Subaru Outback Forums banner
41 - 60 of 112 Posts
The Outback was never geared low enough to be a true off-road vehicle. I got a manual just so I’d be able to fake it (poorly) off-road, and there were plenty of mountain roads that ate my lunch. That said: If I had wanted a true off-road vehicle I would have bought a 4WD vehicle.
 
It's an industry-wide trend. There are probably similar sentiments expressed in every traditional automaker's forums. I fondly remember my 2005 Legacy GT Wagon 5-speed and wish I still had it, but my newer 2020 is a completely different animal in some ways good and in others not so much, but it's a much more spacious, luxurious, safer, and more capable vehicle overall. But I do miss the more mechanical connected feel of old-school subies. The Gen 6 is much closer to a luxury car. It has more bells and whistles than I need or want but I had to get those options to get the turbo - don't need or want power liftgate, push button start, etc. I did want Eyesight though - almost hit a toddler in my WRX and that's when I decided the extra nanny functions were worth it for peace of mind.
 
I can't count the number of posts I have seen here from people wishing the Outback was "more refined". I guess there has just been a natural progression to make it just that. I personally wish it would have stayed a little more rough around the edges and less refined, but then I don't have to answer to stockholders worried about the bottom line.
 
It's never been an off road vehicle. You can attempt to make it into one by adding a lot of modifications to it, but it would probably make more sense to buy a dedicated off road vehicle like a RZR instead of wasting the money.

What bothers me about the Wilderness trim is that it's still a CVT, and it doesn't have lockers. It's as if Subaru looked to see what mods people were already doing and did those as a trim.

What Subaru really is is a family wagon with safety features. It uses a CVT to save on gas even though it will cost more to maintain. The same can be said of it getting rid of the 6 cylinder engines and putting turbos into their vehicle. They'll save you money on gas, but you'll pay more to maintain it.

A work truck like a Tundra might be a better option if you're on forest roads more often. I saw a bunch while driving forest roads in Flagstaff this weekend.
 
I am on my 6th Outback having started with my first one in 2003 with a second generation. That was a great car that was built like a tank and could take me anywhere. With every generation there is less to like and more to dislike. My next two were the third generation. I loved the CVT but build quality dropped. Still, they got me where I wanted to go and I could easily get my kayaks on top. The next two were fifth generation. Build quality improved a little but they had the worst roof rack system ever devised. The first one, I had to jury rig a rack to fit my kayaks, but it raised the rack level so it was harder to load. The engine was still good and the CVT worked well. The one I have now is sixth generation. While it has some nice electronics, the engine is the same but they ruined the CVT. The fake gear shifts rob power and gas mileage. While the fifth generation felt well powered on the road, this one feels like a slug. Over the years the Outback has gone from a rugged go anywhere to a suburban wagon. As much as I have loved the Outbacks, I feel this is likely my last one.
 
Discussion starter · #48 ·
I am on my 6th Outback having started with my first one in 2003 with a second generation. That was a great car that was built like a tank and could take me anywhere. With every generation there is less to like and more to dislike. My next two were the third generation. I loved the CVT but build quality dropped. Still, they got me where I wanted to go and I could easily get my kayaks on top. The next two were fifth generation. Build quality improved a little but they had the worst roof rack system ever devised. The first one, I had to jury rig a rack to fit my kayaks, but it raised the rack level so it was harder to load. The engine was still good and the CVT worked well. The one I have now is sixth generation. While it has some nice electronics, the engine is the same but they ruined the CVT. The fake gear shifts rob power and gas mileage. While the fifth generation felt well powered on the road, this one feels like a slug. Over the years the Outback has gone from a rugged go anywhere to a suburban wagon. As much as I have loved the Outbacks, I feel this is likely my last one.
I think you might have a couple of your generations confused 😁, that said I agree with the overall sentiment of your post.
But apparently, we are supposed to accept the direction they've turned, because market share and all.
 
Discussion starter · #49 ·
I am a Jones.... and ironically posted almost on this same topic a few days ago in a local Subaru group. Our last "new" Subaru was a '19. CVT for better fuel economy? Where? we missed it?? Our previous 3.6s easily beat the 19 with a CVT. We do good to maintain 22mpg in it, the older models (to include OBs) were consistently above 25mpg over the exact same roads.. you know.... the ones with the real auto tranny. We miss a better (older) vehicle. So much so that we're buying old ones.... without touch screens, eye sight, electronic parking brakes, etc.... that's not what we want.
Could not agree more, and this in fact is exactly what I did- I went backwards from a 5th gen 2016 Outback 2.5 with the CVT & Eyesight, to a 2013 3.6R with the conventional automatic and no Eyesight. Substantially more power, better drivetrain performance, and none of the newfangled electronic crap to go wrong or to make a windshield cost substantially more to replace.
 
Ironically, they still have the best commercial I have ever seen for an automobile. (Not any of the recent ones.)
What?? Not even the Dachshunds??
 
Subaru, just like every other auto manufacturer, builds vehicles to the spec that they believe most customers will want to buy so to keep themselves in a perpetual state of constant business. Back when the Outback originally came out, yes it was oriented or at least marketed towards being a more rugged version of a station wagon that in many ways was desirable for those who didn't want an SUV or at least saw a car based vehicle as better suiting them.

I don't see much having changed as far as the design of the vehicle as far as the intended purpose goes. I've been running this website for nearly two decades and it is an enthusiast-based forum and yes the enthusiast crowd will often want things like off-road features and turbo engines, etc, etc but the reality is that that is not the demographic whom Subaru has chosen to market to and has truthfully based their success around. They have become wildly successful catering to the mainstream car buyer and while there's several people who might want to gripe about the Outback not being this or not being that I can assure you that Subaru doesn't care that much because their formula has brought them industry-leading success and incredibly high demand that has been ongoing for over a decade.

If you want this vehicle to be better off-road than upgrade it yourself but don't expect Subaru to offer much beyond maybe a wilderness edition because that's all the mainstream car buyer is probably willing to accept alongside the other variations of the Outback that sell like hotcakes and keep business going.
 
Subaru, just like every other auto manufacturer, builds vehicles to the spec that they believe most customers will want to buy so to keep themselves in a perpetual state of constant business. Back when the Outback originally came out, yes it was oriented or at least marketed towards being a more rugged version of a station wagon that in many ways was desirable for those who didn't want an SUV or at least saw a car based vehicle as better suiting them.

I don't see much having changed as far as the design of the vehicle as far as the intended purpose goes. I've been running this website for nearly two decades and it is an enthusiast-based forum and yes the enthusiast crowd will often want things like off-road features and turbo engines, etc, etc but the reality is that that is not the demographic whom Subaru has chosen to market to and has truthfully based their success around. They have become wildly successful catering to the mainstream car buyer and while there's several people who might want to gripe about the Outback not being this or not being that I can assure you that Subaru doesn't care that much because their formula has brought them industry-leading success and incredibly high demand that has been ongoing for over a decade.

If you want this vehicle to be better off-road than upgrade it yourself but don't expect Subaru to offer much beyond maybe a wilderness edition because that's all the mainstream car buyer is probably willing to accept alongside the other variations of the Outback that sell like hotcakes and keep business going.
Very well said.
 
Discussion starter · #58 ·
Subaru, just like every other auto manufacturer, builds vehicles to the spec that they believe most customers will want to buy so to keep themselves in a perpetual state of constant business. Back when the Outback originally came out, yes it was oriented or at least marketed towards being a more rugged version of a station wagon that in many ways was desirable for those who didn't want an SUV or at least saw a car based vehicle as better suiting them.

I don't see much having changed as far as the design of the vehicle as far as the intended purpose goes. I've been running this website for nearly two decades and it is an enthusiast-based forum and yes the enthusiast crowd will often want things like off-road features and turbo engines, etc, etc but the reality is that that is not the demographic whom Subaru has chosen to market to and has truthfully based their success around. They have become wildly successful catering to the mainstream car buyer and while there's several people who might want to gripe about the Outback not being this or not being that I can assure you that Subaru doesn't care that much because their formula has brought them industry-leading success and incredibly high demand that has been ongoing for over a decade.

If you want this vehicle to be better off-road than upgrade it yourself but don't expect Subaru to offer much beyond maybe a wilderness edition because that's all the mainstream car buyer is probably willing to accept alongside the other variations of the Outback that sell like hotcakes and keep business going.

I disagree. Subaru needs to get their act together-- just for me.
 
Could not agree more, and this in fact is exactly what I did- I went backwards from a 5th gen 2016 Outback 2.5 with the CVT & Eyesight, to a 2013 3.6R with the conventional automatic and no Eyesight. Substantially more power, better drivetrain performance, and none of the newfangled electronic crap to go wrong or to make a windshield cost substantially more to replace.
We have Subaru Ambassadors in the family, and it pains them greatly when we're out together and someone starts chatting with me because of our tweaks to older models. Often the conversation leads towards "new car talks" and I have an honest conversation. I've seen a few people I've talked to with older models - they say our conversation influenced them, they tested, and they bought used.

Seeing those older models being chosen over new tells me I'm not alone and that SOA is missing on a not insignificant share.

One other segue. we park a '99 OB outside and had 2" hail a couple of weeks ago. There is ONE tiny, almost imperceptible ding in the roof. The '21 OB 2 doors down was totaled - golf ball doesn't begin to describe it. This isn't a Subaru specific thing... but it does show that 22 years of "advancement" hasn't gotten Subaru anywhere. The '99 gets 25-26mpg, which is oddly about the same I hear and see from current versions. Yet I still go down our street when others can't get out of their drives.... c'est la vie! No CVT, no Eyesight, much tougher, I can work on it, glass is cheaper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blizzard and seb001
41 - 60 of 112 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top