narrow than most. But I have more shoulder room than in a 2018 equinox or 2018 Caddy XT5.
    Very Happy with the car. Good for them. 3 fold sales increase in 10 years. They are doing something right.

  • avatar
    IBx1

    Check your prices Steph.

    The competition would have to be upgraded to AWD to compete with the Subaru on a fundamental level. I see the cheapest AWD Highlander starting at $34,540, the Pilot at $32,800, and the Pathfinder at $32,730, all *before* destination charges of about $1,000.

    If the Subaru starts at $32,370 *after* destination, they just hit a home run.

  • avatar
    87 Morgan

    This will sell like crazy here in CO. You see a ton of Subie product heading up the mountain loaded to the gills with gear. I am certain that a lot of the buyers for this won’t even care about the 3 row portion, they just want a bigger SUV with a Subaru badge on the front. Period.

    Then you add the conquest sales for those that want/need a 3 row SUV into the mix and suddenly the supply chain is very constrained. Their will be no problem selling this thing to Joe Subaru public.

    The real issue, is how/where does Subaru find more manufacturing space? They could sell 200k of these annually with little issue.

  • avatar
    orangefruitbat

    This vehicle would probably be perfect for our next vehicle, if the release timing was right. Right now our 2014 Forester is becoming a bit small for our family camping trips, even with the Thule on top (and the bike rack on the back…). We definitely need something bigger, but the choices are expensive and fuel-inefficient up here is snowy Canuckistan. I don’t really need three rows of seats, but I do need the cargo-space that comes with third row down. (Does anybody make a 2 row vehicle with 3rd row cargo space?).

    Another irritation is that if you want 2nd row captains seats, you typically need the most expensive package (If we get captains seats then I can carry cross-country skis in the car – our Thule is too short for the longer traditional nordic skiis and I don’t want to own two different rook carriers).

    Highlanders are crazy expensive (especially the Hybrid model). Also, no CarPlay.

    Pilots have the most cargo space, but aren’t much cheaper. Probably a contender.

    The VW Atlas looks nice, but I’m concerned about longterm ownership of a VW. Maybe a leaser?

    Nissan Pathfinders and Hyundai Santa Fes have some cash on the hood, but I’m not really excited about either.

    I’ve looked at minivans, but the only one available with AWD is the Toyota Sienna – which is really big, won’t fit in my garage, and isn’t any cheaper than the 3 row SUVs anyways.

  • avatar
    Stanley Steamer

    Subaru said it’s goal with the Ascent is to make it the safest vehicle in the world. It will be the crash test scores that sell this one, if it lives up to expectation.

  • avatar
    bumpy ii

    Well, now we know where the stamping dies for the 1st-gen Traverse went.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Nice minivan. They could charge eleventy billion and the proles would line up. Humanity can be persuaded into all kinds of hive like and stupid behavior.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Or they can just be assimilated and become one with the Borg.

    • 0 avatar
      Ryoku75

      Marketing is a very powerful thing, especially when you can exploit people’s fear of winter driving.

      I’m more perplexed with mini CUV things, they’re not very spacious for the most part, most don’t offer awd, and they cost more. What’s the point?

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        Marketing is creating a demand for something that buyers want, or think they need.

        The Subaru marketers are preaching to the choir with the new Ascent because Subaru is trying to move current Subaru owners upward into a larger, more spacious line.

        It might work for current Subaru owners. But I can’t see current owners of Highlanders, Pilots and Grand Cherokees (in that order) migrating to the new Ascent.

  • avatar
    vehic1

    Wow – it starts at a Whopping 1% higher than a Toyota Highlander! Well, that number can be easily adjusted back to Earth, at any time.
    Yes, Subaru deserves credit for compiling a lengthy string of sales increases – although several of the year-over-year ones recently have been very tiny – without the Crosstrek’s sizable gains, there would have been a decrease.

  • avatar
    legacygt

    First of all, the thesis of the article is pretty much off-base. The Ascent comes standard with AWD. Price out a Highlander (or any of those others) with AWD and the Subaru’s price actually does seem lower. But even that is misleading because Subaru and it’s dealers tend to discount cars much less than some of the others. Factor in incentives and negotiation and I would imagine the playing field gets level with regard to pricing.

    Still, the success or failure of the Ascent will have nothing to do with pricing. The Tribeca was a flop because it was too small to be a useful 3-row vehicle. (Also because of how it looked but that was rectified within a year.) Market studies have shown that Subaru customers can often afford to spend more on their cars than they do. This makes their sales somewhat less sensitive to pricing. To me, the Ascent pricing looks reasonable and entirely unremarkable. It will be up to the car to resonate with customers.

  • avatar
    carguy

    To me this looks like a larger Outback wagon which is probably exactly what Subaru’s customer want. I don’t think they will have any problems meeting their sales projection.

    It really looks like the transformation of SUVs into station wagons seems to be all but complete. I for one don’t have a problem with that.

  • avatar
    Ubermensch

    I was looking at getting a Mazda3 to replace my aging Legacy Wagon but slavuta’s comments in this thread have almost talked me out of it because I am afraid I will become like him if I get one.

    • 0 avatar
      carguy

      This illness may not be transmitted though Mazda cars after all. A number of friends and myself have owned Mazdas (and have loved them) and none have developed an irrational hostility toward other peoples taste in cars.

  • avatar
    MeJ

    Every single Subaru article that gets posted brings out the haters. I still can’t quite understand why. They are good, solid vehicles that get amazing gas mileage and the safety is always top shelf. Add a great all wheel drive system that makes it an all weather beater and you can’t really go wrong.
    I suspect a lot of the hat e is from the brands recent sales success. Humans always want to tear down something good.

    • 0 avatar
      Garrett

      Amazing gas mileage? More like amazingly awful.

      We had an Outback with the 2.5 back when they still had automatics as opposed to the CVT. Our real world fuel economy was worse than what we got in a Volvo XC60 with the T6 engine.

      I also had a WRX with a stick, and I got worse fuel economy than when I had a Mustang GT – and at least in the Mustang I didn’t need to run premium.

      I won’t touch a Subaru with a CVT.

      Either give me a real auto, or pay for the wife to learn how to drive a stick. And anyone who suggests I teach my wife to drive stick is obviously not married or still can’t understand why they are divorced!

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        The EJ generation of engines got truly terrible mileage, especially when connected to the 4-speed automatic.

        The newer FB and FA engines with the CVT are more or less competitive on fuel economy (though not remotely “amazing”). The CVT is also more responsive and willing than that 4-speed piece of junk.

        • 0 avatar
          Garrett

          Had a loaner with the four banger and a CVT once. I did not like driving it at all.

          They also ruined the exhaust note.

          At least the NA 2.5 sounded cool on the Outback with dual exhausts.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      MeJ,

      I don’t hate Subaru. In fact, I would buy one but wouldn’t keep it passed 6 years, something I can do with Honda, Toyota or Mazda. Subaru greatness is [well] greatly exaggerated. You said:

      – They are good, solid vehicles – if you mean, reliable – yes but to the certain point after which hell breaks out.
      – that get amazing gas mileage – average
      – and the safety is always top shelf. – considering standard AWD, you may say, they are safer on average because they stay on the road better. Otherwise they are not safer than Honda, Toyota or Mazda
      – Add a great all wheel drive system – Their “great AWD” now exists only in WRX. CVT models use watered-down AWD, which is still better than, lets say, useless Hyundai system. But Forester does not better in snow than CX5, which uses [of course] Skyactiv system. Go to youtube and search for “subaru awd fail”

  • avatar
    vehic1

    Subarus are perfectly decent vehicles, clearly – although their reliability and fuel economy are seldom tip-top. Their marketing campaign (we’re about Love and the environment) worked spectacularly well in 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 – indeed, sales were “skyrocketing” during those years. By late 2017, however, the monthly gains decreased to less than 170 units (Dec. ’17); perhaps this model can provide a much-needed boost, to regain a little momentum.

    • 0 avatar
      IBx1

      From the sounds of things, their reduced growth is about production limitations and the overall shrinking of the market. Basically, that’s as good as they could have it with the capital equipment and market they have.

  • avatar
    VW4motion

    Who knew we’d need a bowl of popcorn for a pricing announcement. Such anger. LOL

  • avatar
    gtem

    I predict that this will stem the bleeding of Subaru loyalists that begrudgingly upgrade to Highlanders and Pilots and such once they outgrow outbacks. These Ascents will print money for Subaru.

  • avatar
    amca

    That thing’s a rolling tragedy.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lie2me: They also had a maple leaf on the steering wheel hub
  • DevilsRotary86: Back in 2015/2016 when I was considering a new car, Mr Kyree Williams on here suggested that I should...
  • Superdessucke: This makes me realise how much I miss the hot hatch. We have the ancient GTI which is pretty much...
  • -Nate: Oy, vey . -Nate
  • EBFlex: “They finally get the styling right and we can’t have it. Sonofasnitch.” Ford would rather you...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States