Subaru Outback Forums banner

1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Registered
2010 outback. base 2.5
Joined
·
1,970 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I got the bug to drive one so my local dealer was nice enough to give me a XT touring to drive. The seats are interesting, you sit up very high in the front and in the back. The leather touring seats are nice but a little on the hard side and you sit on them, not in them. The real gem is the new 2.0 DIT. Plenty of smooth power especially in SI sharp mode. Every model should offer this engine and I would not consider a new Forester unless it was a XT. Handling was good if not a little on the lite side from the EPS. The ride was a little stiff but not excessive. Road noise is better than the 13 Forester but it's no Outback. Overall its a good remake but this car at 35k is tough to swallow. A discounted XT premium for 26k and change would be the real deal. If the 15 Outback offers this engine with a little more HP and TQ it is going to be flying off the lots. Fuel economy ratings are impressive for the Turbo but this is a engine I would keep my foot in so if I was really concerned with MPG the 2.5 would be my choice.
 

·
Registered
'11 Outback 2.5i CVT - '06 Forester X 5MT
Joined
·
1,766 Posts
If the 15 Outback offers this engine with a little more HP and TQ it is going to be flying off the lots.
They already did in '05-'09, and the OBXT didn't fly off the shelves. I doubt they'll revive it. It's just not what (MOST) of the OB market wants.

The Forester is a more nimble, better handling car, so it can take better advantage of a turbo IMO.
 

·
Registered
2006 Outback 2.5i Limited 5MT, 1984 Porsche 944
Joined
·
277 Posts
Edited for clarification: The Outback XT models were just too expensive for what they were. By the time you add the option, you're in BMW wagon and Saab wagon territory.
 

·
Registered
2010 outback. base 2.5
Joined
·
1,970 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
They already did in '05-'09, and the OBXT didn't fly off the shelves. I doubt they'll revive it. It's just not what (MOST) of the OB market wants.

The Forester is a more nimble, better handling car, so it can take better advantage of a turbo IMO.
Point taken but the rumor is the 3.6 is history so you may be forced to take a turbo 4 for the higher trims plus mated with the cvt it is a very nice setup IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
They already did in '05-'09, and the OBXT didn't fly off the shelves. I doubt they'll revive it. It's just not what (MOST) of the OB market wants.

The Forester is a more nimble, better handling car, so it can take better advantage of a turbo IMO.
I don't know if this is thruth, back in '05 & '06 I was a single guy in my mid 20's with no kids or real reason to own a wagon but I wanted an '05/'06 Outback XT/ 5MT. The problem was that they just plain didn't make enough of them. And Subaru's marketing strategy was goofy, being they offered the 3.0L H6 right along side the turbo models making roughly the same power.

I think 3.0L H6 sales stole the show for "most" buyers, but it was clear Subaru was conducting an experiment to see how many people would take the H6 over the turbo leading to a decision to keep the H6 for the 4th gen.

Personally having driven both back to back in '06, the tubo was more fun to drive. The H6 was the easier car to live with day to day, as it was smoother and the power delivery was linear. I ended up passing on getting the Outback back then. But If I had to do it all over again after living with our N/A 2.5 CVT, I think I would go for a modern Outback with a turbo four and CVT.
 

·
Registered
2010 outback. base 2.5
Joined
·
1,970 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I don't know if this is thruth, back in '05 & '06 I was a single guy in my mid 20's with no kids or real reason to own a wagon but I wanted an '05/'06 Outback XT/ 5MT. The problem was that they just plain didn't make enough of them. And Subaru's marketing strategy was goofy, being they offered the 3.0L H6 right along side the turbo models making roughly the same power.

I think 3.0L H6 sales stole the show for "most" buyers, but it was clear Subaru was conducting an experiment to see how many people would take the H6 over the turbo leading to a decision to keep the H6 for the 4th gen.

Personally having driven both back to back in '06, the tubo was more fun to drive. The H6 was the easier car to live with day to day, as it was smoother and the power delivery was linear. I ended up passing on getting the Outback back then. But If I had to do it all over again after living with our N/A 2.5 CVT, I think I would go for a modern Outback with a turbo four and CVT.
I see you have a WRX. To be honest my XT drive reminded me of the 10 WRX I test drove with my wife back then. Almost as fast and the ride was WRX stiff but not as sharp in the handling department.
 

·
Registered
2006 Outback 2.5i Limited 5MT, 1984 Porsche 944
Joined
·
277 Posts
SAAB anything?

Does $35k get you anything in a BMW dealership anymore?
It did when the XT was offered.

A 2009 9-3 Wagon XWD Turbo had an MSRP of $36k.

A 2009 BWM 3-Series Wagon AWD had an MSRP of $36K.

A comparable 2009 XT had an MSRP of $35K. The Subaru is/was a nice car, but the Saab and BMW are a notch above. Given the poor reliability record of the XT, and the Saab and BMW's were cheaper to operate too.
 

·
Registered
2010 OB 3.6R limited
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
It did when the XT was offered.

A 2009 9-3 Wagon XWD Turbo had an MSRP of $36k.

A 2009 BWM 3-Series Wagon AWD had an MSRP of $36K.

A comparable 2009 XT had an MSRP of $35K. The Subaru is/was a nice car, but the Saab and BMW are a notch above. Given the poor reliability record of the XT, and the Saab and BMW's were cheaper to operate too.
Yes, Comparing Top of the line Forester with base model BMW 3 series.(without a turbo!!!:28:)
WHy not compared base Model Forester at under $24K vs TOp of the line BMW 3 series (at over $50K)....

Isn't the Saab 9-3 a rebadged subaru? I know one of them are but not sure if it is the 9-3...If som buying a used 9-3 is probably a good idea especially now that the company no longer exost and they should be discounted deeply compared to a Subaru that hold it value so well.
 

·
Registered
2012 Outback 2.5 i Premium
Joined
·
474 Posts
You're thinking of the Saaburu 9-2x which was basically a WRX that wasn't as fast and had the ignition in the wrong spot.
 

·
Registered
2006 Outback 2.5i Limited 5MT, 1984 Porsche 944
Joined
·
277 Posts
Yes, Comparing Top of the line Forester with base model BMW 3 series.(without a turbo!!!:28:)
WHy not compared base Model Forester at under $24K vs TOp of the line BMW 3 series (at over $50K)....

Isn't the Saab 9-3 a rebadged subaru? I know one of them are but not sure if it is the 9-3...If som buying a used 9-3 is probably a good idea especially now that the company no longer exost and they should be discounted deeply compared to a Subaru that hold it value so well.
1) I was actually referring to the XT Outback and why the XT model was pulled.

2) I don't care if it's a called base, limited, ultra, extreme, pony, or super-awesome-edition. It was a valid comparison given the power output of the L6 and the equipment of the car, and the entire point of my post. A low 20's car that is equipped, and thus priced in the territory of a mid 30's car will still drive like a low 20's car.

You're thinking of the Saaburu 9-2x which was basically a WRX that wasn't as fast and had the ignition in the wrong spot.

And I actually liked the ignition location of my 900. :D It was nice having the ignition, parking brake, and gear shift all in one spot, as well as not having an annoying, clanking-rattle sound every time you hit a bump.
 

·
Registered
Lawn ornament XT
Joined
·
14,366 Posts
1) I was actually referring to the XT Outback and why the XT model was pulled.

2) I don't care if it's a called base, limited, ultra, extreme, pony, or super-awesome-edition. It was a valid comparison given the power output of the L6 and the equipment of the car, and the entire point of my post. A low 20's car that is equipped, and thus priced in the territory of a mid 30's car will still drive like a low 20's car.


And I actually liked the ignition location of my 900. :D It was nice having the ignition, parking brake, and gear shift all in one spot, as well as not having an annoying, clanking-rattle sound every time you hit a bump.
It's a good comparison, since I was trying to compare the relative prices of these cars.

If you take $35k into a BMW dealer today and compare what it can get you against the same $35k in a Subaru shop, what can you get?

Regarding the ignition keys- one of my favorite mods is the 1.5" length of foam weatherstripping tape I have attached to the steering column below the ignition key slot. It silences the keys slapping around when I'm off road, and it was simple and near-to-free.
 

·
Registered
2010 outback. base 2.5
Joined
·
1,970 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I forgot to add the X-Mode enhancement to the XT'S and Limited and Touring 2.5's. I was told it was Subarus answer to Land Rovers capability as fas as off road and supreme traction. Still 35k (38k with eyesight) is too much IMO. A base auto with X-mode for around 23k would be a excellent AWD vechile for the money for folks who like no frills value.
 

·
Registered
2010 OB 3.6R limited
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
1) 2) I don't care if it's a called base, limited, ultra, extreme, pony, or super-awesome-edition. It was a valid comparison given the power output of the L6 and the equipment of the car, and the entire point of my post. A low 20's car that is equipped, and thus priced in the territory of a mid 30's car will still drive like a low 20's car.


I actually cross shop the BMW 3 and 5 series wagon with the OB 3.6R when I was shopping back in 2010.

The OB wins easily. The BMW (both AWD and wagon body) were much smaller in the rear seat room. I believe The 3 series BMW was even smaller than my old car (Honda civic Hybrid). If you throw the similar equipped car the 3 series cost $8K more and the 5 series cost $20K more (than the OB). (Again, I don;t care what they call them either(base, premium, limited and whatever).I compared what they are equipped with.

My criteria were AWD, Cargo space (therefore the wagon style), Rear seat space and Power(HP).

All of them were Non turbo engine. Not sure how much the BMW are priced today but I Guts feeling it will be at least $5K-$8K more than a similar equipped OB. Not to mention getting a BMW mean you have to settle for an inferior (and not so reliable) AWD system compared to Subaru.

I know A lot of people put huge premium on BMW name , but not me! Owned one before when I was younger and didn;t think they were that great!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
When we looked at cars in December, I looked at the BMW X1 and X3 before settling on the Outback. The base model X1 is comparably priced to a top of the line Outback. Once I added the features that I wanted, the X1 was thousands more, but was a much smaller car. The X3 started out more expensive at base. We went with the Outback with EyeSight. Getting the X3 with that kind of safety feature would have been more than $10K more. The 3 series wagons started at around the same price as the X3's and are about also a bit smaller than the Outback.

I'm not saying the BMW were bad overall (or good, for that matter), but they were much more expensive for the size.
 

·
Registered
'11 Outback 2.5i CVT - '06 Forester X 5MT
Joined
·
1,766 Posts
Point taken but the rumor is the 3.6 is history so you may be forced to take a turbo 4 for the higher trims plus mated with the cvt it is a very nice setup IMO.
True, and that may be likely, but it will probably be a tuned down, fuel sipping alternative. Or they'll just remove the higher power option altogether. Especially once they add the Hybrid option (for a whopping 3mpg more:confused:).

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it, but it doesn't seem like Subaru wants it to happen.

I don't know if this is thruth, back in '05 & '06 I was a single guy in my mid 20's with no kids or real reason to own a wagon but I wanted an '05/'06 Outback XT/ 5MT. The problem was that they just plain didn't make enough of them. And Subaru's marketing strategy was goofy, being they offered the 3.0L H6 right along side the turbo models making roughly the same power.

I think 3.0L H6 sales stole the show for "most" buyers, but it was clear Subaru was conducting an experiment to see how many people would take the H6 over the turbo leading to a decision to keep the H6 for the 4th gen.

Personally having driven both back to back in '06, the tubo was more fun to drive. The H6 was the easier car to live with day to day, as it was smoother and the power delivery was linear. I ended up passing on getting the Outback back then. But If I had to do it all over again after living with our N/A 2.5 CVT, I think I would go for a modern Outback with a turbo four and CVT.
I agree to a point, Subarus definately doesn't market their performance models. You really don't even see a WRX commercial, they thrive on the cult following and appearance in the WRC. Along with actually building a quality fun to drive performance car.

If I didn't look online and read forums I might have never known about the Legacy GT. I never saw one on a dealer lot, I had to have mine shipped in from 400 miles away when I ordered it.

As far as "not making enough", it can get a bit circular in that logic. Subaru builds cars as they sell them. Alot of XTs didn't sell so they didn't produce many. I agree 100% with the reasons. 3.0 stole market share and you just didn't hear about a Turbo Outback, so noone knew to ask for one. However I think I am probably Subarus target audience, and I didn't get an OB for it's performance characteristics. I bought it for everything else. I have my Forester to satisfy cravings, when I can afford it, I'll probably get a WRX or FXT.

IMO if Subaru would just push their performance models and require all dealers to stock at least one, they would sell much better. However their sales keep increasing year over year, as other manufacturers are falling. So they must be doing SOMETHING right.

I just hope they bring back a MT with some options.
 

·
Registered
2013 Subaru Outback Premium 2.5i All-Weather+Moonroof Venetian Red Pearl W/ Ivory Coth
Joined
·
572 Posts
My driving impression of the 2014 Forester is that its a rock solid vehicle...Rock solid suspension, body and seats (ouch). Maybe an option should be those old dude wood bead roller inserts
 

·
Registered
Lawn ornament XT
Joined
·
14,366 Posts
As far as "not making enough", it can get a bit circular in that logic. Subaru builds cars as they sell them. Alot of XTs didn't sell so they didn't produce many. I agree 100% with the reasons. 3.0 stole market share and you just didn't hear about a Turbo Outback, so noone knew to ask for one.

IMO if Subaru would just push their performance models and require all dealers to stock at least one, they would sell much better. However their sales keep increasing year over year, as other manufacturers are falling. So they must be doing SOMETHING right.

I just hope they bring back a MT with some options.
Seriously! Not that I had been shopping new cars, but I didn't even know XTs existed until I found a few while looking at newer used outbacks. If Subaru had pushed the marketing, I might well have bought one brand new while they still made them.
 

·
Registered
'11 Outback 2.5i CVT - '06 Forester X 5MT
Joined
·
1,766 Posts
Seriously! Not that I had been shopping new cars, but I didn't even know XTs existed until I found a few while looking at newer used outbacks. If Subaru had pushed the marketing, I might well have bought one brand new while they still made them.
Yuuuup!

I was originally intending on buying a new Legacy GT when I retire my Forester. I hope that won't be until at least 2020, but now they have discontinued it too.

I am psyched to see the new WRX, and since it is essentially the same size as my last LGT, it may be a viable option come that time. I just hope they are still making a MT with a sunroof when that time rolls around...
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top