2011 Outback 2.5i 0-60 .Vs 2013 2.5i

[JTSKATER]

Tail wind.

[rickg]

Just about as slow as I expected. If I want to go fast I will jump on one of my bikes. If I want to make it to the ski slopes, I jump in my Outback.

Rick G

[Scout.]

This is almost comical. This is a sport utility wagon guys, check the stats on any car that would even be in somewhat the same category and you'll see the outback is within a second either way of anything else. You want a fast car buy one, in the meantime the outback is certainly no slouch in its intended use and class.

[BossMaverick]

Originally Posted by rickg

Just about as slow as I expected. If I want to go fast I will jump on one of my bikes. If I want to make it to the ski slopes, I jump in my Outback.

Rick G

I'll second this (except the ski part because I don't ski).

My Outback would need about 635 hp to match the horsepower to weight ratio of my motorcycle. My motorcycle isn't even a sport bike. An Outback would probably need at least 1,000 hp to match an average sport bike. So comparatively speaking, there isn't any way of making a production Outback fast.

Overall, I'm satisfied with the power of my Outback 2.5. It does very well for a 4 cylinder in that heavy of an AWD vehicle.

[AO River]

Originally Posted by reddoak

I figured I would try it today, so I lined up on an empty road, started the timer, and launched it.

I'll check back in when I hit 60.

Brings the lull haha

Yah considering the weight differences, climate differences and what have you, not sure the OP results are of much use. Oh well, got some "blazing" 0-60 runs in!

[jp1203]

Supposedly the weight between the '12 and '13 is almost exactly the same and the horsepower/torque difference is so close the difference wouldn't be too noticeable.

I drove a '12 Legacy 2.5 for a day while the dealer who sold me my 2008 was fixing a quirk. Not to start an H4 vs H6 debate, but as much as the CVT helps (which is really a lot in comparison to our 4EAT H4s) it was still more than a little boring to me performance-wise.

[bradze]

my wheels are much lighter than the stock ones, however i added at least 100 lbs of stuff to the dry weight of the car. i wonder how much slower it is.

[AO River]

Originally Posted by jp1203

Supposedly the weight between the '12 and '13 is almost exactly the same and the horsepower/torque difference is so close the difference wouldn't be too noticeable.

The OP's car is an '11 with AWP, moonroof and other extras as well as racks on the roof (drag). He said the loaner '13 was a stripped down premium model. Those differences would easily have an effect.

[reddoak]

Originally Posted by reddoak

I figured I would try it today, so I lined up on an empty road, started the timer, and launched it.

I'll check back in when I hit 60.

There we go. A little under a day.


Plenty fast!

[Pool Runner]

Hey guys I'm not complaining about the the 0-60 speed of the Outback, it is more than sufficient in the real world. If I want to go fast I will drive my '13 WRX. The entire point of this thread was my curiosity if the FB25 boxer motor with CVT in the '13 Outback had improved the performance .vs the EJ25 in the '10-'12 Outback CVT.

It appeared that the slight bump in power wasn't enough to make a significan't improvement, but it was a bit snappier off the line and much smoother and quieter through the power band.