Subaru Outback Forums banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So I had a loaner '13 Outback last week while I had my 30K service done at the dealer. The loaner car had 4800 miles on it and was a CVT, Premium just like my 2011. Anyway just for poops & giggles I did a couple amateur 0-60 runs on a empty back street with my iphone.

The 2013 hit 9.2 seconds twice and 9.3 the 3rd time. Tried my 2011 today on the same stretch with 29K miles on it and got 9.4 the first time, then 9.6 the second and third.

While the '13 doesn't "feel" any quicker accelerating from cruising speeds or highway sppeds and passing, it does feel snappier from a dead stop or the first few seconds of throttle tip in.
 

·
Registered
'14 3.6R Outback
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
While the '13 doesn't "feel" any quicker accelerating from cruising speeds or highway sppeds and passing, it does feel snappier from a dead stop or the first few seconds of throttle tip in.
The new engine in the 13 has tiny bit more HP and a slightly different torque curve which might a account for the slight variation.

Not too sure how accurate the iphone is at recording that kind of stuff but hey, the price was right, right?
 

·
Registered
2013 Legacy Lim CVT Car: 2011 OB Prem 6MT Car: 2006 Miata GT 6MT mc: 2003 Honda GL1800A * Reunite Gondwanaland *
Joined
·
3,567 Posts
... tiny bit more HP and a slightly different torque curve
which might a account for the slight variation.
OTOH, that "difference" (last week versus yesterday) might also
be due to air temperature, atmospheric pressure, tire pressure,
weight of optional equipment, fuel tank level, speedo errors,
etc, etc.

FWIW, Subaru Germany sez 0-100 km/h (0-62 mph) in 10.4 sec
for a 2012 2.5i CVT -- and a slightly less languid 9.6 sec for 6MT.
I'd speculate that those measured 0-60 E.T.s (in the low-mid 9's)
are prolly due to optimistic speedometers, in both cars.

...in any case, please wake me when they reach the traps,

Looby
 

·
Registered
'14 3.6R Outback
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
OTOH, that "difference" (last week versus yesterday) might also
be due to air temperature, atmospheric pressure, tire pressure,
weight of optional equipment, fuel tank level, speedo errors,
etc, etc.

FWIW, Subaru Germany sez 0-100 km/h (0-62 mph) in 10.4 sec
for a 2012 2.5i CVT -- and a slightly less languid 9.6 sec for 6MT.
I'd speculate that those measured 0-60 E.T.s (in the low-mid 9's)
are prolly due to optimistic speedometers, in both cars.

...in any case, please wake me when they reach the traps,

Looby
Haha! Too true!
 

·
Registered
2019 Jeep Rubicon Unlimited
Joined
·
618 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
OTOH, that "difference" (last week versus yesterday) might also
be due to air temperature, atmospheric pressure, tire pressure,
weight of optional equipment, fuel tank level, speedo errors,
etc, etc.

FWIW, Subaru Germany sez 0-100 km/h (0-62 mph) in 10.4 sec
for a 2012 2.5i CVT -- and a slightly less languid 9.6 sec for 6MT.
I'd speculate that those measured 0-60 E.T.s (in the low-mid 9's)
are prolly due to optimistic speedometers, in both cars.

...in any case, please wake me when they reach the traps,

Looby
Actually had more fuel in the rental at 3/4 tank and 1/4 in my 2011. Not sure if it matters on a back road 0-60 run but my 2011 is a pretty loaded model with sunroof, all the cold weather equip etc.. while the 2013 was a fairly stripped premium. My car has two Yakima bike attatcments and snow board rack in place right now plus two car seats in the back seat (Kid did not go along for the ride though);) I think with the added fuel weight of the 2013 it was pretty fair.

I have also found 0-60 time all over the map for the 2.5i, CVT on various publications. As low as 9.1 sec to as high as 10.6. I would suffice that a 9 second run for either car seems pretty accurate.
 

·
Registered
2013 Green Outback Limited 2.5, Past Subarus owned: 2011 Ruby Red Outback 2.5 Ltd with Moon and other goodies, 2007 Outback Premium 5sp, 2000 Outback Ltd AT, 1997 Outback Basic 5sp, 1990 Legacy LS
Joined
·
147 Posts
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
 

·
Registered
2013 Outback Limited 2.5, Ice Silver Metallic.
Joined
·
92 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
2013 Outback 2.5 Premium 6mt
Joined
·
187 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
2013 2.5i Premium 6mt, Twilight Blue
Joined
·
2,378 Posts
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 :19:

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!
 

·
Registered
2011 Tacoma TRD Sport Double Cab Long Box
Joined
·
2,893 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
'11 outback 2.5i premium '12 impreza sport limited
Joined
·
3,822 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
2013 2.5i Premium 6mt, Twilight Blue
Joined
·
2,378 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
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.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top