2013 Outback Vs. 3-row SUVs

[fatabbot]

Originally Posted by subiesailor

Yes we have the Subaru OB which is our primary every day family car - wife has the old VW she uses during the week for work - weekends if she needs to haul kids and I'm going some place I either take the VW or the Sequoia. We have had three cars one being large since 2004. The larger car sees about 4000-8000 miles a year pending road trips with added family members.

99.9% of the longer road trips are just wife + 2 kids the dog is 14yrs old now and Grandpa is 2 minutes away so the old Guys often hang out when we leave town in the Subaru.

Paid $8000 for a 93 Land Cruiser in 2004 - sold it this past April for $7000 - bought the Sequoia needed more space ie proper 3rd row for 22K. Similar 07's first year for the full head air bags were selling for around 26K at the dealers if you could find one. Limited 4x4 trim

Yeah, this was a 4WD Limited, too. About $1k less than others on the market around here. Most Toyotas have great resale around here, was surprised to see Sequoias faring a bit worse.

I have an old Z28 I drive to work 3 days a week. Not exactly a gas miser, but does surprisingly well at 75 mph (~26 mpg) thanks to the tall gearing.

[Tystevens]

Originally Posted by mdelzer

I'm looking to get a new SUV soon and I've had my eye on the OB since the 2010 came out. My wife loves the OB as well but with our 70 pound dog in the mix we are now concerned we'll not have enough room throughout the entire lifespan of the vehicle. As in I'm not going to buy a new 2013 and trade it in 2 or 3 years for something bigger.

Here's the worst case scenario for a road trip:

• 2 adults
• 2 car seats
• 1 twenty pound dog
• 1 seventy pound dog
• requisite luggage for all 4 for a week or so
• 2 compact strollers or 1 compact dual
• 2 adult bicycles
• tent
• cooler
• misc camping tote

95% of the use will be daily commute of less than 30 miles round trip. We live in Western, MI so AWD is important. Trailer towing capability while nice is not a must have so the smaller tow rating of a H4 OB is adequate for 99% of my potential future needs. As in, I'm not going to go buy a boat. At most I might tow a small utility trailer or small enclosed unit.

So can any current owners speak to their experience with an OB and traveling with some combination of roof box, roof bike, hitch bike, and hitch box? The only other vehicles on our shopping list would be a Traverse, Accadia, Pilot, or Highlander. I'm not convinced that a 3 row will be all that much more roomy, just different. Also at the moment we currently do no have any kids. Fuel economy wise the OB wins hands down with a good 4-6 MPG average spread between it and the rest in AWD/4WD configurations.

I *might* be able to get all of that in my Suburban, but that is about the only SUV that will carry all of that stuff.

In all seriousness (and I know this opinion won't be too popular), depending on how much stuff you really want/need to carry, a full-size SUV might be worth a look. They really aren't as bad as you think. Or rather, many of the crossovers (Traverse/Pilot/Highlander) aren't as good as you think in real-world use. Our '05 Suburban will get 18 mpg regardless of how full you pack it -- bikes on the top, cargo rack, etc. Newer ones with the 6 spd transmission will break 20 mpg on the freeway - my dad and my father-in-law both have '11 or newer GM half-ton pickups, and they report very good mileage in the 20-22 range for highway trips. Compared to my '07 Outback, which will only get about 23 mpg loaded with people/gear and with bikes on the rack.

My SIL traded in a Suburban on a GMC Acadia, partly to save gas. The Acadia has ended up getting about 1.5 better mpg for them over the last few years they've had it. I suspect it is due in part to the traditional 4 wheel drive (w/ 2 wd mode if you don't need all 4) vs the full-time awd, which is a gas sucker. I know they have been frustrated that the Acadia really isn't cheaper to drive, and doesn't have the space of their Suburban, but they are upside down and stuck with it for a little while longer. They will be going back to a Suburban as soon as they can.

Just some food for thought. I know it isn't very cool to drive a full-size SUV. But if you want max utility -- you can tow, haul, or transport whatever you want in comfort -- they won't cost you that much more to operate than the alternatives.

[subiesailor]

Originally Posted by Tystevens

I *might* be able to get all of that in my Suburban, but that is about the only SUV that will carry all of that stuff.

In all seriousness (and I know this opinion won't be too popular), depending on how much stuff you really want/need to carry, a full-size SUV might be worth a look. They really aren't as bad as you think. Or rather, many of the crossovers (Traverse/Pilot/Highlander) aren't as good as you think in real-world use. Our '05 Suburban will get 18 mpg regardless of how full you pack it -- bikes on the top, cargo rack, etc. Newer ones with the 6 spd transmission will break 20 mpg on the freeway - my dad and my father-in-law both have '11 or newer GM half-ton pickups, and they report very good mileage in the 20-22 range for highway trips. Compared to my '07 Outback, which will only get about 23 mpg loaded with people/gear and with bikes on the rack.

My SIL traded in a Suburban on a GMC Acadia, partly to save gas. The Acadia has ended up getting about 1.5 better mpg for them over the last few years they've had it. I suspect it is due in part to the traditional 4 wheel drive (w/ 2 wd mode if you don't need all 4) vs the full-time awd, which is a gas sucker. I know they have been frustrated that the Acadia really isn't cheaper to drive, and doesn't have the space of their Suburban, but they are upside down and stuck with it for a little while longer. They will be going back to a Suburban as soon as they can.

Just some food for thought. I know it isn't very cool to drive a full-size SUV. But if you want max utility -- you can tow, haul, or transport whatever you want in comfort -- they won't cost you that much more to operate than the alternatives.

If anyone is looking for a suburban in CA my Father Inlaw will be selling his in 6 months or so. Old man owned hardly ever used his last one is still in the family with over 300,000 miles on it. This one is a 2003 with 90K on it bread truck doors the long version with 3rows.
I found his oil change records I have no idea why but he's changed the oil every 3000 miles! No wonder his other one is at 300K and still runs like new ha ha.

Anyway its tooooooo **** big for him he can't even park it at his doctors office.

[2013OB]

I couldnt get everything into my Lincoln Navigator with the trailer but I probably go overboard when I camp--bunk bed cots, blow up boat w/ electric trolling motor, 2 room tent, portable heated shower, and you name it, I probably have it. Thats with the 18cubic ft cargo box on top. The firewood is what puts me over the top and that goes in the Coleman Versa. Probably dont use 50% of the crap I bring but I wont let go of the portable heated shower---nothing better than a hot shower when camping!

I bought my 05 Navigator in 08 for $20k with 46k miles and traded it in for $10.5k in July with 78k miles. Im pretty anal about vehicle and it was in great shape and all service records. The Subi dealership wholesaled it for $11k. Not too many people come to Subaru dealerships looking for a 12mpg tank!! Great vehicle but I really didnt need all that space for just 3 of us and I was sick of the 12mpg average---mostly in town driving. I dont ever recall ever filling up the whole vehicle with people but my gfriend did take it on a 1700 mile road trip with 6 people in it. Very comfortable for 4 adults and 2 kids. Ive had SUV's for the past 15 years and have no issues with a smaller vehicle that is more modern and fuel efficient and suits my every day needs.

[pt37]

Originally Posted by Tystevens

I *might* be able to get all of that in my Suburban, but that is about the only SUV that will carry all of that stuff.

In all seriousness (and I know this opinion won't be too popular), depending on how much stuff you really want/need to carry, a full-size SUV might be worth a look. They really aren't as bad as you think. Or rather, many of the crossovers (Traverse/Pilot/Highlander) aren't as good as you think in real-world use. Our '05 Suburban will get 18 mpg regardless of how full you pack it -- bikes on the top, cargo rack, etc. Newer ones with the 6 spd transmission will break 20 mpg on the freeway - my dad and my father-in-law both have '11 or newer GM half-ton pickups, and they report very good mileage in the 20-22 range for highway trips. Compared to my '07 Outback, which will only get about 23 mpg loaded with people/gear and with bikes on the rack.

My SIL traded in a Suburban on a GMC Acadia, partly to save gas. The Acadia has ended up getting about 1.5 better mpg for them over the last few years they've had it. I suspect it is due in part to the traditional 4 wheel drive (w/ 2 wd mode if you don't need all 4) vs the full-time awd, which is a gas sucker. I know they have been frustrated that the Acadia really isn't cheaper to drive, and doesn't have the space of their Suburban, but they are upside down and stuck with it for a little while longer. They will be going back to a Suburban as soon as they can.

Just some food for thought. I know it isn't very cool to drive a full-size SUV. But if you want max utility -- you can tow, haul, or transport whatever you want in comfort -- they won't cost you that much more to operate than the alternatives.

I agree ^. I have an outback and the wife has a traverse. The traverse does not have that much more practical space than the outback. We have an almost 2 year old and an almost 1 year old and car sets take up a ton of space. You will probably want a minivan or full size SUV. The wife has said numerous times after getting the traverse "I wish I got a minivan.".

[mdelzer]

We went camping this summer with a 2006 Mazda 3 hatchback and got everything in no problems between the 2 of us and both dogs. And that is without a roof or hitch box. Also did a road trip to Montana in it with camp gear to camp along the way and got everything in fine. No dogs on that trip but we were packed in suit cases instead of soft side duffle bags that could stuff into all the available space.

Aside from the full load trips which will be few and far between, the more frequent trips will be to the dog beach, etc. So far the biggest thing I've gotten from this thread is that I don't need a full size suv or a 3 row cuv....yet. If/when that day comes it will likely be the 3rd wheel vehicle for as needed use and not as a daily driver.

[imwjl]

Originally Posted by there4igraham

I'd say your best bet is to go with a trailer to haul all that extra gear. Don't make the exception the rule otherwise you'll end up with a vehicle too large and thirsty for your day to day activities.

If you're anything like me, you start hitting the delete key when it's time to pack up the car for a trip. As much as I'd like to take everything I'd rather have the least amount of stuff to deal with.

Any costs Kenneling the dog would probably be less than fuel and operating costs for a land barge.

Plenty to consider.

Good point to say don't make the exception the rule. In our case that's a lot of why we have a 4 cyl Outback.

We also have minivan and 3 seat CUV among family members and friends. The problem we found with 3 seat CUVs was no storage when you use the 3rd seat, less leg room in some cases.

We'd probably have two minivans if my work didn't require the high traction and ground clearance you get with the Outback.

[Tystevens]

Originally Posted by pt37

I agree ^. I have an outback and the wife has a traverse. The traverse does not have that much more practical space than the outback. We have an almost 2 year old and an almost 1 year old and car sets take up a ton of space. You will probably want a minivan or full size SUV. The wife has said numerous times after getting the traverse "I wish I got a minivan.".

In all honesty, if one needs a good travel/adventure vehicle but does not need 4x4, clearance, or to tow a whole lot, a minivan is a pretty good choice.

There is no minivan in our future because 1) we tow a 7k lb travel trailer, and 2) my wife would not be caught dead in one for some reason she will not articulate (other than "I hate them").

[there4igraham]

Nothing swallows gear like a minivan. I traded a Ford Flex for my Outback because I spent most of my time driving that wagon with nothing in it. It got used maybe once or twice a year. If I need to haul anything my Outback won't hold I can always rent a truck.

[misfitmonroe]

Originally Posted by mdelzer

I'm looking to get a new SUV soon and I've had my eye on the OB since the 2010 came out. My wife loves the OB as well but with our 70 pound dog in the mix we are now concerned we'll not have enough room throughout the entire lifespan of the vehicle. As in I'm not going to buy a new 2013 and trade it in 2 or 3 years for something bigger.

Here's the worst case scenario for a road trip:

• 2 adults
• 2 car seats
• 1 twenty pound dog
• 1 seventy pound dog
• requisite luggage for all 4 for a week or so
• 2 compact strollers or 1 compact dual
• 2 adult bicycles
• tent
• cooler
• misc camping tote

95% of the use will be daily commute of less than 30 miles round trip. We live in Western, MI so AWD is important. Trailer towing capability while nice is not a must have so the smaller tow rating of a H4 OB is adequate for 99% of my potential future needs. As in, I'm not going to go buy a boat. At most I might tow a small utility trailer or small enclosed unit.

So can any current owners speak to their experience with an OB and traveling with some combination of roof box, roof bike, hitch bike, and hitch box? The only other vehicles on our shopping list would be a Traverse, Accadia, Pilot, or Highlander. I'm not convinced that a 3 row will be all that much more roomy, just different. Also at the moment we currently do no have any kids. Fuel economy wise the OB wins hands down with a good 4-6 MPG average spread between it and the rest in AWD/4WD configurations.

My suggestion would be to get a full size SUV or when you take a vacation rent a vehicle. We just bought an Outback because our Camry wasn't working for our needs. We have a 40 lb dog, a 70 lb dog and a teenager. We knew we had to get a bigger SUV but I didn't want a full size. I only live an hour away from you so I get why you want AWD. We have family in northern MI that we visit several times a year so for us, the car fits everything we need. We had a Ford Explorer before the Camry. It had a 3rd row seat. We rarely used it because after setting it up, there was no room left in the back however with the 3rd row seat down, there was plenty of room, for the dogs and luggage. We could also pull a pop up trailer with it. Unfortunately we had a lot of mechanical issues that became a nightmare. I think we had a lemon. So anyway, in my opinion I think the outback would be too small.