2013 XV crosstrek

[subiesailor]

Originally Posted by Busdrivera321

Wow, I just test drove the Crosstrek and to say it's slow is an understatement! The salesman balked when I said the CVT seemed not to work at all like our 13 Outback. He pulled out his phone and timed me accelerating to 60, 17 seconds with the pedal to the floor all the way. When my wife and I were in the market for our Outback we felt the same about the 12"s CVT, it just seemed to race like a slipping clutch, 13's are much improved! I think I'll wait until the next gen. CVT. Also for a 24000 dollar car they really should paint the engine bay and underfloor instead of just primer. There's a lot to like even more to dislike! Anyone else who has test driven or owns feel the same way?

Matthew

If you want a fast car you shouldn't be shopping Subarus especially the models targeting top mileage numbers. Go drive a WRX or look at another brand. Or wait a year or two for the Turbo XV

[Busdrivera321]

Originally Posted by subiesailor

If you want a fast car you shouldn't be shopping Subarus especially the models targeting top mileage numbers. Go drive a WRX or look at another brand. Or wait a year or two for the Turbo XV

Hi Subie, I am not shopping fast cars, I am shopping for something versatile, economic and something that will last a long time with proper care. My wife already has the SAP 13 Outback in BB and we love it. I have written many times about our fuel economy and our general happiness in owning it.

The Crosstrek is a nice looking car(to me) and I like the all wheel drive and the EPA fuel mileage so I thought I would take a look. I test drove the base model with the CVT in Tangerine orange and immediately was drawn to the fact that the engine bay was not painted in the exterior color. Maybe it was planned that way on the tangerine one for some reason but it still looks unfinished to me. There were also several areas where the paint either ran or puddled up, just isn't what I would expect for a 21000 to 28000 dollar economy car no matter who manufactures it.

Now about the acceleration, I know some made fun of the poster who said this could be dangerous but they were not far off, the specific one that I test drove was anemic at best. 17 seconds to 60 on a rather cool day was not the fault of the 2 liter engine. 148 HP is not bad for a vehicle of the CV's weight. It was the transmission plain and simple. On full throttle acceleration the rpm's went to over 4000 and just stayed there with little actual acceleration. I am familiar with our CVT on the Outback, much heavier car with minimal horsepower gain and with what they call Generation 2 cvt, it accelerates rather well. I haven't timed it because thats what my VW GTi is for.

So what this comes down to was me posting my opinion only on the Crosstrek and seeing if others that either owned one or had test driven one had the same results and views that I have. For all I know it could have just been the one car I drove that had a problem. Thanks for your short response though!

[subiesailor]

Originally Posted by Busdrivera321

Hi Subie, I am not shopping fast cars, I am shopping for something versatile, economic and something that will last a long time with proper care. My wife already has the SAP 13 Outback in BB and we love it. I have written many times about our fuel economy and our general happiness in owning it.

The Crosstrek is a nice looking car(to me) and I like the all wheel drive and the EPA fuel mileage so I thought I would take a look. I test drove the base model with the CVT in Tangerine orange and immediately was drawn to the fact that the engine bay was not painted in the exterior color. Maybe it was planned that way on the tangerine one for some reason but it still looks unfinished to me. There were also several areas where the paint either ran or puddled up, just isn't what I would expect for a 21000 to 28000 dollar economy car no matter who manufactures it.

Now about the acceleration, I know some made fun of the poster who said this could be dangerous but they were not far off, the specific one that I test drove was anemic at best. 17 seconds to 60 on a rather cool day was not the fault of the 2 liter engine. 148 HP is not bad for a vehicle of the CV's weight. It was the transmission plain and simple. On full throttle acceleration the rpm's went to over 4000 and just stayed there with little actual acceleration. I am familiar with our CVT on the Outback, much heavier car with minimal horsepower gain and with what they call Generation 2 cvt, it accelerates rather well. I haven't timed it because thats what my VW GTi is for.

So what this comes down to was me posting my opinion only on the Crosstrek and seeing if others that either owned one or had test driven one had the same results and views that I have. For all I know it could have just been the one car I drove that had a problem. Thanks for your short response though!

Brand new cars with nearly zero miles on them are not going to run hard and fast all that well to start with. My OB is very different than it was on day 1.

Your right the XV is not fast - nor is the Prius or Honda Fit which you can consider the XV the Subaru off road version of being their most fuel efficient offering ie the Fit or Prius product in the Subaru line. No doubt subaru needs to find more power to make a large percentage of people happy with the XV due to its sporty sharp look. Till Subaru starts doing DI engines where they can bump power some without wiping out mileage capability the 140hp Impreza is what it is - a small affordable good mileage 5star AWD car. Which happens to be selling so fast the dealers can hardly keep one on the lot to show people. Which would indicate the power is not much of an issue for the people buying them.

[bulwnkl]

Thanks for the additional info, Busdrivera321. Pay no attention to the apologist who things that CVTs work differently during different months of the year, or that an XV is a Subaru Prius. LOL!

[Busdrivera321]

Originally Posted by subiesailor

Brand new cars with nearly zero miles on them are not going to run hard and fast all that well to start with. My OB is very different than it was on day 1.

Your right the XV is not fast - nor is the Prius or Honda Fit which you can consider the XV the Subaru off road version of being their most fuel efficient offering ie the Fit or Prius product in the Subaru line. No doubt subaru needs to find more power to make a large percentage of people happy with the XV due to its sporty sharp look. Till Subaru starts doing DI engines where they can bump power some without wiping out mileage capability the 140hp Impreza is what it is - a small affordable good mileage 5star AWD car. Which happens to be selling so fast the dealers can hardly keep one on the lot to show people. Which would indicate the power is not much of an issue for the people buying them.

Well since you seem to just want to voice your different opinion(argue) without actually reading what I said that is your choice. By the way both the prius and the fit are well over 5 seconds faster to 60. Just to reiterate, I said the 148 HP is fine, it is the CVT transmission in the car that I test drove that was the problem.

PS the car I drove had 790 miles on it, considering it's a demonstrator basically I would say it's more than likely broken in.

[Busdrivera321]

Originally Posted by bulwnkl

Thanks for the additional info, Busdrivera321. Pay no attention to the apologist who things that CVTs work differently during different months of the year, or that an XV is a Subaru Prius. LOL!

Thanks, I am just trying to help him get to 10000 posts!

I really wish the Crosstrek was just a little better in a few regards, I really like the looks and the gas mileage, I just could not overcome the absolute lack of acceleration and paint issues.

We love our 13 Outback, even with the CVT and a few other minor issues!

[bensu]

I'm starting to look at these also. Our Pathfinder's transmission died last weekend and we're out looking for a new car. We've been looking at the 2013 OB Limited but a Crosstrek seems to have almost all the same features but in a smaller package. And I'm not crazy about the new SUV look of the OB either. Kinda like the station wagon.

http://www.subaru.com/tools/compare-vehicles.html?model=XV%20Crosstrek&year=2013&trim=2.0i%20Premium

Sounds like acceleration is an issue - I guess that's the tradeoff for the extra MsPG. If they put a 2.5 in there, it would get nearly the same MPG as an Outback - I'm guessin.

Crosstrek Pros:
*Price
*MPG
*Styling
*Handling

Crosstrek Cons:
*Interior space
*Acceleration
*Towing capacity (1500lbs)
*First year model

[GTB123]

I would like to know if the construction of the XV is any beefier than a regular Impreza. If its just a jacked up hatchback without a stronger chassis or suspension, then I would be afraid to take it off road for much more than dirt roads. Anyone know about this?

[subiesailor]

The body of the impreza is and always has been probably the strongest model subaru built in recent years. Due to its Rally back ground. Prior to that the Legacy even up till the mid 2000's were still sporting features that kept it stiff and strong like a pass through vs flip down rear seats etc.

I wouldn't be worried about the impreza body strength with the current engine options the body is far stronger and capable than the 148hp engine and running gear they are putting in it.

[bensu]

In one of the many reviews I read/watched yesterday, someone mentioned that the chassis - in fact here: "The many changes made to the Impreza, such as a reinforced chassis and tougher brakes, create a very different type of car." They mention the upgrades and ask the question - is it worth the extry cuppla thousand? answer: yass.