# Subaru



## SkiDork (Sep 21, 2012)

If you were going to get a Subaru as a ski car (wagon style) which model would it be?


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 21, 2012)

Outback wagon.  We have a 2005 Outback 2.5xt and love it.  250 horse and it drives like a champ, even with 115k on it.  Nice for tailgate parties and plenty of room.  4wd all the time.


----------



## steamboat1 (Sep 21, 2012)

Depends on how it will be used. If your going to have 3 or more people in the car then the Outback wagon or Forrester would be a more sensible choice. Even the Legacy would be a good choice but you mentioned wagon style.

My ski trips are usually either solo or with only one other person in the car. I have the Imprezza Outback Sport which has plenty of room for 2 people plus luggage & ski's. It's a hatchback so has the same functionality as wagons for tailgate parties. The difference to me is gas mileage. With the Imprezza I get better than 35mpg on the highway with regular gas, not bad for AWD. My understanding is that some of the other models, especially with turbo charged engines, only run on high test. Not only that but the gas mileage isn't even close to what I get. That can make a big difference when driving back & forth 15 times during a season putting 700-800 miles on the car each time like I do.

I do have another larger car if my family decides to come or if more people are tagging along but the rest of my family gave up skiing several years ago so most of the time I'm flying solo. The Imprezza Outback Sport is the perfect ski car for my needs. Just my $0.02


----------



## gmcunni (Sep 21, 2012)

i like the older outback wagon, the new one is too SUVy for me


----------



## skijay (Sep 21, 2012)

2013 XV Crosstrek. I'm waiting until mid October to test drive one.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 21, 2012)

skijay said:


> 2013 XV Crosstrek. I'm waiting until mid October to test drive one.



interesting looking car, but man are those rims fugly.  I don't care about rims enough to have ever bought aftermarket ones in my life, but I would definitely need to do so with that car.

http://www.subaru.com/vehicles/xv-crosstrek/index.html


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 21, 2012)

gmcunni said:


> i like the older outback wagon, the new one is too SUVy for me




I agree though I am getting used to the look now.


----------



## steamboat1 (Sep 21, 2012)

skijay said:


> 2013 XV Crosstrek. I'm waiting until mid October to test drive one.


Cool looking car. I like the fact that the suspension is raised 4" more than a standard Imprezza. My Outback Sport is only raised 2" more. Has the same engine as my car so it runs on regular but the gas mileage rating is slightly lower. I guess that's from additional drag caused by the higher suspension.


----------



## wtcobb (Sep 21, 2012)

I have an Impreza and it works fine with the single back seat down to put the skis through. I can only fit three, but you need to put the seat down in an Outback too...

Ideally if you're traveling with more than two you have a roof rack/box, which all Subarus are equipped to handle. Outbacks and Forresters already have the crossbars (usually) too.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 21, 2012)

After  25 yr of driving Saab sport wagons or coupes we bought a 2012 Outback  Limited  Deep Indigo Pearl w white leather heated seats, moonroof ,, Harmon Kardon audio system subwoofer Bluetooth , sat radio ,  winter pkg and several other goodies . Loved my Saab sport combo but this one is larger ,AWD and is a really nice interior layout and great storage capacity . 

We just got back from a 2600 mile oddesey thru the Mtns of VT , NH and the Dacks and drove the coasts of Maine, NH and the Cape . So we got a good mix of turnpike , 2 laners, dirt roads ,  twisty stuff on VT 100 and 28/30 in the Dacks . we also did city driving  in Boston metro area  and some "sand dancing" on the Cape and averaged 32.4 mpg with the 2.5 CVT engine . We set the cruise on 70 on Turnpike and drove 60 on 2 laners and whatever the conditions allowed on the twistys .

pretty happy with it after 3 plus months . It is our first SUBIE.


----------



## skijay (Sep 21, 2012)

If you consider a 2009 + Forester and you are 6' tall or taller and you may be a passenger in it, consider sitting in the passenger's side seat for a while. The seat is low and it lacks legroom. I have to hear the bitching from someone on trips up north.


----------



## ctenidae (Sep 21, 2012)

BRZ.

And something with all wheel drive.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 21, 2012)

ctenidae said:


> BRZ.
> 
> And something with all wheel drive.



We don't all work in financial services. ;-)


----------



## ctenidae (Sep 21, 2012)

Yeah, but we'd all enjoy a BRZ. I know I would!


----------



## jaja111 (Sep 21, 2012)

ctenidae said:


> Yeah, but we'd all enjoy a BRZ. I know I would!



Only if I can strap a hairdryer on it.


----------



## darent (Sep 21, 2012)

have a 2000 outback as my ski car, winter kit with heated front seats, plus winter tires, great winter car with just 71000 miles on it. I drop one rear seat and store skis in car with plenty of room for the e two of us.  What the heck is a BRZ??


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 21, 2012)

SkiDork said:


> If you were going to get a Subaru as a ski car (wagon style) which model would it be?


Subaru doesn't make wagons any more. They have the Impreza hatchback, a pair of sedans, and CUVs. You'll have to buy used to get an actual wagon.


----------



## hrstrat57 (Sep 21, 2012)

2009  W R X = creme de la subaru creme


----------



## SkiDork (Sep 21, 2012)

riverc0il said:


> Subaru doesn't make wagons any more. They have the Impreza hatchback, a pair of sedans, and CUVs. You'll have to buy used to get an actual wagon.



I guess by "wagon" I mean 4 door with hatchback


----------



## steamboat1 (Sep 22, 2012)

wtcobb said:


> I have an Impreza and it works fine with the single back seat down to put the skis through. I can only fit three, but you need to put the seat down in an Outback too...
> 
> Ideally if you're traveling with more than two you have a roof rack/box, which all Subarus are equipped to handle. Outbacks and Forresters already have the crossbars (usually) too.


My Imprezza Outback Sport came standard with a roof rack. I have a large/wide Thule box sitting in my attic that hasn't been used in years. If I ever find the need to use it again it clamps right onto my rack without special adapters. I've had 4 pairs of ski's, boots, poles along with 3 6ft. hero's in the coffin with room to spare in the past. I'll lose a couple mpg with it on the roof.

Yeah it came with heated seats & all those stupid blue tooth & other kizmo's which I never use standard too.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Sep 22, 2012)

So far I've had a 1990 Subaru Loyale, a 1995 Legacy Wagon, and a 1998 Forester (which I still drive). The Loyale sucked but it had low and high range 4WD so it was a beast in the deep snow. The Legacy was a beautiful car and drove in an awesome manner which belies the fact that it was a wagon. Got that up past 300k miles before giving it away. The Forester is now around 220k miles and getting to the point where it's been banged up quite a bit over it's lifespan.

My next car will be a 2009 Impreza Outback Sport. But I am going to beat up the Forester for one more winter :smash:

Upcoming XV Crosstrek does look pretty cool, like a perfect ski / mountain bike car really. But I don't want to shell out for a brand new car especially when I know how long Subarus will run. Rather save a little gas money too.

Subaru BRZ looks like pure sex to me and if I had the money I'd use that as a ski car in a heartbeat. Oh nevermind I just realized it's a Subaru without AWD ??

http://www.subaru.com/vehicles/brz/index.html


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 22, 2012)

RWD actually, definitely not a good option for snowy driving. A cross over with Toyota. Very un-Subie but I am sure it will be a massive hit and extend Subie's presence outside of its typical northern snowy market.


----------



## jaja111 (Sep 22, 2012)

riverc0il said:


> RWD actually, definitely not a good option for snowy driving. A cross over with Toyota. Very un-Subie but I am sure it will be a massive hit and extend Subie's presence outside of its typical northern snowy market.



Being in the industry I can attest to the current sales of the Toyot-aru being dismal at best. I've driven one (the Scion version - same damn car) and it was underwhelming in daily driving, sort of joyless until you started to really rail on the thing. It has a WIDE envelope of handling ability with even marginal tires and maintains a great level of predictability and composure. Pushing luck for a ticket is fantastic - i.e. good track car but going to the store though is rather... well.... blah.


----------



## darent (Sep 22, 2012)

riverc0il said:


> Subaru doesn't make wagons any more. They have the Impreza hatchback, a pair of sedans, and CUVs. You'll have to buy used to get an actual wagon.




you don't consider a outback as a wagon?


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 22, 2012)

darent said:


> you don't consider a outback as a wagon?


Current model is a crossover.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 23, 2012)

+1

with the demise of the legacy wagon and ginormousing of the Outback, Subaru no longer builds a wagon.


----------



## SkiDork (Sep 23, 2012)

Whats the difference between 5 door and wagon?


----------



## SkiFanE (Sep 23, 2012)

wtcobb said:


> I have an Impreza and it works fine with the single back seat down to put the skis through. I can only fit three, but you need to put the seat down in an Outback too...
> 
> Ideally if you're traveling with more than two you have a roof rack/box, which all Subarus are equipped to handle. Outbacks and Forresters already have the crossbars (usually) too.


 We bought a new car in August. Subaru didn't make cut for test drive. I admit I have a long time dislike for the brand. Mt bro lives in VT and has had a couple and said they rust, not just body. 

AWD was a requirement, and we ended up with Mazda CX5. What ultimately won us over was the back seat  i think they call it 60/80/20 folding. So you can fold down 20% for skiis and still fit 2 people in backseat. Plus its very fuel efficient, in 30s. Since we travel 400 miles skiing every weekend, it saves tons over minivan. And with split seat we can take on ski trips.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 23, 2012)

deadheadskier said:


> +1
> 
> with the demise of the legacy wagon and ginormousing of the Outback, Subaru no longer builds a wagon.



They do.  They just don't sell it in the United States.   You can still buy one in Japan, Australia, and Europe.   
Here's the Brit Subaru Legacy link.   They don't even sell the sedan there.
http://subaru.co.uk/vehicles/legacy/

Even more annoying, in the UK, you can get it with a 2.0L turbodiesel boxer that puts out a healthy 258 foot-pounds of torque with 55 mpg highway.  It's only 150 hp so 0-60 won't exactly snap your neck back but it will do fine climbing hills and accelerating up on-ramps.


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 23, 2012)

Geoff said:


> Even more annoying, in the UK, you can get it with a 2.0L turbodiesel boxer that puts out a healthy 258 foot-pounds of torque with 55 mpg highway.  It's only 150 hp so 0-60 won't exactly snap your neck back but it will do fine climbing hills and accelerating up on-ramps.


Is that UK MPG? Their imperial MPG is higher than our MPG measurements. Assuming that is imperial MPG, that would be still be 45.6 US MPG, better than a VW TDI.

Why Subaru doesn't see fit to bring that over here I don't know. WV sells WAY more TDIs than gas Wagens in the USA.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 23, 2012)

Geoff said:


> They do.  They just don't sell it in the United States.   You can still buy one in Japan, Australia, and Europe.
> Here's the Brit Subaru Legacy link.   They don't even sell the sedan there.
> http://subaru.co.uk/vehicles/legacy/
> 
> Even more annoying, in the UK, you can get it with a 2.0L turbodiesel boxer that puts out a healthy 258 foot-pounds of torque with 55 mpg highway.  It's only 150 hp so 0-60 won't exactly snap your neck back but it will do fine climbing hills and accelerating up on-ramps.



kinda like how Mazda offers a 6 wagon in Australia and it's one of the better selling vehicles in that country.

Somebody really needs to come up with an affordable import company to bring car models that are available in other countries here to the States.  I really have a hard time believing that the vehicles available overseas are built to emission and safety standards that are that much different than here in the USA.

In the UK and Japan you can get a manual transmission AWD diesel Mazda CX-5.  I'd buy that car tomorrow if it was available to me here.  You can't even get a manual transmission AWD gas model here.  that blows


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 23, 2012)

Call the company Green Imports.  Suckers like me would pay hefty premiums for the vehicles and never realize any savings with the fuel economy over the increased purchase price, but at least we'd get a manual transmission vehicle with all wheel drive and torque, which is really all I want.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 23, 2012)

deadheadskier said:


> Call the company Green Imports.  Suckers like me would pay hefty premiums for the vehicles and never realize any savings with the fuel economy over the increased purchase price, but at least we'd get a manual transmission vehicle with all wheel drive and torque, which is really all I want.



You'd really buy a grey market car with no warranty?


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 24, 2012)

Geoff said:


> You'd really buy a grey market car with no warranty?



Good point.  I wonder how the re-insurers would react to such a situation.  Mazda doesn't offer a very aggressive warranty.  3 years, 36 miles bumper to bumper on new cars. It cost me $1500 to extend that to 7 years 100K on my recent Mazda 3 purchase.  I'm not much of a wheeler and dealer when buying cars. I research the msrp going in and what the average sale price is and as long as I'm within $500, I'll buy the car.  With the promotions going on when I bought my 3, that $1500 extended warranty expense brought the cost of the vehicle to $300 more than MSRP.  I can live with that.  I'd imagine reinsurance on an imported grey car wouldn't be that much different / more expensive.


----------



## SkiDork (Sep 24, 2012)

SkiDork said:


> Whats the difference between 5 door and wagon?



nobody can answer this?  When I saw the "Subaru doesn't make a wagon any more"  I was confused.  4 door with hatchback to me is a station wagon...


----------



## Geoff (Sep 24, 2012)

SkiDork said:


> nobody can answer this?  When I saw the "Subaru doesn't make a wagon any more"  I was confused.  4 door with hatchback to me is a station wagon...



Put an Outback side-by-side with a Legacy wagon (but not in North America where you'd have to use the Legacy sedan).   The Outback is a crossover SUV (barely), not a wagon.   Much higher.  Less aerodynamic.   It costs you MPG and the handling degrades some.


----------



## mlctvt (Sep 24, 2012)

riverc0il said:


> Is that UK MPG? Their imperial MPG is higher than our MPG measurements. Assuming that is imperial MPG, that would be still be 45.6 US MPG, better than a VW TDI.
> 
> Why Subaru doesn't see fit to bring that over here I don't know. WV sells WAY more TDIs than gas Wagens in the USA.



The reason Subaru of America didn't bring in the turbodiesel Legacy Wagon was it only came with a manual transmission and Subaru USA thought they wouldn't have enough buyers for it with manual only. They didn't(maybe still don't) have an automatic transmission that could handle the torque of the 2.0 Turbodiesel. I would have bought one but I'm an owner of the ultra rare one year only Legacy GT Wagon with Manual trans. Since Subaru gave up on wagons,  my wife and I will probably be giving up on Subaru. She currently drives a WRX wagon. Our next car(s) could be either the VW TDI wagon or the CX-5 hopefully diesel with manual?


----------



## mlctvt (Sep 24, 2012)

SkiDork said:


> nobody can answer this?  When I saw the "Subaru doesn't make a wagon any more"  I was confused.  4 door with hatchback to me is a station wagon...



All of the new 5-doors have less cargo space than the previous wagon version. The rear roof line comes down at more of an angle than the more squared off wagons cutting out cargo space.


----------



## SkiDork (Sep 24, 2012)

I think its nitpicking to say they aren't wagons...  When I was a kid a station wagon was a huge freakin boat...  My friends dad had a Town and Country station wagon, nothing today compares to something like that...


----------



## darent (Sep 24, 2012)

Has anyone noticed how much the new Ford escape looks like the mazda CX5, my wife has a 2008 escape and wants to get a new one I was looking at her materials and was surprsed at the resemblance


----------



## SkiFanE (Sep 24, 2012)

Good point. Is an SUV chassis same as a wagon?  I don't think so. 

We always had boats like that.  Fam with 6 kids 2 dogs and occasional cousin or friend trucking it to lake every weekend.  We had a trailer to cart all the junk. Thank god for bench seats and 'back back' and no silly seatbelt laws lol



SkiDork said:


> I think its nitpicking to say they aren't wagons...  When I was a kid a station wagon was a huge freakin boat...  My friends dad had a Town and Country station wagon, nothing today compares to something like that...


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 24, 2012)

SkiDork said:


> nobody can answer this?  When I saw the "Subaru doesn't make a wagon any more"  I was confused.  4 door with hatchback to me is a station wagon...


Hatchbacks are significantly smaller than wagons. With a hatchback, you might get a foot or two (at best) of space behind the passenger seats. In many cases, sedan models of the same hatchback model often times have more floor space (not vertical space, floor space). I don't consider hatchbacks to be wagons. They are compact cars with a rear lid rather than a full bodied wagon with a lot of cargo space.


----------



## skijay (Sep 24, 2012)

mlctvt said:


> The reason Subaru of America didn't bring in the turbodiesel Legacy Wagon was it only came with a manual transmission and Subaru USA thought they wouldn't have enough buyers for it with manual only. They didn't(maybe still don't) have an automatic transmission that could handle the torque of the 2.0 Turbodiesel. I would have bought one but I'm an owner of the ultra rare one year only Legacy GT Wagon with Manual trans. Since Subaru gave up on wagons,  my wife and I will probably be giving up on Subaru. She currently drives a WRX wagon. Our next car(s) could be either the VW TDI wagon or the CX-5 hopefully diesel with manual?



Supposedly big brother Toyota may have the automatic transmission issue resolved from the Toyota parts bin with a 5 speed automatic currently in use, that can handle the torque and the RWD / AWD configurations with an inline (not transversely mounted) engine.  The RWD refers to a Toyota product.  I think it was a Euro spec van or pick-up truck.   I read this in a Subaru forum early this year.  Not 100% sure of how accurate it is as you would think if you have the transmission and it works just use it!

My thought: They are waiting to see if a CVT will work successfully with the Boxer Diesel.


----------



## BigJay (Sep 25, 2012)

I've read many websites regarding the Subaru Diesel engine in North America... it was announced 5 years ago when gaz prices started going up... they said that they didn't have the technology for making clean diesel (because NA is more strict on gaz emission apparently). They don't want to buy it from Ford, GM or VW... they want to make their own.

We have a Forester... and i looked at the UK website and find we don't get any of the fancy stuff... auto-adjusting lights... suspension levelling under load... and so on.


----------



## Edd (Sep 25, 2012)

SkiDork said:


> I think its nitpicking to say they aren't wagons...  When I was a kid a station wagon was a huge freakin boat...  My friends dad had a Town and Country station wagon, nothing today compares to something like that...



Ooo that is an awesome looking car. I have huge love for wagons. Sedans are just dumb to me from a functionality standpoint. I think all cars should just be wagons.


----------



## SkiDork (Sep 25, 2012)

Edd said:


> Ooo that is an awesome looking car. I have huge love for wagons. Sedans are just dumb to me from a functionality standpoint. I think all cars should just be wagons.



yes - his car was actually yellow.  I always wanted one of those


----------



## bobbutts (Sep 25, 2012)

Just go down and drive them.  You should definitely try the CVT and see if you like it, since that will narrow the options.


----------



## SkiDork (Oct 21, 2012)

New question:  Looking at the Outback and Crosstrek.  AFA the outback, I would tend toward the 4 cylinder.  Not doing any towing or racing.  Any reason why I would want to consider the bigger 6 cylinder for a ski car?


----------



## BigJay (Oct 21, 2012)

I don't think there is a Crosstek with 6cyl. Don't forget that the Crosstek is basically an impreza with more ground clearance... kind of like the old Impreza Outback


----------



## SkiDork (Oct 22, 2012)

BigJay said:


> I don't think there is a Crosstek with 6cyl. Don't forget that the Crosstek is basically an impreza with more ground clearance... kind of like the old Impreza Outback



If you read my question I indicated it was for the outback...  But thanks anyway


----------



## Geoff (Oct 22, 2012)

SkiDork said:


> New question:  Looking at the Outback and Crosstrek.  AFA the outback, I would tend toward the 4 cylinder.  Not doing any towing or racing.  Any reason why I would want to consider the bigger 6 cylinder for a ski car?



Pulling onto a highway on ramp with a full load could be a little adventurous in a 4 cyl Outback.   173 hp and 174 foot-pounds of torque with a CVT for a 3500 pound car with 4 people, the back stuffed with groceries, and a fiberglass pod on the Thule bars is going to feel sluggish climbing hills and accelerating to highway speed or to pass somebody.   If you want 30 mpg on regular gas, that's the penalty you'd pay.

It would be a much bigger deal out west where engine performance at 7 to 8,000 feet goes to hell.


----------



## andrec10 (Oct 22, 2012)

I have a 2011 Outback with the CVT, and once you learn "how" to drive it, even fully loaded, it gets out of its own way pretty well.


----------



## Geoff (Oct 22, 2012)

andrec10 said:


> I have a 2011 Outback with the CVT, and once you learn "how" to drive it, even fully loaded, it gets out of its own way pretty well.



Does PETA get after you for flogging those squirrels?


----------



## Warp Daddy (Oct 23, 2012)

andrec10 said:


> I have a 2011 Outback with the CVT, and once you learn "how" to drive it, even fully loaded, it gets out of its own way pretty well.



Ditto . Have not experienced any pickup problems on ramps or passing uphill with my 2012.


----------



## AdironRider (Oct 25, 2012)

The crosstrek is a waste of money IMO. 

4-5K more for a lifted Impreza? Sorry Ill take the Impreza with coilovers and save 3k. 

Heard they are severely underpowered. New Imprezas arent that powerful to begin with and its going to be a nightmare in the crosstrek. Seems like a marketing ploy to me more than anything.


----------



## BigJay (Oct 26, 2012)

The 2.5L is a novelty in Europe. Most of their car is sold w/ the 2.0 diesel engine... the others come with 2.0 fuel engine. You can forget about a 6cyl Subaru in Europe... no one would want that...

It's not all about horsepowers. I took a trip w/ a friend thru NM, AZ and UT in a Impreza with 2 bike racks and a box on top. We averaged 26.x MPG. Pretty good to have the conservative CVT and 2.0L engine. My forester does around 24 MPG with nothing attached to it... with a roof rack and a box, i'm sure it would go down to 21-22 MPG... and the way my gf drives, we can sometimes average below 20mpg in the city.

So the Impreza isn't underpowered... it's an AWD Honda Civic... not everyone likes and wants the Civic SI... that's why the new impreza is selling pretty good north of the border!

Now think how great it would be to have the DIESEL engine over here in North America!


----------



## gmcunni (Jan 28, 2013)

BigJay said:


> Don't forget that the Crosstek is basically an impreza with more ground clearance... kind of like the old Impreza Outback



i've always like the previous outback wagon body style.  if i were shopping for a new car the Crosstrek would be high on my list.


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 28, 2013)

AdironRider said:


> The crosstrek is a waste of money IMO.
> 
> 4-5K more for a lifted Impreza? Sorry Ill take the Impreza with coilovers and save 3k.



I'm currently debating the crosstrek vs the impreza and not sold either way yet.  If your numbers were correct the impreza would be a clear winner for me.  But they aren't.  An impreza equipped like a crosstrek (impreza sport premium) is only about $1,200 less than the crosstrek.  That $1,200 clearly includes a bit of marketing - but also a beefier suspension and towing capability, plus the ground clearance.  That's what's making it a tough call.


----------



## Puck it (Jan 28, 2013)

Cannonball said:


> I'm currently debating the crosstrek vs the impreza and not sold either way yet.  If your numbers were correct the impreza would be a clear winner for me.  But they aren't.  An impreza equipped like a crosstrek (impreza sport premium) is only about $1,200 less than the crosstrek.  That $1,200 clearly includes a bit of marketing - but also a beefier suspension and towing capability, plus the ground clearance.  That's what's making it a tough call.



I saw one of those in the lot at Cannon early in the season. I had seen one. I like it enough to look it up online.  I would go orange though. I would condiser it if the FJ goes away. 

  Replacing the Tundra?  How was the repair on it go?  BTW.


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 28, 2013)

Puck it said:


> I saw one of those in the lot at Cannon early in the season. I had seen one. I like it enough to look it up online.  I would go orange though. I would condiser it if the FJ goes away.
> 
> Replacing the Tundra?  How was the repair on it go?  BTW.



Haha...I hate the orange!  But that's what the wife likes, so we'll see...

Tundra has been in the shop for a week with at least another week to go.  Prob around $8K in body work when said and done.  The accident isn't really the reason for car shopping but it was the catalyst.  Just time to improve on MPG.  I have owned trucks since I was 17.  A subaru would be a culture change. But I'm not afraid.


----------



## Puck it (Jan 28, 2013)

Cannonball said:


> Haha...I hate the orange!  But that's what the wife likes, so we'll see...
> 
> Tundra has been in the shop for a week with at least another week to go.  Prob around $8K in body work when said and done.  The accident isn't really the reason for car shopping but it was the catalyst.  Just time to improve on MPG.  I have owned trucks since I was 17.  A subaru would be a culture change. But I'm not afraid.



I had a wagon with fake wood panels thus called Woody back in grad school. I traded my motorcycle to commute to grad in winter. It is still one of the best vehicles that I have driven in the snow. It only had 2wd and not the best tires. Tell her go for the orange.  I listened to my wife and daughter and did not get for the yellow FJ.  I really the XV though.


----------



## riverc0il (Jan 28, 2013)

XV doesn't get that great of gas mileage, does it? On par with the larger Outback if I am not mistaken? Certainly much less than the Impreza hatch which is the only really good AWD vehicle for gas mileage out there.


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 29, 2013)

riverc0il said:


> XV doesn't get that great of gas mileage, does it? On par with the larger Outback if I am not mistaken? Certainly much less than the Impreza hatch which is the only really good AWD vehicle for gas mileage out there.



Actually the XV is pretty close to the impreza for MPGs.  They run about like this:

Impreza hatch base: 27/36 (city/hwy)
Impreza hatch sport: 26/35 (Not a reported number.  But from what I've read due to added roof rails and 17" wheels)
Crosstrek XV:           25/33 (std roof rails, 17" wheels, etc)
Outback (base):        24/30 
Forester (base):        21/27

So, it falls between the imprezza and the outback.  Obviously the outback gives you a lot more room and a lot 'more' in general.  For my personal situation it's about maximizing MPG within the constraints of AWD.  My wife's CRV is approx the size of the outback with approx the same MPG.  We don't need 2 cars that do the exact same thing. So the extra MPG of the XV over the outback makes it a winner. By the same token, the extra MPG of the imprezza over the XV makes a strong case too.  So I'm still in a dilemma between them.


----------



## AdironRider (Jan 29, 2013)

I think you are going to be dissapointed with the XV. My wifes best friend got one and its so underpowered you end up getting much worse gas milage than advertised as your goosing it everywhere to keep up with traffic.  

Look up the M3 vs prius clip from Top Gear on Youtube and you'll get the picture.


----------



## wtcobb (Jan 29, 2013)

AdironRider said:


> I think you are going to be dissapointed with the XV. My wifes best friend got one and its so underpowered you end up getting much worse gas milage than advertised as your goosing it everywhere to keep up with traffic.
> 
> Look up the M3 vs prius clip from Top Gear on Youtube and you'll get the picture.



This happened with the switch from the 2.5 to the 2.0. Much less power from the Impreza engines now. And then the XV got a heavier body on the same underpowered engine.


----------



## Puck it (Jan 29, 2013)

AdironRider said:


> I think you are going to be dissapointed with the XV. My wifes best friend got one and its so underpowered you end up getting much worse gas milage than advertised as your goosing it everywhere to keep up with traffic.
> 
> Look up the M3 vs prius clip from Top Gear on Youtube and you'll get the picture.


  I love seeing a Prius on the interstate doing 75mph!!!!


----------



## Geoff (Jan 29, 2013)

Cannonball said:


> Outback (base):        24/30



I thought the Outback was EPA 28 highway?   That's how Edmunds has it.

I've had the new Legacy sedan as a rental a few times.   As I've written many times, I grew up in a Subaru household where mom has driven Subaru wagons since the early 1970's and my sister has had them since 1975.   I never fit in them comfortably so I never bought one.  Now that the Legacy is super-sized, I'll have to give the Outback another look.  ..though I'd rather have a Legacy wagon than an Outback if they hadn't stopped bringing them into the US.


----------



## riverc0il (Jan 29, 2013)

Okay, highway is a touch better but city is 24 vs 25 so I suspect total average will much significantly less than 3 mpg difference which is the highway variance. XV hasn't been out too long but here are some real world numbers:

http://www.fuelly.com/car/subaru/outback/gas h4/wagon

http://www.fuelly.com/car/subaru/xv crosstrek

Not many XV's reporting in but the average looks pretty similar if slightly higher. Not a huge gain like the Impreza without any real increase in space compared to the Impreza and a huge bump in prize.


----------



## ScottySkis (Jan 30, 2013)

Are their any hybrid Subraus car yet?


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 30, 2013)

riverc0il said:


> Not a huge gain like the Impreza without any real increase in space compared to the Impreza and a huge bump in prize.



Yeah, maybe.  I guess it's all about how you'd spec it out.  In my case the price difference isn't that much.  The base model impreza is pretty spartan. Whereas there really is no 'base model' Crosstrek.  The entry level Crosstrek is Subaru's Premium level with their all-weather package.  Since I would add this all onto an Impreza the final price difference for similarly equipped vehicles is ~$1,200 (I've priced them out at the dealer).  Some of those add-ons (roof rails, larger tires) reduce gas mileage.  That is reflected in Crostrek MPG estimates (since those are standard) but not reflected in the Imprezza MPG estimates since those are based on the strip down models.  This is even true for the fuelly numbers to an extent since entries by imprezza owners run the gamut of how the cars are equipped.  So their MPG difference is a little less than it appears.  An Outback, on the other hand, is definitely a big price jump over either of the others.  But you're right that the imprezza is the cheapest and gets the best MPG.  For that reason it continues to be a top contender in my car shopping.


----------



## AdironRider (Jan 30, 2013)

riverc0il said:


> Okay, highway is a touch better but city is 24 vs 25 so I suspect total average will much significantly less than 3 mpg difference which is the highway variance. XV hasn't been out too long but here are some real world numbers:
> 
> http://www.fuelly.com/car/subaru/outback/gas%20h4/wagon
> 
> ...



I think you need to take into account the fuelly numbers are inflated by a bunch of hypermilers. 

Who else is going to log all their milage and post it on the internet otherwise? Not most real world people thats for sure.


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 30, 2013)

AdironRider said:


> I think you need to take into account the fuelly numbers are inflated by a bunch of hypermilers.
> 
> Who else is going to log all their milage and post it on the internet otherwise? Not most real world people thats for sure.



That could definitely be true.  But that should be pretty consistent across all vehicles, so at least the _relative _numbers are informative.


----------



## riverc0il (Jan 30, 2013)

AdironRider said:


> I think you need to take into account the fuelly numbers are inflated by a bunch of hypermilers.


Maybe. But if you make that assumption, then it is true across the entire site so comparisons between average MPG curves for two vehicles is still relevant. You could say that each individual vehicle has slightly overstated averages compared to real life. The bigger issue that is questionable is manual vs. automatic and where people live (i.e. winter fuel and snows compared to sunny year round and LRR tires).

Not all Fuelly users are big into their MPG. For example, my vehicle is a VW Jetta SportWagen TDI, an obvious choice for someone really on their MPG. But the range of average MPG reported is astounding:

http://www.fuelly.com/car/volkswagen/jetta/2012

I average 40 MPG and drive snows almost 6 months out of the year and have a ridiculously short 7 minute commute so the engine never warms up on my commutes during the winter. Pretty damn good for my environment and I'd probably be closer to 45 if I lived someplace like FL. But about 1/3 of those reporting in get 35 or less average. Perhaps because the TDI is not only a choice for hypermilers but also for drivers that enjoy diesel performance and torque in a wagon. But those people are tracking on Fuelly too, even though they aren't hypermilers.

But again the point is moot because the sample is self selecting for ALL vehicles so comparisons can be drawn, though less so for models with Manual and Auto choices.


----------



## ScottySkis (Jan 31, 2013)

riverc0il said:


> Maybe. But if you make that assumption, then it is true across the entire site so comparisons between average MPG curves for two vehicles is still relevant. You could say that each individual vehicle has slightly overstated averages compared to real life. The bigger issue that is questionable is manual vs. automatic and where people live (i.e. winter fuel and snows compared to sunny year round and LRR tires).
> 
> Not all Fuelly users are big into their MPG. For example, my vehicle is a VW Jetta SportWagen TDI, an obvious choice for someone really on their MPG. But the range of average MPG reported is astounding:
> 
> ...


Is that A all wheel drive car?


----------



## o3jeff (Jan 31, 2013)

Scotty said:


> Is that A all wheel drive car?



The Subarus are and the VW is front wheel drive.


----------



## AdironRider (Jan 31, 2013)

No doubt, but you are talking about specific vehicles here, not fleet milage so my point still stands. You go to fuelly, see a certain no. then get let down when you dont get it without driving like you live in Vero Beach.


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 31, 2013)

AdironRider said:


> No doubt, but you are talking about specific vehicles here, not fleet milage so my point still stands. You go to fuelly, see a certain no. then get let down when you dont get it without driving like you live in Vero Beach.



haha, yup.  The good news for me is that I do drive like I live in Vero Beach.  I am a really slow driver.  Not consciously or for any good reason....just chill I guess.  Part of the problem is that other than back and forth from MA to NH I basically drive short distances on small local roads.  My commute is 7 miles and I don't have a defined time when I get to or leave work.  I'm forever looking in the rearview and saying "why is this a-hole right on me?!!....oh because I'm going 5 under the limit....oops".


----------



## riverc0il (Jan 31, 2013)

AdironRider said:


> No doubt, but you are talking about specific vehicles here, not fleet milage so my point still stands. You go to fuelly, see a certain no. then get let down when you dont get it without driving like you live in Vero Beach.


The point you are making does not contradict my point. Your point is that Fuelly mileage is on average higher than what non-Fuelly reporting drivers on average experience. That is almost surely true. My point is that comparisons between cars are valid because the sampling pool is consistent throughout the entire site (your point as much as mine) so therefore you can draw rough comparisons between two different vehicles... not a reflection on what you should expect if you personally bought that vehicle... but you can see that one vehicle on average out performs or under performs another vehicle.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 1, 2013)

Cannonball said:


> haha, yup.  The good news for me is that I do drive like I live in Vero Beach.  I am a really slow driver.  Not consciously or for any good reason....just chill I guess.  Part of the problem is that other than back and forth from MA to NH I basically drive short distances on small local roads.  My commute is 7 miles and I don't have a defined time when I get to or leave work.  I'm forever looking in the rearview and saying "why is this a-hole right on me?!!....oh because I'm going 5 under the limit....oops".



You'd fit in well out West. Its amazing that road rage still exists, but in the inverse for driving to fast.


----------



## Cannonball (Feb 1, 2013)

AdironRider said:


> You'd fit in well out West. Its amazing that road rage still exists, but in the inverse for driving to fast.



No doubt.  When in lived in CO there were enough type A East coast transplants to keep the roads autobahn-like.  But WY is the slowest place I've ever been.  Even I got impatient.


----------



## steamboat1 (Feb 2, 2013)

I have a 2011 Imprezza Outback Sport. Been averaging 28mpg on my trips back & forth to VT. with a set of Blizzack WR70 winter tires. During the summer with regular all season tires mpg is close to 31mpg. The car was only rated for 27mpg hwy so I'm happy. On the other hand the car was rated 21mpg city. My actual mpg has been closer to 19mpg.


----------



## gmcunni (Feb 2, 2013)

we'll need gas receipts and certified odometer readings otherwise you will be labeled a fraud and your statements of "fact" will be dismissed as conjecture and attempts to promote Subaru, for whom you are obviously a mole sent to circumvent the truth.


----------



## gmcunni (Mar 28, 2013)

hybrid crosstrek next year


----------



## wtcobb (Mar 28, 2013)

Interesting. Not that much better mileage, but it's a first-gen hybrid for Subaru. 

My first question: will it still come with a manual, or go the way of all other hybrids?


----------



## bobbutts (Mar 28, 2013)

Cvt..


----------



## Puck it (Mar 28, 2013)

Cannonball just got one of these recently, not the hybrid of course. I think he likes it so far.


----------



## ScottySkis (Mar 28, 2013)

gmcunni said:


> hybrid crosstrek next year



I need one of these.


----------



## Cannonball (Mar 28, 2013)

Puck it said:


> Cannonball just got one of these recently, not the hybrid of course. I think he likes it so far.



Yup. Been planning to post up a review here.  Hope I can address some of the issues brought up in this thread (back when I was shopping).  Got 3k on it so far, figured I'd put a little more on before reviewing just to be able to cover more bases.


----------



## gmcunni (Mar 28, 2013)

Cannonball said:


> Yup. Been planning to post up a review here.  Hope I can address some of the issues brought up in this thread (back when I was shopping).  Got 3k on it so far, figured I'd put a little more on before reviewing just to be able to cover more bases.



what's the short version - love it, like it or hate it?


----------



## marcski (Mar 28, 2013)

You can have your Cross-Trek. I'll take one of these please:


----------



## gmcunni (Mar 28, 2013)

i saw this and as hot as it looks my first thought "ground clearance sucks for a ski car" 


marcski said:


> You can have your Cross-Trek. I'll take one of these please:
> 
> View attachment 8517


----------



## Cannonball (Mar 28, 2013)

gmcunni said:


> what's the short version - love it, like it or hate it?



Love it.
 Have noticed all of the upsides listed in the reviews. Haven't noticed any of the downsides reported.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 28, 2013)

28/34/31 city/highway/combined XV Hybrid
25/33/?? city/highway/combined XV

Couldn't find a combined number for the regular XV on Sub's web site. But considering city only increases 3MPG and highway only 1MPG, it is safe to assume the combined must be less than 3MPG improvement. 

How much more are they going to charge for the Hybrid? Are they setting themselves up for failure with extremely minimal differences in MPG? That just doesn't seem worth it. The price difference would have to be less than a grand to make the hybrid worth it.


----------



## ScottySkis (Mar 28, 2013)

riverc0il said:


> 28/34/31 city/highway/combined XV Hybrid
> 25/33/?? city/highway/combined XV
> 
> Couldn't find a combined number for the regular XV on Sub's web site. But considering city only increases 3MPG and highway only 1MPG, it is safe to assume the combined must be less than 3MPG improvement.
> ...



Why so little savings on gas?


----------



## Cannonball (Mar 28, 2013)

riverc0il said:


> 28/34/31 city/highway/combined XV Hybrid
> 25/33/?? city/highway/combined XV
> 
> Couldn't find a combined number for the regular XV on Sub's web site. But considering city only increases 3MPG and highway only 1MPG, it is safe to assume the combined must be less than 3MPG improvement.


FYI: 28 combined for the reg.  Which is about what I'm averaging, although that's climbing quite a bit as I break it in.



riverc0il said:


> How much more are they going to charge for the Hybrid? Are they setting themselves up for failure with extremely minimal differences in MPG? That just doesn't seem worth it. The price difference would have to be less than a grand to make the hybrid worth it.



Yeah, I don't really get why the improvement is so minimal.  And really wonder if it would be worth it.  I'll admit that I haven't researched the hybrid much since it was announced since I didn't want to kick myself for jumping the gun.  But this makes me feel better.  Probably wouldn't have gone with a first gen hybrid anyway.


----------



## bigbog (Mar 28, 2013)

gmcunni said:


> we'll need gas receipts and certified odometer readings otherwise you will be labeled a fraud and your statements of "fact" will be dismissed as conjecture and attempts to promote Subaru, for whom you are obviously a mole sent to circumvent the truth.


Nice lines on that Crosstrek Cannonball......

...If they could somehow squeeze 40-50mpg with that WRX...and 40-50mpg for the weekend/off-road crowd  (too much blast-off drink today..;-)


----------



## Geoff (Apr 28, 2013)

SkiDork said:


> New question:  Looking at the Outback and Crosstrek.  AFA the outback, I would tend toward the 4 cylinder.  Not doing any towing or racing.  Any reason why I would want to consider the bigger 6 cylinder for a ski car?



Bumping this thread, I haven't seen SkiDork's Subaru but I know he bought one.   I presume it's an Outback with the 4 cylinder engine and CVT?    I'm curious how it performs driving up the pass.   If you're going 50 mph at Goodrow Lumber, can you hold 50 going up the hill with the family in the car?

I used to drive a 1986 S-10 Blazer with 115 hp.   That really struggled going up the Sherburne pass.   My 2002 Mazda Navajo (Ford Exploder) with 160 hp / 225 ft-lbs was better.   Every car I've owned since had way more horsepower & torque and I stopped noticing that I was climbing the pass.    With only 170-ish foot-lbs of torque, I'm wondering what an Outback does on that hill.


----------



## Cannonball (Jul 31, 2013)

Been meaning to post a follow up about the Crosstrek for a while, but wanted a few months and a few thousand miles of use first.  I'm there now.  Bought it in Feb so I've had it for 5 months including winter, spring, and summer conditions.  Have put 12K on it including 2 trips from Boston to Philly and many, may trips from MA to NH.  So here's a digested psuedo-review from my experience:

Background/disclaimer: I am NOT a car guy.  Other than a '78 LeMans in high school this is the first "car" I've ever owned.  I've had mostly pickup trucks, but also a few Broncos.  From reading other car threads on here I know a lot of you are into cars.  You know and care about subtle handling differences, 0-60, etc.  That's cool.  I'm sure it matters.  I just don't have enough experience with those subtleties to really make fine-scale comparisons.  As a "truck guy" who didn't need a truck anymore I was looking for a) MPG, B) affordability, C) AWD, D) enough space for wife+dog+gear.  Most other considerations didn't carry much weight.

Thought it would make sense to address some of the concerns/knocks mentioned earlier in this thread:
_*"The crosstrek is a waste of money IMO. 4-5K more for a lifted Impreza? Sorry Ill take the Impreza with coilovers and save 3k."   
*_I sort of addressed this before.  That's an apples-oranges cost comparison.  The crosstrek doesn't really have a base-model option so a comparably equipped imprezza is only about $1,200 less than a Crosstrek.  But still, there is some truth to the point.  $1,200 for the ground clearance beefed up suspension and a couple other things might not be worth it to everyone.  It was worth it to me.

_*"Heard they are severely underpowered."
*_Yeah, I've heard that a lot too.  But I haven't noticed it.  As stated I'm not a car guy so maybe the Crosstrek is weak compared to some cars people are used to.  I'm used to 8cyl pickup trucks.  I'd say the Crosstrek merges and passes about the same...as in without any trouble.  

_*"XV doesn't get that great of gas mileage, does it? On par with the larger Outback if I am not mistaken? Certainly much less than the Impreza hatch which is the only really good AWD vehicle for gas mileage out there."
*_It seems pretty good to me.  I've averaged 30MPG over the 12K miles.  But actually it's a little better than than since it crept up quite a bit after break in. In the past 3 months I've been averaging 31MPG.  From what I've followed 2013 Outbacks average around 25MPG and Imprezas are about the same as the Crosstrek.  

_*"I think you are going to be dissapointed with the XV. My wifes best friend got one and its so underpowered you end up getting much worse gas milage than advertised as your goosing it everywhere to keep up with traffic."
*_Kind of a combo of the above 2 comments.  So I'll just say that I haven't noticed a lack of power and I'm getting better mileage than expected.  = Not disappointed.

That was about it for other peoples concerns.  Now my concerns:
*Will I be able to carry everything without a truck?  *Hmmmm, not always.  So far I've been OK with it 90% of the time.  It kind of sucks to be limited in what I can pick up at Home Depot and hauling yard brush is not so great.  I've borrowed trailers and that worked out pretty well.  I'm considering buying a trailer now.   It's definitely more challenging and time consuming to think about carrying stuff.  Can just trow my bike, kayak, etc in the back.  But with roof racks and tow hitch it's been pretty manageable.
*
I do a lot of work down muddy, dirt roads.  Will I get down there?  *So far the thing has been a champ on fire roads, cranberry bog connectors, etc.  One I stop worrying about paint scratches it will probably be even better.
*
How will I like driving it?  I've always preferred the upright posture of a truck seat.   *I'm actually really digging driving it! Multiple times I've driven through a full tank (>400miles) without a rest and felt fine.  It's comfortable, moderately quiet, and well laid out.

So anyway, not much a real car review by car guy standards.  But bottom line is that I'm really liking it and would easily recommend it.

And I like the look......


----------



## deadheadskier (Aug 1, 2013)

except for the god awful rims, it is indeed a sharp looking small cross over.


----------



## spring_mountain_high (Mar 27, 2014)

my 2009 outback's transmission completely shit the bed at 100K...according to the mechanic it's a common problem for this year/model...called subaru and they basically said 'we consider that a wear and tear part, you're out of warranty, too bad for you, go pound sand'

maybe i'm wrong, but 100K seems a little early to me for a trans to die...very disappointing, especially for a make that touts reliability


----------



## jimk (Mar 27, 2014)

Did the OP (skidork) ever buy a car?  Which one?


----------



## skijay (Mar 27, 2014)

spring_mountain_high said:


> my 2009 outback's transmission completely shit the bed at 100K...according to the mechanic it's a common problem for this year/model...called subaru and they basically said 'we consider that a wear and tear part, you're out of warranty, too bad for you, go pound sand'
> 
> maybe i'm wrong, but 100K seems a little early to me for a trans to die...very disappointing, especially for a make that touts reliability



Automatic or the stick? I'm hoping that every 30 / 60 / 90k when they (dealer) does the automatic transmission service will prevent that from happening to me. I have the same year but the Forester. I'm getting close to the 90k mark.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 27, 2014)

spring_mountain_high said:


> my 2009 outback's transmission completely shit the bed at 100K...according to the mechanic it's a common problem for this year/model...called subaru and they basically said 'we consider that a wear and tear part, you're out of warranty, too bad for you, go pound sand'
> 
> maybe i'm wrong, but 100K seems a little early to me for a trans to die...very disappointing, especially for a make that touts reliability



Way to low of mileage for a transmission to go.


----------



## spring_mountain_high (Mar 27, 2014)

skijay said:


> Automatic or the stick? I'm hoping that every 30 / 60 / 90k when they (dealer) does the automatic transmission service will prevent that from happening to me. I have the same year but the Forester. I'm getting close to the 90k mark.



auto...i took meticulous care of the car and had a lot of the service done at the dealership too


----------



## jaysunn (Mar 27, 2014)

> We don't all work in financial services.



I do:

Thanks for buying AMERICAN, I drive a 2013 JEEP Cherokee.  Not as cool as a Subaru, but I bet I can can pull you around the parking lot with the front hooks.. 




AMERICA baby.

jaysunn


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 27, 2014)

jaysunn said:


> I do:
> 
> Thanks for buying AMERICAN, I drive a 2013 JEEP Cherokee.  Not as cool as a Subaru, but I bet I can can pull you around the parking lot with the front hooks..
> 
> ...



Jeep is owned by Italians ...


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 27, 2014)

:lol:


----------



## jaysunn (Mar 27, 2014)

> jeep is owned by Italians ...



Thank God, I am half Italian, Fuck just looked it up and I am about to pull my american flag from the front of the house/.…..\\\Are you sure?

Jeep
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Jeep (disambiguation).
"General Purpose" redirects here. For other uses, see General purpose (disambiguation).
Jeep
Jeep logo
Type	Division
Industry	Automobile
Founded	1941[1]
Headquarters	Toledo, Ohio; Auburn Hills, Michigan, US
Area served	Worldwide
Key people	Michael Manley (CEO of Jeep division)
Sergio Marchionne (CEO of Chrysler Group LLC)
Products	Sport utility vehicles
Parent	Chrysler Group LLC
Website	www.jeep.com
Jeep is a brand of American automobiles that is a division of Chrysler Group LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Italian multinational automaker Fiat S.p.A..[2][3]


----------



## o3jeff (Mar 28, 2014)

Doesn't Fiat own them?


----------



## bvibert (Mar 28, 2014)

o3jeff said:


> Doesn't Fiat own them?



That's what the text above says...



> Jeep is a brand of American automobiles that is a division of Chrysler Group LLC, a wholly owned *subsidiary of Italian multinational automaker Fiat S.p.A.*.


----------



## o3jeff (Mar 28, 2014)

bvibert said:


> That's what the text above says...



Guess I should go back to reading the first and last line of the posts instead of only the first!


----------



## skijay (Mar 28, 2014)

I didn't realize they built a 2013 Jeep Cherokee.  I thought that they had the 9 speed automatic transmission issue that they just resolved and started to deliver the 2014 Jeep Cherokee.  I do like the 2014 Cherokee, could be a contender for my Subaru replacement.


----------



## jaysunn (Mar 30, 2014)

That totally sucks I thought I was being a patriot and buying American. Damn.


----------



## Geoff (Mar 30, 2014)

wa-loaf said:


> Jeep is owned by EYEtalians ...



Fixed it for you


----------



## WWF-VT (Mar 31, 2014)

spring_mountain_high said:


> my 2009 outback's transmission completely shit the bed at 100K...according to the mechanic it's a common problem for this year/model...called subaru and they basically said 'we consider that a wear and tear part, you're out of warranty, too bad for you, go pound sand'
> 
> maybe i'm wrong, but 100K seems a little early to me for a trans to die...very disappointing, especially for a make that touts reliability



Our 2007 Outback with 97K miles had a head gasket failure.  It was about a $2000 repair and it's a common problem across  many Subaru models over many years.


----------



## gmcunni (Mar 31, 2014)

jaysunn said:


> That totally sucks I thought I was being a patriot and buying American. Damn.



not american any longer either:
budweiser
good humor ice cream
7-eleven
gerber
firestone
john hancock life ins
frigidaire
chrysler building
holiday inn
citgo


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 31, 2014)

WWF-VT said:


> Our 2007 Outback with 97K miles had a head gasket failure.  It was about a $2000 repair and it's a common problem across  many Subaru models over many years.



I had an 05' and it never let me down, but the cost of maintenance exceeded a new car payment over the last year I had it. I traded it in at 120k



gmcunni said:


> citgo



I don't think Citgo was ever American?


----------



## hammer (Mar 31, 2014)

wa-loaf said:


> I had an 05' and it never let me down, but the cost of maintenance exceeded a new car payment over the last year I had it. I traded it in at 120k


Not trying to hate on Subarus (seriously considering one to replace a 13YO car) but a 120K trade-in point because of repair costs seems a bit early...makes me concerned.

My 1998 Outback needed new head gaskets at around 125K miles and it was a known problem then.  Thought that Subaru would have fixed the issue 9 model years later.


----------



## gmcunni (Mar 31, 2014)

wa-loaf said:


> I don't think Citgo was ever American?


*CITGO*
Started by an American oilman, it is now owned by the government of Venezuel


----------



## gmcunni (Mar 31, 2014)

WTF - Ben & Jerry's too.... 



> Lipton bought Good Humor in 1965. Unilever, the British-Dutch conglomerate, had bought Lipton in 1937. Unilever is now the world's biggest ice cream maker. It also owns Ben & Jerry's and Breyers.


----------



## Edd (Mar 31, 2014)

spring_mountain_high said:


> auto...i took meticulous care of the car and had a lot of the service done at the dealership too



Do you remember if this was a 4 speed auto or a 5?


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## skiNEwhere (Mar 31, 2014)

I don't know if this is true about the older subaru's but in the new ones it's pretty easy for oil changes. They placed the oil filter on top of the engine so you can replace it by just popping the hood and unscrewing it. 

Still need to get under the car to drain the old oil but it does make the overall process quicker and easier.


----------



## spring_mountain_high (Apr 1, 2014)

Edd said:


> Do you remember if this was a 4 speed auto or a 5?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone



4 speed


----------



## ScottySkis (Apr 8, 2014)

I need a used one of these by next winter. Wonder what would be good price for one.


----------



## moresnow (Apr 8, 2014)

How much can you afford?

Then find the best car (lowest mileage, best maintained, options you want, etc.) at or below that amount.


----------



## skijay (Apr 9, 2014)

The tires make a difference! Just because it has AWD it doesn't give it any advantage when it comes to stopping ability.  Yes, the Subaru rocks in the snow and mud to get you going and I love the AWD for that, but the OEM tires or some cheap replacement tires put on a vehicle to sell will make you question your purchase once you hit a slick spot and try to stop!   

Check the tires on any used car for condition and brand.


----------



## Geoff (May 13, 2014)

Bumping this thread.

Subaru has announced a refreshed 2015 Outback.   They raked the windshield by moving the bottom 2" forwards, fiddled with the fuel injection, and put mechanical louvres on the nose.   They're claiming 33 mpg highway.   The engine tweak adds 2 horsepower so it's 175 hp and low end torque is a bit better.   It's fractionally wider and fractionally longer and adds a bit more rear seat legroom.   They quieted it down with a better windshield and more sound absorbing material in strategic places.

It only has CVT.   No manual transmission.   Even the 3.6L engine has CVT.

In the top trim level, they added some kind of exterior combo lock on the rear liftgate so you can lock your keys in the car and go skiing without worrying about losing the keys.

It's supposed to show up on dealer lots sometime in August.

I'm going to take a hard look at it as a candidate to replace both my VW GTI and Mountaineer.   33 mpg on regular gas in an AWD wagon really can't be ignored.   175 hp and 3,600 pounds is a step down from the weight to horsepower ratio I'm used to and the engine doesn't have great torque.   I'm not 100%-sold but it's worth a strong look.


----------



## deadheadskier (May 13, 2014)

Outside of long term reliability, yes its worth a look.   I imagine the transmission will feel quite boring to you compared to the GTI.


----------



## Geoff (May 14, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> Outside of long term reliability, yes its worth a look.   I imagine the transmission will feel quite boring to you compared to the GTI.



It kind of doesn't matter.   I'm "mister speed limit" on secondary roads and usually drive with the cruise control buttons instead of the gas pedal.   Between the Woodstock police, the Windsor sheriff in Bridgewater, the cop in Mendon, and the Vermont State Police always looking for easy pickings in Killington, I don't ever exceed the speed limit in Vermont.   The secondary roads I drive on in Massholia also either have speed traps or transit the third world of New Bedford where slow & attentive is the only possible way to drive.

Going from 200 hp, 3300 pounds, and DSG to 175 hp with a lot less low end torque, 3600 pounds, and CVT is only going to suck occasionally.   I won't miss having to buy premium fuel at the gas pump, though.   I often see 30 and 40 cent spreads between 87 octane and premium.

I'm actually more concerned about the interior quality.   The GTI interior approaches entry level euro luxury quality.  The current gen Legacy sedans I've rented were more plastic-y Camry-like.   The ride is also very Camry-like but that's pretty easy to change if I want to stiffen it up.

I drive a Volkswagen and a Mountaineer so it's not like I'm afraid of brands with known reliability problems.   I've had four Exploder variants over the years so I've lived all the problems.   My two GTIs have been average which might suck compared to a Honda but looks nothing like owning an Exploder.   Other than head gaskets and oil consumption, I'm not aware of any chronic reliability issues with Subarus.   I'm not driving much since I telecommute so any car I buy should hold up pretty well.   At this point, I'm not planning to buy for at least a year unless something really bad happens to one of my cars so this is likely the last car I buy before I retire in a decade.   Financially, I'm more concerned with my retirement nest egg than blowing money on a depreciating asset.


----------



## deadheadskier (May 14, 2014)

Well I'm an unabashed Mazda fan.  I would think a CX-5 would be a better option than an Outback outside of the fact it has less cargo space.   Similar gas mileage and a better weight to HP ratio.  Maybe you are pickier than I, but the interiors of the GT models I've been in have been pretty nice.


----------



## hammer (May 14, 2014)

Decided to go with a 2009 Impreza for our 21 YO son.  Time will tell on the head gasket issue (car has 55K miles) but he liked the car and the AWD will help in the winter.  Needs a new driver side visor and I want to figure out how to buff out a number of clear coat scuffs on the hood.


----------



## wa-loaf (May 14, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> Well I'm an unabashed Mazda fan.  I would think a CX-5 would be a better option than an Outback outside of the fact it has less cargo space.   Similar gas mileage and a better weight to HP ratio.  Maybe you are pickier than I, but the interiors of the GT models I've been in have been pretty nice.



Haven't seen the 15', but the interiors are pretty cheap feeling in the current outback and gauges are all over the place.


----------



## bvibert (May 14, 2014)

CVT only makes me weep inside.  Of course the Outback has gotten too damn big anyway, so it's off my radar regardless.  I've driven a few CVTs, and I feel it's absolutely the worst thing to happen to cars in a long time.


----------



## deadheadskier (May 14, 2014)

wa-loaf said:


> Haven't seen the 15', but the interiors are pretty cheap feeling in the current outback and gauges are all over the place.



I haven't been in an Outback in a few years.  The GT I was referencing was the Mazda.


----------



## jimk (May 14, 2014)

I became a first time Subaru buyer last summer and got a new, basic 2014 Outback (2.5/auto trans) for about $24k out the door including trade-in of dying 1992 Civic.  So far happy with the standard engine:  adequate power and decent gas mileage in a vehicle that can hold a good amount of skiers and gear.  This vehicle won't thrill you on dry roads, but I drove it from VA to CO and VA to ME/NY last winter including two serious storm days in CO and it's real solid in the snow at altitude.  I knew they were going to update the Outback in 2015, but I couldn't delay due to vehicle needs.  If 2015 version has more power and room while increasing MPG that's a nice trick.


----------



## Cannonball (May 14, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> Well I'm an unabashed Mazda fan.  I would think a CX-5 would be a better option than an Outback outside of the fact it has less cargo space.   Similar gas mileage and a better weight to HP ratio.  Maybe you are pickier than I, but the interiors of the GT models I've been in have been pretty nice.



But isn't the CX-5 more comparable to the imprezza or Crosstrek?  I think the Outback is a much bigger vehicle than the CX-5.   CX-5 was a strong contender for me when I was shopping last year (ended up with Crosstrek).  But it was apples to oranges against the Outback. 

Now I'm shopping again, to replace my wife's CRV.   Forrester and Outback are the top contenders.  The improved MPG on the new Outback could tip the scales.


----------



## deadheadskier (May 14, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> But isn't the CX-5 more comparable to the imprezza or Crosstrek?  I think the Outback is a much bigger vehicle than the CX-5.   CX-5 was a strong contender for me when I was shopping last year (ended up with Crosstrek).  But it was apples to oranges against the Outback.
> 
> Now I'm shopping again, to replace my wife's CRV.   Forrester and Outback are the top contenders.  The improved MPG on the new Outback could tip the scales.



I conceded that the Outback has more Cargo space; definitely a bigger car, but not by much.  Cargo capacity behind the rear seats is 34.1 cubic feet for the CX-5 vs. 35.5 for the 2015 Outback. With the seats down, the Outback size advantage is more apparent - 73.3 vs 65.4 for the CX-5.   As a point of comparison as you are also looking at Forester, that vehicles numbers are 31.5 and 68.5.

The direct competition for the CX-5 is the Escape, Forester, RAV4, CRV and Nissan Rogue.  I've driven the Escape, CRV and Rogue and the driving dynamics of those cars isn't in the same league as the CX-5.  The reviews of the others also concede that Mazda is by far the best handling car of the category.  I have a good relationship with my local Mazda dealership having bought two new cars from them and they've let me test drive the CX-5 a couple of times.  I was underwhelmed by the initially released 2.0 Liter engine.  The 2.5 is really nice though and doesn't sacrifice much in the way of fuel economy.  For a cross over, the cars handling is pretty amazing.  I could through it around corners with almost as much ease as my Mazda 3 Hatch.  The auto transmission on it is really quite good too and I don't say those words easily as I vastly prefer driving a MT.


----------



## jimk (May 15, 2014)

hammer said:


> Decided to go with a 2009 Impreza for our 21 YO son.  Time will tell on the head gasket issue (car has 55K miles) but he liked the car and the AWD will help in the winter.  Needs a new driver side visor and I want to figure out how to buff out a number of clear coat scuffs on the hood.



My adult son may get a new Impreza hatchback later this year.  Crosstrek is a possibility too depending on price differential.



deadheadskier said:


> I conceded that the Outback has more Cargo space; definitely a bigger car, but not by much.  Cargo capacity behind the rear seats is 34.1 cubic feet for the CX-5 vs. 35.5 for the 2015 Outback. With the seats down, the Outback size advantage is more apparent - 73.3 vs 65.4 for the CX-5.   As a point of comparison as you are also looking at Forester, that vehicles numbers are 31.5 and 68.5.
> 
> The direct competition for the CX-5 is the Escape, Forester, RAV4, CRV and Nissan Rogue.  I've driven the Escape, CRV and Rogue and the driving dynamics of those cars isn't in the same league as the CX-5.  The reviews of the others also concede that Mazda is by far the best handling car of the category.  I have a good relationship with my local Mazda dealership having bought two new cars from them and they've let me test drive the CX-5 a couple of times.  I was underwhelmed by the initially released 2.0 Liter engine.  The 2.5 is really nice though and doesn't sacrifice much in the way of fuel economy.  For a cross over, the cars handling is pretty amazing.  I could through it around corners with almost as much ease as my Mazda 3 Hatch.  The auto transmission on it is really quite good too and I don't say those words easily as I vastly prefer driving a MT.



I'm sure you would have a winner in the CX-5.  I test drove a CX-5 last summer before I bought my Outback.  It was nice and got good press, but I had never owned a 4wd vehicle before.   Advice of friends and strong rep Subaru's have for handling well in snow tipped my decision.  The CX-5 would be more fun to drive on dry land and with better gas mileage.  I'm used to boring, but roomy minivans for my ski car and like that the Outback has pretty good passenger/cargo space especially if you add a roof rack or box.  The interior of my no frills Outback is nothing special, but I'm ok with that in a ski car.  Wife drives it M-F.  I've had good luck with some used cars in the past and considered a used SUV, which down here in VA can be found by the tons in good condition since we don't get much bad weather in the suburbs, but Subaru resale value is high and I preferred a new stripped Outback at same price as some of the late model used ones I'd seen with ~30k miles and more bells and whistles.


----------



## Geoff (May 15, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> Well I'm an unabashed Mazda fan.  I would think a CX-5 would be a better option than an Outback outside of the fact it has less cargo space.   Similar gas mileage and a better weight to HP ratio.  Maybe you are pickier than I, but the interiors of the GT models I've been in have been pretty nice.



Nope.   Among other things, there is no Mazda dealer anywhere near Killington.   The nearest dealer in my travel pattern is Grappone in Bow, NH at the I-89/I-93 interchange.  The CX-5 is really small inside.   The legroom is totally inadequate for me.   That's what ruled out Subaru for decades until they made the Legacy bigger a few years ago.   The 2015 Outback also has 10 cubic feet more cargo area with the seats folded.   For somebody who changes houses every 6 months with a 220 mile drive between them, that's a pretty big deal.   My GTI has 46 cubic feet.   The CX-5 only has 64.   The 2015 Outback has 74.   My Mountaineer has 81.3.

I've driven the CX-5.  It's way more engaging to drive than an Outback but it has several things that disqualify it.


----------



## wa-loaf (May 15, 2014)

More important than cubic feet is the lay flat space. I think that gets lost a lot in these discussions. You can have a tiny space behind the rear seats but a lot of height and get the same cubic feet as in another vehicle, but it's not nearly as useful.

That's partly why I drive a wagon and not a sport ute.


----------



## Cannonball (May 15, 2014)

wa-loaf said:


> More important than cubic feet is the lay flat space. I think that gets lost a lot in these discussions. You can have a tiny space behind the rear seats but a lot of height and get the same cubic feet as in another vehicle, but it's not nearly as useful.
> 
> That's partly why I drive a wagon and not a sport ute.



Exactly!   I wish they'd bring back the legacy wagon.  Probably the most usable space per dollar (with AWD).


----------



## Edd (May 15, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> Exactly!   I wish they'd bring back the legacy wagon.  Probably the most usable space per dollar (with AWD).



Oh, hell yes. That was my last car and I drove it for over 8 years. When the time came to replace it that model was no longer an option. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## wa-loaf (May 15, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> Exactly!   I wish they'd bring back the legacy wagon.  Probably the most usable space per dollar (with AWD).





Edd said:


> Oh, hell yes. That was my last car and I drove it for over 8 years. When the time came to replace it that model was no longer an option.



What are the odds they bring the Impreza wagon over? That might get me back to Subaru.


----------



## Edd (May 16, 2014)

wa-loaf said:


> What are the odds they bring the Impreza wagon over? That might get me back to Subaru.



That made me do some Googling. I assume you're talking about this. 



Called the Levorg in Japan. Seems to be performance oriented. Good looking car. Just 2 turbocharged engines as options with CVT as the only transmission. 

I'd consider a version of this with a basic engine for sure. I'd never heard of this thing. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## wa-loaf (May 16, 2014)

Edd said:


> View attachment 12642
> Called the Levorg in Japan. Seems to be performance oriented. Good looking car. Just 2 turbocharged engines as options with CVT as the only transmission.



That's the one, though I thought there was an available manual transmission. I don't know how you can call something performance oriented with a CVT ...


----------



## bvibert (May 16, 2014)

wa-loaf said:


> That's the one, though I thought there was an available manual transmission. I don't know how you can call something performance oriented with a CVT ...



Mind boggling


----------



## Cannonball (May 16, 2014)

It seems like Subaru has decided to really diverge their lines.  They have really stepped it up on the performance side with their WRX and even gone so far as dropping AWD for the BRZ.  Meanwhile, for their other lines they've focused on economy (both MPG and MSRP).  I personally like this approach since I'm in the economy camp.  But it wouldn't hurt to have some options that crossover.


----------



## Cornhead (May 16, 2014)

I rented a Mazda CX 5 in Colorado last week, I was quite impressed. The only gripes, wimpy motor, but I did average 25.2 mpg, too narrow between the side bolsters on the seats, but that could be a personal problem of mine, if I weren't a fat ass/back, they'd be better. I loved all the modern amenities, blind spot warning mirrors, smart key, back up camera. 

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Geoff (May 16, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> Exactly!   I wish they'd bring back the legacy wagon.  Probably the most usable space per dollar (with AWD).



I'd rather have the ground clearance of an Outback during mud month.   An Outback would also do a little bit better getting in and out of the ski area parking lot when there's 18" of unplowed slop in it.


----------



## jimk (May 16, 2014)

One of the few options I got on my 2014 Outback was 17" wheels.  16" wheels were standard.  I notice the 2015 has 17" standard and 18" optional size wheels.  Everything else being equal, what do larger wheels do for you?
Two complaints I have with my Outback, 
a. handsfree phone connection is not so user friendly.  My wife figures it out most of the time she wants to do it.  Being a dinosaur- technophobe I don't even try.  
b.  visibility out the rear of car is not so good for backing up.  Guess I should have got the rear view camera, but being a dinosaur will just continue to crane my neck.


----------



## Geoff (May 16, 2014)

jimk said:


> One of the few options I got on my 2014 Outback was 17" wheels.  16" wheels were standard.  I notice the 2015 has 17" standard and 18" optional size wheels.  Everything else being equal, what do larger wheels do for you?



It's 100% cosmetic.  The overall tire diameter is larger next year so there isn't as much wheel gap between the top of the tire and the fender.

18" wheels make for expensive tires and often make for impossible-to-find tires.   If I bought an Outback, I'd run summer tires on the 18" wheels and snows on 17" wheels I found used from somebody doing a wheel upgrade.   I do that now on my VW GTI.   



jimk said:


> Two complaints I have with my Outback,
> a. handsfree phone connection is not so user friendly.  My wife figures it out most of the time she wants to do it.  Being a dinosaur- technophobe I don't even try.
> b.  visibility out the rear of car is not so good for backing up.  Guess I should have got the rear view camera, but being a dinosaur will just continue to crane my neck.



I think the camera is standard next year even on the base trim level.  

I'm always disappointed with cell phone integrations.


----------



## steamboat1 (May 16, 2014)

Geoff said:


> It's 100% cosmetic.  The overall tire diameter is larger next year so there isn't as much wheel gap between the top of the tire and the fender.



Not necessarily. My Imprezza Outback Sport has 17" tires as opposed to 16" tires that come on standard Imprezza's. The 16" tires have the traditional full width sidewalls whereas my 17" tires have the low profile sidewalls. With the difference in the width of the sidewalls there really isn't much difference in the overall size of the tires. Of course I don't know what width sidewalls they plan to use on the 18" tires.


----------



## Cannonball (May 16, 2014)

jimk said:


> a. handsfree phone connection is not so user friendly.



Can't stand it in the Crosstrek.  It's worse than not having it at all.  The other day as I pulled into my driveway suddenly my mother-in-law's voice was coming through my speakers. Apparently my car decided to break in on the phone conversation my wife (in the house) was having with her mom.   That's worthy of a lawsuit for pain and suffering!!!


----------



## Edd (May 16, 2014)

jimk said:


> visibility out the rear of car is not so good for backing up.  Guess I should have got the rear view camera, but being a dinosaur will just continue to crane my neck.



Backing up in my 2010 Forester is still tricky for me after 4 years. I've never had that problem with a vehicle before. I would love a rear view camera. 



Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## skijay (May 19, 2014)

I only wish Subaru would bring the Boxer Diesel engine option choice for us here in the USA.


----------



## gmcunni (Sep 14, 2014)

joined the subi family this summer. picked up '15 Outback Limited, replacing our GMC Acadia.  i was more interested in the Crosstrek but wife didn't want to downsize that much.  looking forward to our first trip up North loaded with ski gear.


----------



## Edd (Sep 14, 2014)

gmcunni said:


> joined the subi family this summer. picked up '15 Outback Limited, replacing our GMC Acadia.  i was more interested in the Crosstrek but wife didn't want to downsize that much.  looking forward to our first trip up North loaded with ski gear.



CVT or manual? Curious what your take on the transmission would be; especially coming from something like the Acadia. Rented one of those in Tahoe maybe 4 years ago. Nice ride.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 14, 2014)

Edd said:


> CVT or manual? Curious what your take on the transmission would be; especially coming from something like the Acadia. Rented one of those in Tahoe maybe 4 years ago. Nice ride.



Subaru doesn't offer a manual transmission in the 2015 Outback.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 14, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> Not necessarily. My Imprezza Outback Sport has 17" tires as opposed to 16" tires that come on standard Imprezza's. The 16" tires have the traditional full width sidewalls whereas my 17" tires have the low profile sidewalls. With the difference in the width of the sidewalls there really isn't much difference in the overall size of the tires. Of course I don't know what width sidewalls they plan to use on the 18" tires.



An Imprezza Outback Sport has 50-series tires.   That's barely considered to be low profile.   Usually, a low profile tire is 40 series or less.   I run 40 series summer tires and 50 series winter tires on my VW GTI.    A 2015 Outback with 18" wheels has 55 series tires.   That is not a low profile tire.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Sep 14, 2014)

Geoff said:


> Subaru doesn't offer a manual transmission in the 2015 Outback.



I'm sure subarus data supports the decline in manuals purchased, but I can foresee a backlash from owners who are on their 2nd or 3rd Subaru when they want to trade in and are told there's no stick shift.

More people seem to prefer striving the stick of a Subaru than other brands.


----------



## steamboat1 (Sep 14, 2014)

Geoff said:


> An Imprezza Outback Sport has 50-series tires.   That's barely considered to be low profile.   Usually, a low profile tire is 40 series or less.   I run 40 series summer tires and 50 series winter tires on my VW GTI.    A 2015 Outback with 18" wheels has 55 series tires.   That is not a low profile tire.


All I know is that the width of the sidewalls on my car is significantly less than standard tires. Call it whatever you like if that's what turns you on..


----------



## gmcunni (Sep 14, 2014)

Edd said:


> CVT or manual? Curious what your take on the transmission would be; especially coming from something like the Acadia. Rented one of those in Tahoe maybe 4 years ago. Nice ride.



as mentioned, no manual option in US.   compared to acadia... hard to tell. only 600 miles on it so far and not driving hard.   i never loved the acadia tranny.. didn't downshift well and when it did it would often go down 2 gears, end up near the redline without giving me the acceleration needed/

CVT does shift smoothly, i've played a little with the paddle shifters but don't have a good feel for them yet.


----------



## gmcunni (Sep 14, 2014)

Geoff said:


> A 2015 Outback with 18" wheels has 55 series tires.   That is not a low profile tire.




225/60R18 actually.


----------



## Edd (Sep 14, 2014)

Apropos of nothing, I just replaced the tires for the first time on my '10 Forester. The originals made it over 67K. That was way better than anything on my Legacy before. Pretty pleased. 

The originals were Yokohama Geolander G95s.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 16, 2014)

It looks like they vastly improved the interior in the 2015 Outback.


----------



## o3jeff (Sep 16, 2014)

My Friends just ordered a 2015 4cy Outback, should be here in 5-10 weeks. Interested in checking it out as I have never been a big Subaru fan.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 16, 2014)

good luck Gary , we love our Outback LTD. Its a 2012 has 18,000 on it . it is our travel and ski car. wehave other wheels for local use . 

theSubies were NOT. On our radar screen after driving Saabs for 25 yrs , but after seing the interior , driving it we were sold . Still love would but another in a heartbeat !


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 17, 2014)

Warp Daddy said:


> *but after seeing the interior* , driving it we were sold



Really?! I thought the interior of the 10' - 14' model year was a real step down from the previous version. It's all hard plastic and poorly organized. The 2015 seems to have them back on track design wise. Almost bought a 13', but the interior was one of a few things that made me go with a VW. VWs have their issues, but they sure now how to do interiors well!


----------



## AdironRider (Sep 17, 2014)

Just wait for a couple years of use and that interior will be a rattle trap, not durable piece of ....

Any brand new car interior will look decent, it is a new car after all.


----------



## darent (Sep 17, 2014)

skiNEwhere said:


> I'm sure subarus data supports the decline in manuals purchased, but I can foresee a backlash from owners who are on their 2nd or 3rd Subaru when they want to trade in and are told there's no stick shift.
> 
> More people seem to prefer striving the stick of a Subaru than other brands.


I am one of those, changing brands because of lack of manuel tranny, so hard to find in a subie


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 17, 2014)

darent said:


> I am one of those, changing brands because of lack of manuel tranny, so hard to find in a subie



Have something in mind? Its hard to get anything that isn't either small entry level or a sports car.


----------



## darent (Sep 17, 2014)

wa-loaf said:


> Have something in mind? Its hard to get anything that isn't either small entry level or a sports car.


1967 MGB, trunk mounted ski rack. MY 2000 subie going to daughter and moving to Michigan, her husband has a brother that rebuilds subies,   janski's old car, 2009 escape with 14895 miles on it, a slush box, is now the new ski car. I will miss the subie!!


----------



## Cannonball (Sep 17, 2014)

darent said:


> I am one of those, changing brands because of lack of manuel tranny, so hard to find in a subie



Are they hard to find? My mom just bought a 2014 Impreza.  She wanted manual tranny and got it. I don't think she went through any hassle to get it.  I test drove a few Subie models before buying my XV last year, a couple of those were manual (just on the lot).  Might have just been lucky in those cases, manual isn't of interest to me so I wasn't paying attention to whether they were rare or not.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 17, 2014)

My Mazda dealer tells me only about 20% of the Mazda 3s he sells come with a Manual and that model car has about as high of a manual take rate as there is for a non-sports car on the market.   We own two 3s, both MTs.   

I'd like to get an AWD SUV at some point with a MT, but I think the only option in the US market right now is a 4 door Wrangler.


----------



## Edd (Sep 17, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> I'd like to get an AWD SUV at some point with a MT, but I think the only option in the US market right now is a 4 door Wrangler.



The 2015 Forester appears to come with a 6-speed manual. 

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/subaru/2015-subaru-forester-ar162580.html


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 17, 2014)

*that's not a Subaru

sorry, details


----------



## Edd (Sep 18, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> *that's not a Subaru
> 
> sorry, details



Hmmm....huh?  Although, I suddenly remember you're not a Subaru fan.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 18, 2014)

Not particularly.  I do respect their capability.  I'm just a fairly crodgity consumer, perhaps unreasonably so.  The Legacy Wagon I drove for two years was the biggest POS I ever had as a daily driver.  I found the boys at Exeter Subaru to be rip off artists as well regarding maintenance.  And this was a company car, so I wasn't even paying the repair bills.

I imagine I'll be stuck getting an auto SUV down the line, and then have the wife's ride as my manual toy to use every once in a while.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 18, 2014)

darent said:


> I am one of those, changing brands because of lack of manuel tranny, so hard to find in a subie



One requirement I have is to be able to drive the 2 miles from my condo to the parking lot wearing ski boots.  I've been booting up in the condo since 1998.   

Who is this Manuel Tranny guy?   A Portuguese cross dresser?   

Once I collapse the Mountaineer and GTI down to one car that can be both daily driver and deal with hauling stuff, my Killington driveway, and unplowed ski area parking lots, I may get a summer toy that is more engaging to drive.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 18, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> Are they hard to find? My mom just bought a 2014 Impreza.  She wanted manual tranny and got it. I don't think she went through any hassle to get it.  I test drove a few Subie models before buying my XV last year, a couple of those were manual (just on the lot).  Might have just been lucky in those cases, manual isn't of interest to me so I wasn't paying attention to whether they were rare or not.



If you want the Outback in a manual it's hard to find in the 14' and they eliminated it altogether in the 15's.

Impreza's and Forrester's still have them. My Fiance has the XV in manual and it's pretty nice, but lacks in cargo space.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 18, 2014)

wa-loaf said:


> Really?! I thought the interior of the 10' - 14' model year was a real step down from the previous version. It's all hard plastic and poorly organized. The 2015 seems to have them back on track design wise. Almost bought a 13', but the interior was one of a few things that made me go with a VW. VWs have their issues, but they sure now how to do interiors well!


 

Yep we loved the leather heated seats !  BTW Hard plastic describes just about every car we have ever owned , mostly saabs , Toyotas and a few assorted Vws and all the domestics .all hard their fair share of hard plastic .

And as far as layouts , opinions are like , WELL ya know the drill :razz::razz:


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 18, 2014)

Lots of hard plastic doesn't bother me.  I've been riding around in a new Impala rental car this week.  Weirdest interior I've ever seen.  It's like they unfolded a leather suitcase and stapled it to the dash.


----------



## AdironRider (Sep 18, 2014)

Geoff said:


> One requirement I have is to be able to drive the 2 miles from my condo to the parking lot wearing ski boots.  I've been booting up in the condo since 1998.
> 
> Who is this Manuel Tranny guy?   A Portuguese cross dresser?
> 
> Once I collapse the Mountaineer and GTI down to one car that can be both daily driver and deal with hauling stuff, my Killington driveway, and unplowed ski area parking lots, I may get a summer toy that is more engaging to drive.



Coilovers on the GTI and you are basically there.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 19, 2014)

AdironRider said:


> Coilovers on the GTI and you are basically there.



Nope.   You haven't seen my Killington driveway during mud month.  I have around 10 days every year where the GTI can't move from either deep snow or mud and deep ruts.   The deep snow is kind of a big deal since it's on the epic powder days.   A Golf R on airbags with a skid plate instead of the fiberglass water shield under the oil pan might do it but they didn't import the Golf R with DSG so I can't drive it with ski boots.   I've destroyed the fiberglass water shield under the oil pan several times over the last 13 years I've driven GTIs.  I now leave it parked on those days.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 19, 2014)

Geoff said:


> I've destroyed the fiberglass water shield under the oil pan several times over the last 13 years I've driven GTIs.  I now leave it parked on those days.



http://www.dieselgeek.com/Volkswagen_and_Audi_skid_plate_kits_s/1829.htm


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 19, 2014)

Geoff said:


> they didn't import the Golf R with DSG so I can't drive it with ski boots.



Years ago, I used to make the 8 mile drive to Stowe from my house driving a MT Honda Accord with ski boots on.  Took some getting used to, but it can be done.


----------



## Cornhead (Sep 19, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> Years ago, I used to make the 8 mile drive to Stowe from my house driving a MT Honda Accord with ski boots on.  Took some getting used to, but it can be done.



Ha, driven my auto SHO with ski boots on before, don't know if I'd try my MT Rex tho, I have all I can do to engage the neutral safety switch with my boots on to warm it up.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## darent (Sep 23, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> Lots of hard plastic doesn't bother me.  I've been riding around in a new Impala rental car this week.  Weirdest interior I've ever seen.  It's like they unfolded a leather suitcase and stapled it to the dash.


:grin: well put about the Impala!!


----------



## gmcunni (Nov 17, 2014)

good day with the new subi yesterday.

picked up a used THule box a month ago. found it mounted to far back to allow the rear hatch to open enough to be useful.  got lucky and drilled a new hole  and was able to move the box forward about 2 inches.   then used the new "lift gate memory" function to limit how high the rear gate opens.  Can't get it fully open but plenty of room to get gear in and out now.

BONUS - am able to pull in the garage with the box on!! have about 2 inches of clearance 

saturday was a good day too with the subi, drove it to ski shop to get some new gear for the family and drop off my skis for a tune, scored gas for $2.89 which is crazy cheap in CT.


----------



## o3jeff (Nov 20, 2014)

gmcunni said:


> good day with the new subi yesterday.
> 
> picked up a used THule box a month ago. found it mounted to far back to allow the rear hatch to open enough to be useful.  got lucky and drilled a new hole  and was able to move the box forward about 2 inches.   then used the new "lift gate memory" function to limit how high the rear gate opens.  Can't get it fully open but plenty of room to get gear in and out now.
> 
> ...



What are you getting for gas mileage? Do you have the 4 or 6 cyl?


----------



## gmcunni (Nov 20, 2014)

o3jeff said:


> What are you getting for gas mileage? Do you have the 4 or 6 cyl?


2.5L 4 cyl

30+ on highway
25ish combined.

with the thule on past week was more like 22


----------



## WoodCore (Nov 20, 2014)

o3jeff said:


> What are you getting for gas mileage? Do you have the 4 or 6 cyl?



With the 6 cylinder I'm averaging 26mpg on the highway and up to 21 in town depending on the weight of my foot!


----------



## Geoff (Nov 21, 2014)

WoodCore said:


> With the 6 cylinder I'm averaging 26mpg on the highway and up to 21 in town depending on the weight of my foot!



I'm still struggling between HID plus H6 versus the fuel economy with much less performance of the 4 cylinder engine.   The H6 and HID make the car much less of an appliance.

I drive speed limit + 9 on the highway and use cruise control whenever possible.   Will that get me 26 highway with the H6?   What's the MPG falloff driving in subzero weather?


----------



## Tin (Nov 22, 2014)

I'm relieved to see these "oil consumption" lawsuits popping up. My GF has an 09 Outback Wagon and the last few times it was down anywhere from 1.5-2 quarts when I changed the oil, but zero signs of leaking. Thinking of going a little heavier weight to slow it down.


----------



## Edd (Nov 22, 2014)

Tin said:


> I'm relieved to see these "oil consumption" lawsuits popping up. My GF has an 09 Outback Wagon and the last few times it was down anywhere from 1.5-2 quarts when I changed the oil, but zero signs of leaking. Thinking of going a little heavier weight to slow it down.



That's disturbing. I didn't know about this but Googled it a bit. What's the engine and tranny setup on your girlfriend's car?


----------



## mlctvt (Nov 22, 2014)

Tin said:


> I'm relieved to see these "oil consumption" lawsuits popping up. My GF has an 09 Outback Wagon and the last few times it was down anywhere from 1.5-2 quarts when I changed the oil, but zero signs of leaking. Thinking of going a little heavier weight to slow it down.



What oil are you using? The oil type makes all the difference. We have 2 turbo Subarus. Both would go through Mobile M1 fast while none synthetic would be fine with no oil needed to be added until over 3000 miles on the oil change. The Subaru forum consensus was to use Rotella T6 5W-40 which is what we run now. No more oil usage between changes. 
Be careful to always check your levels in modern cars at least weekly, low oil is the number one reason for engine failures today. Especially with the long oil change intervals people run today.


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 22, 2014)

mlctvt said:


> Be careful to always check your levels in modern cars at least weekly



for real?

I haven't routinely checked the oil in a car I've owned in probably 15 years and those were older cars with known consistent engine issues.


----------



## Cannonball (Nov 22, 2014)

Tin said:


> I'm relieved to see these "oil consumption" lawsuits popping up. My GF has an 09 Outback Wagon and the last few times it was down anywhere from 1.5-2 quarts when I changed the oil, but zero signs of leaking. Thinking of going a little heavier weight to slow it down.



It's pretty out of control right now.  My '13 Crosstrek has had oil issues.  My mother's '14 Impreza has had it bad.  She's been in an out of the shop consistently since she bought it.  It's situation is so universal that I've had 2 weird, random conversations about it:
1) called the service dept at the dealer (about a different major issue) they literally answered the phone with "We are aware of the oil issue"
2) a random guy in a random convenience store parking lot stopped me and said: "I work for Subaru, how do you like your car?  Are you having issues with the oil?" 

But my real problem is with my starter and Subaru's major mishandling of the problem (a story for another time).  I like my Crosstrek in almost every way but I am really unhappy and concerned with Subaru right now.  My wife is in the market for a new car.  We had planned on a Forester, but I don't think so anymore.  We'll probably stick with Honda for her.


----------



## Tin (Nov 23, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> for real?
> 
> I haven't routinely checked the oil in a car I've owned in probably 15 years and those were older cars with known consistent engine issues.



I do it just out of anxiety these days. My Volvo goes through oil as well and no signs of leaks anywhere, engine area is spotless.




Edd said:


> That's disturbing. I didn't know about this but Googled it a bit. What's the engine and tranny setup on your girlfriend's car?



It's an 09 Outback 2.5i, 5-speed. Apparently it is the piston rings dating are the cause and after 12 years people are finally pissed. When her oil pressure sending unit was spewing everywhere and she was down to about 2 quarts the oil light never even came on.  

She already had the good old paper head gasket issue at 48k, luckily it was covered under warranty. In the past year I've had to do a coil, an axle (weirdest, scariest set up I've seen too, just pop in, no pin), 2 oil pressure sending units because they were pissing everywhere, belts, plugs (one twice), wires, and I'm sure more. It got to the point where we had to park it in doors because after a rain it would hardly run and misfire. They are very, very easy vehicles to work on but it seems like they need a lot of it. 

I was putting Penzoil High Mileage 5W-30 in it, I will try the Rotella next time.


----------



## Tin (Nov 23, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> It's pretty out of control right now.  My '13 Crosstrek has had oil issues.  My mother's '14 Impreza has had it bad.  She's been in an out of the shop consistently since she bought it.  It's situation is so universal that I've had 2 weird, random conversations about it:
> 1) called the service dept at the dealer (about a different major issue) they literally answered the phone with "We are aware of the oil issue"
> 2) a random guy in a random convenience store parking lot stopped me and said: "I work for Subaru, how do you like your car?  Are you having issues with the oil?"
> 
> But my real problem is with my starter and Subaru's major mishandling of the problem (a story for another time).  I like my Crosstrek in almost every way but I am really unhappy and concerned with Subaru right now.  My wife is in the market for a new car.  We had planned on a Forester, but I don't think so anymore.  We'll probably stick with Honda for her.




They are better off just paying the lawsuits, recalling vehicles to put in new piston rings? Might as well just throw a new engine in because of the amount of labor needed.


----------



## Geoff (Nov 23, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> for real?
> 
> I haven't routinely checked the oil in a car I've owned in probably 15 years and those were older cars with known consistent engine issues.



The last time I had to check my oil was when I owned a 1987 S-10 Blazer with 160,000 miles on it.   The valves and rings were totally shot so I kept a case of oil in the back and added a quart with every fill-up.   With that kind of oil consumption, I didn't change the oil for the last 15,000 miles I owned it.   I screwed up and left the dip stick ajar at 162,000 miles.   All the oil blew up the dip stick into the engine compartment and the "call tow truck" light lit on the dash.   I added 4 quarts of oil, got it home, and bought a new car the next day.

I check the oil in my boats and lawn mower.


----------



## wa-loaf (Nov 24, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> for real?
> 
> I haven't routinely checked the oil in a car I've owned in probably 15 years and those were older cars with known consistent engine issues.



I'm on a 10k cycle with my car. I just take a look around 8k to make sure things are cool



Tin said:


> It's an 09 Outback 2.5i, 5-speed. Apparently it is the piston rings dating are the cause and after 12 years people are finally pissed. When her oil pressure sending unit was spewing everywhere and she was down to about 2 quarts the oil light never even came on.
> 
> She already had the good old paper head gasket issue at 48k, luckily it was covered under warranty. In the past year I've had to do a coil, an axle (weirdest, scariest set up I've seen too, just pop in, no pin), 2 oil pressure sending units because they were pissing everywhere, belts, plugs (one twice), wires, and I'm sure more. It got to the point where we had to park it in doors because after a rain it would hardly run and misfire. They are very, very easy vehicles to work on but it seems like they need a lot of it.



I had an 05 2.5 5 speed. Really had no issues with it until around 100k and then it seemed every time I was in I was spending $2k on something. Traded it in at 120k. Figured If I was going to be spending that much cash all the time I'd rather have a payment on a new car.


----------



## hammer (Nov 24, 2014)

I had to do the dreaded head gasket change on my old Outback a number of years ago, but my son's 2009 Impreza is behaving so far, around 60K miles and no measurable oil consumption.  I thought I might have some minor oil consumption issues on my Volvo S40 last year but the level didn't really drop in the last 7.5K cycle.  Four cars in the house and the most significant issue recently was bad cam phasers on the Jeep which was covered under the powertrain warranty.  All of the vehicles are over 50K miles, hoping they can each make it to 100K before the repair bills start coming in...


----------



## Tin (Nov 24, 2014)

Ha! She is at 116k now, time to sell. 

The Subaru dealerships around here are horrible. When we first started dating a few years ago she needed new brakes and got a quote from the dealership. For just changing pads all around they wanted almost $700, have never gone back to the stealership since.


----------



## hammer (Nov 24, 2014)

Tin said:


> Ha! She is at 116k now, time to sell.
> 
> The Subaru dealerships around here are horrible. When we first started dating a few years ago she needed new brakes and got a quote from the dealership. For just changing pads all around they wanted almost $700, have never gone back to the stealership since.



Just had my front brakes done on my Volvo, thought that just under $500 was a pretty good deal until I saw online prices for the pads and rotors.  Makes me wish I had the time, tools, and talent to take on stuff like that myself.  I still take the Volvo to the stealership for routine maintenance visits so I can get any needed SW updates.

We've only had to take the Impreza to the dealer for recall service and an oil change so I can't speak for their prices.


----------



## wa-loaf (Nov 24, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> for real?
> 
> I haven't routinely checked the oil in a car I've owned in probably 15 years and those were older cars with known consistent engine issues.





Tin said:


> Ha! She is at 116k now, time to sell.
> 
> The Subaru dealerships around here are horrible. When we first started dating a few years ago she needed new brakes and got a quote from the dealership. For just changing pads all around they wanted almost $700, have never gone back to the stealership since.



I bought mine at Anchor Subaru, they were pretty good. I've been largely satisfied with the subi dealers I been to since (North End in Lunenberg, and Patrick in Shrewsbury). I actually went to a few independent shops and found they wanted to charge as much or more than the dealer for a lot of the work.


----------



## steamboat1 (Nov 24, 2014)

I have an 11 Imprezza Outback Sport. Change the oil every 8k (synthetic). Usually I'm down about a 1/2 qt. after 5k. I think that's normal for any car. Never had any work done by dealer so I don't know how they are. I did have the brakes pads changed after 48k on all four. I went to the dealer for the pads because I was impressed getting 48K out the pads so I wanted the same pads. I do a lot of stop & go driving in NYC. Don't remember exactly what they cost but I don't remember them being expensive. Had my regular mechanic change the pads. Once again I don't remember it being expensive. Certainly didn't cost anywhere near the $500-$700 you guys are talking about, I'd remember that. I guess I'll have to go to the dealer soon because I recently had a recall on the brake lines, they say they can rot out. I have about 75K on the car & that's all I've had to do to the car (oil change & brake pads).


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 24, 2014)

Question for those who cycle out their oil changes to higher mileage - 8-10K range.  

Do you wait equally as long to rotate tires or make a separate appointment?  Factory recommended in my car is 7500K or 3750K for "severe" driving conditions.  I've settled on 6K as a decent change interval and rotate my tires then.


----------



## steamboat1 (Nov 24, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> Question for those who cycle out their oil changes to higher mileage - 8-10K range.
> 
> Do you wait equally as long to rotate tires or make a separate appointment?  Factory recommended in my car is 7500K or 3750K for "severe" driving conditions.  I've settled on 6K as a decent change interval and rotate my tires then.


Really can't answer that question. I have two sets of tires (all season & winter). The only time I rotate them is when I change the tires in fall & spring. Both have been remounted twice so far & I'm pretty sure I'll get another season out of the all seasons & the winter tires still look brand new. I didn't put a lot of mileage on the winter tires the first season I had them because if you remember I got injured that year so I didn't do much driving. The remounts doesn't cost me anything because my tire guy told me as long as I keep buying tires from him he'll remount them free of charge. This is the second set of all seasons on the car & I didn't buy winter tires until two seasons ago. Even with AWD I find the winter tires make a huge difference driving in snow.


----------



## wa-loaf (Nov 24, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> Question for those who cycle out their oil changes to higher mileage - 8-10K range.
> 
> Do you wait equally as long to rotate tires or make a separate appointment?  Factory recommended in my car is 7500K or 3750K for "severe" driving conditions.  I've settled on 6K as a decent change interval and rotate my tires then.



I'm putting 20k on my car every year so that's two 10k oil changes annually that have included tire rotations. The oil changes are kind of offset from when I swap the snow tires so I'd say they are getting rotated with around 6-8k and then a shorter interval before the wheels get swapped for the seasons.


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 24, 2014)

I guess for me rotating tires during an oil change is a simple thing to do and a way for me to not forget it.  I typically average about 30K miles a year on a car.  Five months of winter see 2 oil changes/rotations, 7 months of summer 3 oil changes/rotations.   Snows go on from November 1st through April 1st.  

It's worked out so far for tire life.  At 68K miles I just dumped the original summer tires the car came with and also bought new snows for this winter.  I may have been able to get 5K more miles out of each set if I stretched it.   That's pretty decent tire life for a Mazda3, which are known to chew through tires.   If I can get another 70K out of the new snows and next set of summer tires before looking for a new car, I'll be happy.  %~$1600 tire expense over the life of the vehicle.


----------



## Edd (Nov 24, 2014)

My 2010 Forester is at 70K for mileage. It's my second Subie and my experience with the brand has been one of complete reliability. I guess I'll start checking the oil. Haven't done that in years, myself. 

I look at cars as completely an appliance. Reliability is far and away my top priority. If the Forester went south I'd be glad to buy a Honda or Toyota. One thing, though. This Forester has an awesome, huge sunroof. I sure would miss that.


----------



## Cannonball (Feb 16, 2015)

My wife recently bought a '15 Forester.  We've had it since November so we've been driving it through all of this winter's snowy weather and it's been great.  But Saturday and Sunday it was virtually undrivable on the road conditions we had.  On Saturday we were on 93N and starting drifting all over the road.  It felt like we had literally zero traction. We carefully slowed down and got off at the first exit. I scraped all of the snow out of the treads thinking we may have just iced up.  Got back on the highway and same thing!  Felt like we could just start spinning at any moment even going 30MPH.  Other people were passing at 70.  We ended up crawling through back roads just to make it to Lincoln.  Then Sunday we couldn't even get out of town to get to Cannon.  We were all over the road.

Are these Geolanders literally the worst tire ever?


----------



## o3jeff (Feb 16, 2015)

Now I'm going to have to check which tires I have when I get home, have Yoko's on my 2014 Crosstrek that aren't too bad in the snow.


----------



## Edd (Feb 16, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> Are these Geolanders literally the worst tire ever?



My original Geolanders lasted like 70k miles. Can't say they were amazing in the snow but I never got stuck or in an accident. 

I remember I replaced them with something different because the OEMs are expensive as shit.


----------



## Cannonball (Feb 16, 2015)

Been reading some reviews on the Geolanders since I posted this.  Many, many others with the same experience.  Literally the worst traction I've felt since my 2-wheel drive Chevy s10.  Really scary stuff.


----------



## JDMRoma (Feb 16, 2015)

My wife Mitsubishi Montero sport had them from the dealership! They sucked and replaced them at 30k with Michelin XCH 4s. Have about 70 k on them and their still passing inspection. Great tires but certainly not cheep. 



Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Geoff (Feb 16, 2015)

Geoff said:


> The last time I had to check my oil was when I owned a 1987 S-10 Blazer with 160,000 miles on it.   The valves and rings were totally shot so I kept a case of oil in the back and added a quart with every fill-up.   With that kind of oil consumption, I didn't change the oil for the last 15,000 miles I owned it.   I screwed up and left the dip stick ajar at 162,000 miles.   All the oil blew up the dip stick into the engine compartment and the "call tow truck" light lit on the dash.   I added 4 quarts of oil, got it home, and bought a new car the next day.
> 
> I check the oil in my boats and lawn mower.



Famous last words.  I ran my GTI out of oil last week.  The "stop engine immediately" went on while cornering and the oil sloshed away from the oil pump fill in the bottom of the oil pan.  The car is running fine but I now distrust it.   I need to do some test driving but I'm pretty sure I have an Outback 3.6R in my future.


----------



## Glenn (Feb 17, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> My wife recently bought a '15 Forester.  We've had it since November so we've been driving it through all of this winter's snowy weather and it's been great.  But Saturday and Sunday it was virtually undrivable on the road conditions we had.  On Saturday we were on 93N and starting drifting all over the road.  It felt like we had literally zero traction. We carefully slowed down and got off at the first exit. I scraped all of the snow out of the treads thinking we may have just iced up.  Got back on the highway and same thing!  Felt like we could just start spinning at any moment even going 30MPH.  Other people were passing at 70.  We ended up crawling through back roads just to make it to Lincoln.  Then Sunday we couldn't even get out of town to get to Cannon.  We were all over the road.
> 
> Are these Geolanders literally the worst tire ever?



If they're OK in the warmer months, get a set of snows. That'll allow you to ride out the Geolanders for a bit longer and worry about replacement down the road. 

AWD and snows= Win. We put a set of snows on my wife's AWD car and it's great in the snow. Just limited by ground clearance; it's a lower car than a Subie.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 17, 2015)

OEM tires on Mazdas suck in the snow too.  After using snow tires the past 8 years or so, I don't think I could go back to All Seasons.


----------



## Puck it (Feb 17, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> Been reading some reviews on the Geolanders since I posted this. Many, many others with the same experience. Literally the worst traction I've felt since my 2-wheel drive Chevy s10. Really scary stuff.



My son had them on the Liberty bit they were the AT ones and they were good in the snow.


----------



## xwhaler (Feb 17, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> Been reading some reviews on the Geolanders since I posted this.  Many, many others with the same experience.  Literally the worst traction I've felt since my 2-wheel drive Chevy s10.  Really scary stuff.


You probably already saw this but those who reviewed them on TireRack are also not fans


----------



## xwhaler (Feb 17, 2015)




----------



## Puck it (Feb 17, 2015)

BTW, the OEM Goodyear Eagle ST's on the Liberty sucked in the rain even.


----------



## Geoff (Feb 17, 2015)

Puck it said:


> BTW, the OEM Goodyear Eagle ST's on the Liberty sucked in the rain even.



Every tire sucks at something.  Consumer Reports bashes Nokians and Blizzaks for hydroplaning.   

If I end up getting an Outback, I guess I'll get 17" winter wheels and put Nokian Hakka SUVs on them.  From what I've read, Subaru requires you reprogram the car when you swap TPMS.  That's really annoying compared to my VW where I can buy a set of 4 TPMS on Amazon for $100-ish and the car figures it out when you swap between summer & winter tires.


----------



## Edd (Feb 17, 2015)

I bought new tires for the Forester recently and there was no mention of reprogramming. I didn't even think about it but I bought them at Town Faire Tire. I just assumed it was taken care of.


----------



## Cannonball (Feb 17, 2015)

Glenn said:


> If they're OK in the warmer months, get a set of snows. That'll allow you to ride out the Geolanders for a bit longer and worry about replacement down the road.



She's getting snows put on tomorrow.  I agree with what you say, but the Geolanders get some reviews that make them sound horrible even in the rain.  So I'm not sure if they are ever going back on.  Want a set cheap?



xwhaler said:


> You probably already saw this but those who reviewed them on TireRack are also not fans



Yeah I saw that.  Bad stuff.

Oh, I should also note as part of this:  I checked the tire pressure today and they were nearly 10psi over inflated.  As I mentioned this car is only 3 months old with only 3,500. So basically it's new off the lot.  I never considered checking the pressure until we had this problem.  Could be a contributing factor.


----------



## Edd (Feb 18, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> Oh, I should also note as part of this:  I checked the tire pressure today and they were nearly 10psi over inflated.  As I mentioned this car is only 3 months old with only 3,500. So basically it's new off the lot.  I never considered checking the pressure until we had this problem.  Could be a contributing factor.



Yup, that could do it.


----------



## wa-loaf (Feb 18, 2015)

Geoff said:


> That's really annoying compared to my VW where I can buy a set of 4 TPMS on Amazon for $100-ish and the car figures it out when you swap between summer & winter tires.



Newer VWs, or at least mine, use the ABS sensors to just monitor wheel diameter so no tpms sensors needed at all and you just hit the reset button when you swap wheels.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 18, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> She's getting snows put on tomorrow.  I agree with what you say, but the Geolanders get some reviews that make them sound horrible even in the rain.  So I'm not sure if they are ever going back on.  Want a set cheap?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I suspect over inflation isn't hurting your snow performance, low pressure would be worse. 

Did you check the tire pressures after the car had been driven, should register a higher psi that way?


----------



## Puck it (Feb 18, 2015)

wa-loaf said:


> Newer VWs, or at least mine, use the ABS sensors to just monitor wheel diameter so no tpms sensors needed at all and you just hit the reset button when you swap wheels.


  Love that.


----------



## Geoff (Feb 18, 2015)

wa-loaf said:


> Newer VWs, or at least mine, use the ABS sensors to just monitor wheel diameter so no tpms sensors needed at all and you just hit the reset button when you swap wheels.



I have a 2007 MK V GTI with the pressure/temperature senders in the valve stem.   VW went to the ABS solution with the MK VI.

The Subaru solution where you have to reprogram the car when you swap between winter and summer wheels blows.


----------



## Edd (Feb 18, 2015)

AdironRider said:


> I suspect over inflation isn't hurting your snow performance, low pressure would be worse.
> 
> Did you check the tire pressures after the car had been driven, should register a higher psi that way?



I'd think low inflation = softer tires, which would be better for snow. Overinflation would tighten up the tread and decrease grip on snow.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 19, 2015)

Edd said:


> I'd think low inflation = softer tires, which would be better for snow. Overinflation would tighten up the tread and decrease grip on snow.




Snow is unique opposed to other forms of terrain/weather that would require 4x4. You want minimal surface area so the tires punch through down to pavement. Otherwise running a low tire pressure increases the surface area of the contact patch, and will result in less traction as a result. 

All other 4x4 areas low tire pressure is your friend.


----------



## Puck it (Feb 19, 2015)

AdironRider said:


> Snow is unique opposed to other forms of terrain/weather that would require 4x4. You want minimal surface area so the tires punch through down to pavement. Otherwise running a low tire pressure increases the surface area of the contact patch, and will result in less traction as a result.
> 
> All other 4x4 areas low tire pressure is your friend.


. Yup.  14psi for sand and all seasons are best for sand.


----------



## Geoff (Feb 20, 2015)

AdironRider said:


> Snow is unique opposed to other forms of terrain/weather that would require 4x4. You want minimal surface area so the tires punch through down to pavement. Otherwise running a low tire pressure increases the surface area of the contact patch, and will result in less traction as a result.
> 
> All other 4x4 areas low tire pressure is your friend.



For winter driving, I don't think there is an ideal tire width because there are so many different kinds of road conditions.

In unplowed slush, a wide tire will want to hydroplane and a narrow tire is an advantage.

The worst traction condition is black ice where the water layer on top of the ice is what makes it slippery.  On that condition, you need something to channel the water away.   That's why friction tires have all those siping cuts.   Width is inconsequential compared to tire design.

I don't encounter much deep, unplowed snow.  I think most of us mostly drive on plowed, packed, snow-covered roads where you can't possibly "punch through to pavement" unless you're running on steel rims.  In that condition, I think more surface area touching the road and an aggressive tread pattern work better than a really skinny, over-inflated tire.

I optimize for black ice since that's the surface where I'm most at risk to crash my car.   I just run the same width as my summer tires but I don't have super-wide summer tires.  I guess hydroplaning on slush is the 2nd worse condition I see so I might consider going narrower if I had really wide stock tires.


----------



## Cannonball (Feb 23, 2015)

Got the snows on last Thursday.  All the difference in the world!  

I don't think the Geolanders are going back on ever.  Kinda sux to throw away a brand new tire.  They provided probably the worst driving experience I've ever had in 30 years on the road. As I read more and more reports about people having the exact same experience I'm getting pretty pissed at Subaru for stocking them! The New England Subaru consumer has some pretty obvious reasons for choosing their vehicle. Putting tires on that completely negate the AWD is pretty irresponsible.


----------



## Geoff (Feb 23, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> Got the snows on last Thursday.  All the difference in the world!
> 
> I don't think the Geolanders are going back on ever.  Kinda sux to throw away a brand new tire.  They provided probably the worst driving experience I've ever had in 30 years on the road. As I read more and more reports about people having the exact same experience I'm getting pretty pissed at Subaru for stocking them! The New England Subaru consumer has some pretty obvious reasons for choosing their vehicle. Putting tires on that completely negate the AWD is pretty irresponsible.



I borrowed Dork's 6-cylinder 4th generation Outback on Saturday.  There are none on dealer lots to test drive and I thought the 4-cylinder was really underpowered.

I'm wondering how the Nokian all season would perform as a year-round tire.    It's heavily biased towards winter performance.  Assuming I stay on plan and buy a Subaru sometime soon, I think it would be a good experiment.   It's certainly easier than messing with winter wheels and reprogramming the TPMS system twice per year.
http://www.nokiantires.com/winter-tires/nokian-wrg3-suv/


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 24, 2015)

Is it really that annoying though? 

I would find myself being much more annoyed with the resulting compromise (which all, all-season tires are) than having to jack with a TPMS light twice a year. 

Ultimately I'd just pull the bulb for TPMS and call it fixed. Thanks Uncle Sam but I can check my own tire pressures myself.


----------



## Cannonball (Feb 24, 2015)

AdironRider said:


> Is it really that annoying though?
> 
> I would find myself being much more annoyed with the resulting compromise (which all, all-season tires are) than having to jack with a TPMS light twice a year.
> 
> Ultimately I'd just pull the bulb for TPMS and call it fixed. Thanks Uncle Sam but I can check my own tire pressures myself.



Exactly.  Went sans-TPMS on the snows we just put on.  The light hasn't bothered me for a second.  But anyone know the vehicle inspection rule on this?  I assume it won't pass inspection with the light on.  Just happens that the car is on a December inspection cycle.  So I probably either need to pull the bulb or wait until mid-Dec (after inspection) to put the snows on.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 24, 2015)

Pretty sure a TPMS light will not pass inspection, at least in NH. Which is a whole nother can of worms. 

They don't inspect in Wyoming, and magically there isn't a massive uptick in vehicle deaths. Who would have predicted that


----------



## hammer (Feb 24, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> Exactly.  Went sans-TPMS on the snows we just put on.  The light hasn't bothered me for a second.  But anyone know the vehicle inspection rule on this?  I assume it won't pass inspection with the light on.  Just happens that the car is on a December inspection cycle.  So I probably either need to pull the bulb or wait until mid-Dec (after inspection) to put the snows on.


Think you should be OK...
http://www.tirerack.com/wheels/tech/techpage.jsp?techid=214


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 24, 2015)

hammer said:


> Think you should be OK...
> http://www.tirerack.com/wheels/tech/techpage.jsp?techid=214



Yeah, but do you really think you are going to win the argument with Jimbo the inspection guy?


----------



## JDMRoma (Feb 24, 2015)

Do not need the TPSM s for New Hampshire inspections. Not yet anyway.   
I've bee a doing it the past 3 years without issue....they usually tell you the lights on and I just say yah I know .... Snow tires without sensors. And they are fine. You can look it up, I checked before buying from Tirerack.   Not required as inspection item in NH. 

Think the whole TPSM thing is BS anyway !!!


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## mlctvt (Feb 24, 2015)

J
Think the whole TPSM thing is BS anyway !!![/QUOTE said:
			
		

> Yup you can thank Ford and the Explorer problem and the fact that Americans don't like car maintenance. When's the last time anyone checked their tire pressures? I try to once a month but it's probably been 2+ months since I last checked.
> 
> More government mandated crap is on the way.
> In 2016 cars will be required to have backup camera. Yes, even a 2 seat convertible will be required to have a backup camera. WTF? are American's all so fat and lazy that we can't turn our heads around before backing up?


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 24, 2015)

looks like it's 2018 for the cameras

http://www.autonews.com/article/201...-phase-in-rearview-camera-mandate-starting-in


I don't mind that one.  Typically the cameras now only come in higher end trims with stuff I don't want, like automatic transmissions.   So, to have the camera available on the lower end models will be nice.  I enjoy using it in my father's car.


----------



## Edd (Feb 24, 2015)

mlctvt said:


> In 2016 cars will be required to have backup camera. Yes, even a 2 seat convertible will be required to have a backup camera. WTF? are American's all so fat and lazy that we can't turn our heads around before backing up?



I didn't know that. Mandates aside, I'd welcome a camera in my next car. I've always been quite competent with parallel parking and such but I've never gotten used to judging distance while backing up in my Forester.  The vehicle height throws me somehow.


----------



## Geoff (Feb 25, 2015)

Rear cameras are kind of useless in the winter when the lens is perpetually covered with road salt.

I think tire pressure monitoring systems are a great feature.  Particularly with low profile tires with high inflation pressures, it's really tough to tell by eye when you're down 3 or 4 pounds of pressure.

I have a credit card deposit on an Outback.


----------



## JDMRoma (Feb 25, 2015)

Geoff said:


> Rear cameras are kind of useless in the winter when the lens is perpetually covered with road salt.
> 
> I think tire pressure monitoring systems are a great feature.  Particularly with low profile tires with high inflation pressures, it's really tough to tell by eye when you're down 3 or 4 pounds of pressure.
> 
> I have a credit card deposit on an Outback.



It won't warn for 2 or 3 pounds a not even 10 that's why I think they Suck !
From my own Toyota to brand new rentals. I Had tires over inflated by 10 and under by 10 without TPSM warnings 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## gmcunni (Feb 25, 2015)

Geoff said:


> Rear cameras are kind of useless in the winter when the lens is perpetually covered with road salt.
> 
> I think tire pressure monitoring systems are a great feature.  Particularly with low profile tires with high inflation pressures, it's really tough to tell by eye when you're down 3 or 4 pounds of pressure.
> 
> I have a credit card deposit on an Outback.




i like the camera.. far from useless in winter but does take maintenance... as in i lick my thumb and wipe it off as i walk behind the car every couple of days.   what i don't like about the camera is my 16 YO daughter learning to drive... i wish i could turn it off so she does not rely on it.

congrats on the new outback.


----------



## hammer (Feb 25, 2015)

JDMRoma said:


> It won't warn for 2 or 3 pounds a not even 10 that's why I think they Suck !
> From my own Toyota to brand new rentals. I Had tires over inflated by 10 and under by 10 without TPSM warnings
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



I've had two times that the TPMS caught low pressure...once when a sensor was going and the tire pressure was under 10 PSI and another when all of the tires were about 10 PSI under spec.

According to this the system is only meant to catch pressures well outside of specified range.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/how-to/a4849/4336449/

My wife's Jeep Grand Cherokee has an option to see the actual pressures which is nice, but most cars just have the idiot light.


----------



## hammer (Feb 25, 2015)

Geoff said:


> Rear cameras are kind of useless in the winter when the lens is perpetually covered with road salt.



+1

The other issue I have with the rear cameras is that it seems like automakers are using them as a crutch...seems like the visibility out the back of many cars is getting worse and at some point you won't be able to see where you are backing up without looking at the camera.  That's bad, the camera should be there as a secondary measure, not as an alternative to turning your head and looking behind you.

Going back a bit more on topic, my son had a Forester as a loaner car while his Impreza was in the shop for maintenance work.  The current Foresters are a lot bigger than the ones I test drove in the late 90s, they look almost as big as my 2001 Highlander was.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 25, 2015)

The thing I like about the camera when I use it is backing up in a tight spot when another vehicle is close.  My depth perception isn't the best.  I never use it for say, backing onto a street with oncoming traffic


----------



## wa-loaf (Feb 25, 2015)

AdironRider said:


> Pretty sure a TPMS light will not pass inspection, at least in NH. Which is a whole nother can of worms.
> 
> They don't inspect in Wyoming, and magically there isn't a massive uptick in vehicle deaths. Who would have predicted that



I think the TPMS requirement was for fuel efficiency, so you aren't burning all that extra fuel pushing an under inflated tire around ...


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 25, 2015)

JDMRoma said:


> It won't warn for 2 or 3 pounds a not even 10 that's why I think they Suck !
> From my own Toyota to brand new rentals. I Had tires over inflated by 10 and under by 10 without TPSM warnings
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



The TPMS comes on in my FJ at 6psi under inflation. Its a small enough window that if it goes from 60 to 20 the next morning the light will come on just from the cold. Another reason I pulled the bulb.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 25, 2015)

hammer said:


> +1
> 
> The other issue I have with the rear cameras is that it seems like automakers are using them as a crutch...seems like the visibility out the back of many cars is getting worse and at some point you won't be able to see where you are backing up without looking at the camera.  That's bad, the camera should be there as a secondary measure, not as an alternative to turning your head and looking behind you.
> 
> Going back a bit more on topic, my son had a Forester as a loaner car while his Impreza was in the shop for maintenance work.  The current Foresters are a lot bigger than the ones I test drove in the late 90s, they look almost as big as my 2001 Highlander was.




I think everyone should have a job in their teens that requires backing up large trucks. Ever since my landscaping days blind spots aren't an issue. Use the mirrors and you are good.


----------



## Geoff (Mar 15, 2015)

So it's official.  I have an Outback 3.6R in the driveway.  It's already covered with mud. 

Killington got a dose of freezing rain yesterday.  The stock tires are frightening in black ice.   I'll limp through the spring with them but I'll be putting Nokian Hakkapelliita R's on it for next winter.  Time to start hunting for somebody who has upgraded wheels on a 2015 Outback and wants to sell their OEM wheels.

It's a PITA getting a new car set up.  I already put Husky tray-style floor mats in it.  I have an Inno LowRider ski box coming.  Thule and Yakama ski boxes are too long and interfere with the rear hatch.   I need to order a rear bumper cover on Amazon and glue it on.  Trailer hitch and clear bra in May.  You have to disassemble the back of the car and notch the vinyl bumper cover to install the hitch so I think I'm going to let somebody else do it.


----------



## gmcunni (Mar 15, 2015)

Geoff said:


> So it's official.  I have an Outback 3.6R in the driveway.  It's already covered with mud.
> 
> Killington got a dose of freezing rain yesterday.  The stock tires are frightening in black ice.   I'll limp through the spring with them but I'll be putting Nokian Hakkapelliita R's on it for next winter.  Time to start hunting for somebody who has upgraded wheels on a 2015 Outback and wants to sell their OEM wheels.
> 
> It's a PITA getting a new car set up.  I already put Husky tray-style floor mats in it.  I have an Inno LowRider ski box coming.  Thule and Yakama ski boxes are too long and interfere with the rear hatch.   I need to order a rear bumper cover on Amazon and glue it on.  Trailer hitch and clear bra in May.  You have to disassemble the back of the car and notch the vinyl bumper cover to install the hitch so I think I'm going to let somebody else do it.



we have a thule on our '15.  yes, too long but since i had it i made it fit and the outback's rear hatch height memory feature worked out well for this situation.  

i've seen, but not installed, 3rd party hitches that don't require the notch cut out.  they might sit lower which could be an issue but it is an option.


congrats on new car


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 15, 2015)

Geoff said:


> So it's official.  I have an Outback 3.6R in the driveway.  It's already covered with mud.
> 
> Killington got a dose of freezing rain yesterday.  The stock tires are frightening in black ice.   I'll limp through the spring with them but I'll be putting Nokian Hakkapelliita R's on it for next winter.  Time to start hunting for somebody who has upgraded wheels on a 2015 Outback and wants to sell their OEM wheels.
> 
> It's a PITA getting a new car set up.  I already put Husky tray-style floor mats in it.  I have an Inno LowRider ski box coming.  Thule and Yakama ski boxes are too long and interfere with the rear hatch.   I need to order a rear bumper cover on Amazon and glue it on.  Trailer hitch and clear bra in May.  You have to disassemble the back of the car and notch the vinyl bumper cover to install the hitch so I think I'm going to let somebody else do it.



This going to replace both your vehicles?


----------



## Geoff (Mar 15, 2015)

wa-loaf said:


> This going to replace both your vehicles?



Yep.  I traded both the GTI and the Mountaineer.   The GTI had gone off extended warranty.  I was getting tired of pouring money into the Mountaineer.  One car is a lot simpler.


----------



## Geoff (Mar 24, 2015)




----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 25, 2015)

Geoff said:


>



Looking good!


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 25, 2015)

How many pairs of skis will fit in that low rider?   Think it's low enough to fit in a parking garage in a city?  Not suggesting that's something you would encounter much given where you live.  Just curious.


----------



## WoodCore (Mar 25, 2015)

Hoping this Subaru makes it across the pond!! I love my 3.6R Outback but miss the performance of my 2005 Legacy GT wagon. 

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/wagons/1502_2015_subaru_levorg_first_drive/


----------



## Geoff (Mar 25, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> How many pairs of skis will fit in that low rider?   Think it's low enough to fit in a parking garage in a city?  Not suggesting that's something you would encounter much given where you live.  Just curious.



It's really wide.  I bet you could jam a half-dozen pairs in the box.   In an ideal world, I would have preferred a box half as wide to reduce drag.

I suspect city garages depends on the garage.  The car is spec'd as 5' 6.1".    The box is 9.8" and the crossbars sit a bit lower than the top of the roof rack.  A bit less than 6'4" should get you into a lot of garages.   

I need to find places to wash it while the box is on the roof.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 27, 2015)

WoodCore said:


> Hoping this Subaru makes it across the pond!! I love my 3.6R Outback but miss the performance of my 2005 Legacy GT wagon.
> 
> http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/wagons/1502_2015_subaru_levorg_first_drive/



Who the hell puts a CVT in a sports car?


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 27, 2015)

I don't get that either.  Isn't fuel economy improvement the main point of CVT?   Fuel economy isn't really a consideration for most sports car buyers.


----------



## bvibert (Mar 27, 2015)

wa-loaf said:


> Who the hell puts a CVT in a sports car?





deadheadskier said:


> I don't get that either.  Isn't fuel economy improvement the main point of CVT?   Fuel economy isn't really a consideration for most sports car buyers.



I'm glad there's still some sane people left in this world.


----------



## Edd (Mar 27, 2015)

WoodCore said:


> Hoping this Subaru makes it across the pond!! I love my 3.6R Outback but miss the performance of my 2005 Legacy GT wagon.
> 
> http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/wagons/1502_2015_subaru_levorg_first_drive/



"Wagon weary Americans?"  Not making sense. "Plop down 30K?"  Well, you probably can't get me to do that.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 7, 2015)

Bump the Subaru thread

I had U Haul put a bolt-on trailer hitch on my Outback.  An EcoHitch would have looked nicer but the U Haul one installed cost quite a bit less than an EcoHitch.





Nokians are next on deck for the winter.   I think I'm just going to stick with the OEM 18" wheels and mount/balance every 6 months.  Winter wheels, TPMS, and paying for a tire shop to reprogram the car every 6 months looks like it would never pay back and this way, I know the tires are re-balanced every 6 months.

After living with it for 6 months, I like it a lot better than I thought I would.


----------



## 180 (Sep 7, 2015)

Geoff said:


>



Looks like ours!


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 7, 2015)

We just retired our 2005 Subaru Outback 2.5 today. She gave us 60k of reliable service. Traded it for a 2015 Toyota Highlander Limited for my wife. She LOVES it. Pretty nice ride. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 7, 2015)

Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 7, 2015)

6k miles per year?  Everything must be really close by in Utah. I've never put less than 20K miles per year on a car.


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 7, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> 6k miles per year?  Everything must be really close by in Utah. I've never put less than 20K miles per year on a car.



We bought it with 93k on it; had it in VT for a year. In five years we put 57k on it: four years in Utah. Yep, stuff is real close. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 7, 2015)

Okay, that makes more sense.  It read to me like you had it since 05 and only put 60k on it over those 10 years.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 10, 2015)

thetrailboss said:


> We just retired our 2005 Subaru Outback 2.5 today. She gave us 60k of reliable service. Traded it for a 2015 Toyota Highlander Limited for my wife. She LOVES it. Pretty nice ride. View attachment 17446View attachment 17447
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



My sister inlaw has one of those. Very nice, but no cargo room with the third row seats up. She's had to borrow my cargo box a few times.


----------



## darent (Sep 11, 2015)

did you look at the Venza, compare pro-con with highlander?


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 11, 2015)

darent said:


> did you look at the Venza, compare pro-con with highlander?



My wife did the shopping. I will ask her.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 11, 2015)

wa-loaf said:


> My sister inlaw has one of those. Very nice, but no cargo room with the third row seats up. She's had to borrow my cargo box a few times.



I noticed that as well. But for what we do it's perfect. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## xwhaler (Sep 11, 2015)

darent said:


> did you look at the Venza, compare pro-con with highlander?



I like the Venza. That was our #2 choice when we made the decision on the Sorento


----------



## yeggous (Sep 11, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> 6k miles per year?  Everything must be really close by in Utah. I've never put less than 20K miles per year on a car.



I put 20k+ on my car every year I've lived in the Merrimack Valley. When I lived in New Haven, I drove much less. 10k max. Lifestyles are very regional.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 11, 2015)

Yeah, outside of a three year stint in the Midwest/Atlantic, I've lived in VT, NH or ME exclusively since 1995.  Going to see a friend up here is often a 20 mile drive, not 4-5 like southern New England.  My 2013 model year Mazda I bought in July of 2012 just rolled past 100k miles last week.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Sep 12, 2015)

Venza has been discontinued so resale could b an issue


----------



## ALLSKIING (Sep 12, 2015)

I put just as many miles as you it looks.  Any thoughts on a diesel? I have been looking at them online the last few days?


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 12, 2015)

ALLSKIING said:


> I put just as many miles as you it looks.  Any thoughts on a diesel? I have been looking at them online the last few days?




Really happy with my sportwagon. But for now if you want AWD you'll have to jump up to Audi or BMW.


----------



## marcski (Sep 12, 2015)

wa-loaf said:


> Really happy with my sportwagon. But for now if you want AWD you'll have to jump up to Audi or BMW.


Get good snow tires....and you're basically on par with awd with allseasons.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 12, 2015)

All set there! Though need new ones this year, maybe time to start up a snow tire thread ...



Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## ThinkSnow (Sep 18, 2015)

I'm late to this post, so sorry if this is a repeat, but does anyone know how the Yokohama Geolandar G91's handle in Snow?  They are original equipment on the 2015 Forester.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 18, 2015)

Cannonball said:


> My wife recently bought a '15 Forester.  We've had it since November so we've been driving it through all of this winter's snowy weather and it's been great.  But Saturday and Sunday it was virtually undrivable on the road conditions we had.  On Saturday we were on 93N and starting drifting all over the road.  It felt like we had literally zero traction. We carefully slowed down and got off at the first exit. I scraped all of the snow out of the treads thinking we may have just iced up.  Got back on the highway and same thing!  Felt like we could just start spinning at any moment even going 30MPH.  Other people were passing at 70.  We ended up crawling through back roads just to make it to Lincoln.  Then Sunday we couldn't even get out of town to get to Cannon.  We were all over the road.
> 
> Are these Geolanders literally the worst tire ever?



Post 2013 on outlines his bad experience with the Geolanders


----------



## Geoff (Sep 19, 2015)

180 said:


> Looks like ours!



Everything looks like it.  My Vermont next-door-neighbors have a 2015 the identical color.  Fortunately, we have different ski boxes.


----------



## ThinkSnow (Sep 21, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> Post 2013 on outlines his bad experience with the Geolanders



That's what I was afraid of.  Anyone have suggestions for a good all season tire that's good in snow?


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 21, 2015)

why not hold onto the Geolanders for summer and get some snows for winter?


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 21, 2015)

ThinkSnow said:


> That's what I was afraid of.  Anyone have suggestions for a good all season tire that's good in snow?



I'd love some carving skis that are good in powder too.


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 21, 2015)

ThinkSnow said:


> That's what I was afraid of.  Anyone have suggestions for a good all season tire that's good in snow?



Though these are supposedly the best option for that:
http://www.nokiantires.com/tires/passenger-car/all-weather-tires/


----------



## marcski (Sep 21, 2015)

wa-loaf said:


> Though these are supposedly the best option for that:
> http://www.nokiantires.com/tires/passenger-car/all-weather-tires/



I've thought these have been pretty good.  I've had them on 2 different vehicles. 

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Continental&tireModel=ExtremeContact+DWS

http://www.continentaltire.com/product/extremecontact-dws-19550r16-84w


----------



## darent (Sep 21, 2015)

I have Hankooks all weather on my Escape and used them last year in all that snow. not too bad. Not as good as the winter tires I had  on my subie. I was bummed my winter tires wouldn't fit the new ride but I am looking for a  winter setup for the Escape.


----------



## 180 (Sep 21, 2015)

Geoff said:


> Everything looks like it.  My Vermont next-door-neighbors have a 2015 the identical color.  Fortunately, we have different ski boxes.



 The placement of time and temp is horrible


----------



## wa-loaf (Sep 22, 2015)

marcski said:


> I've thought these have been pretty good.  I've had them on 2 different vehicles.
> 
> http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Continental&tireModel=ExtremeContact+DWS
> 
> http://www.continentaltire.com/product/extremecontact-dws-19550r16-84w



Don't look like they much in the way of siping.


----------



## Tin (Sep 24, 2015)

Anyone have a driver's side tail light gremlin? Brake light has now been changed 3 times in a year. A friend of ours up the street has the same issue. 2008 Outback and Legacy.


----------



## darent (Sep 25, 2015)

How about the Chevy/GMC truck,SUV front running light gremlin,  for years now I have seen one light out!!


----------



## Geoff (Sep 29, 2015)

180 said:


> The placement of time and temp is horrible



That's my biggest gripe about the car.  It's not just placement.  It's also size and glare.


----------



## dlague (Apr 10, 2017)

So being in Colorado we bit the bullet and bought into a Subaru - why not the third most popular vehicle here.  Bought a new to us Outback at the end of February and now it is no longer on the road.  Definitely built tough, a woman went through a red light and t boned me and pushed me into another lane where I continued to get hit by a pickup.  Smashed up both sides and only got 5 staples in the head and injured my thumb (grip on steering wheel) - that's it.  Inside the car you could never tell it got into an accident but on the outside well .....







BTW Still skied this weekend!


----------



## prsboogie (Apr 10, 2017)

Shit man glad your ok. Saw something posted elsewhere but figured you'd share when ready. Good thing you had a well built vehicle, vibes 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Jully (Apr 10, 2017)

Yeah dang. Hard enough to get T-boned never mind get t-boned into another vehicle. Glad you're okay! Props to still skiing!


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 10, 2017)

dlague said:


> So being in Colorado we bit the bullet and bought into a Subaru - why not the third most popular vehicle here.  Bought a new to us Outback at the end of February and now it is no longer on the road.  Definitely built tough, a woman went through a red light and t boned me and pushed me into another lane where I continued to get hit by a pickup.  Smashed up both sides and only got 5 staples in the head and injured my thumb (grip on steering wheel) - that's it.  Inside the car you could never tell it got into an accident but on the outside well .....
> 
> View attachment 22412
> 
> ...



Wow. Scary. That sucks. Glad you're OK.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Glenn (Apr 11, 2017)

Yikes!


----------



## Warp Daddy (Apr 11, 2017)

Glad u are ok !


----------



## dlague (Apr 11, 2017)

Thanks everyone!  Really liked the car to bad I only got to drive it for about a month!


----------



## bigbog (Apr 19, 2017)

Good to hear that you're ok and able to ski dlague!  You're certainly in the right part of the country.


----------



## dlague (Apr 19, 2017)

Now in car buying mode.  Pulling strong for another Subaru but probably the Outback 36R as the 2.5 does not have the guts to pass other cars.  I really like the safety aspect after my experience.


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 19, 2017)

dlague said:


> Now in car buying mode.  Pulling strong for another Subaru but probably the Outback 36R as the 2.5 does not have the guts to pass other cars.  I really like the safety aspect after my experience.



I've never had an issue with power with my 2.4 in the five months I have owned it.  It is getting 27-28 mpg on average.  Amazing.  This is the last year of the 3.6 FYI.  We had one before and loved it.  It had a lot of power.  Tradeoff was the MPG.  It got about 20.  That was a 2005 though.  

I do like the Lane Assist, Eyesight (adaptive cruise), blind spot monitors, rear view camera, and the rear-stop safety feature.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Apr 19, 2017)

I would also consider the 2.0 Turbo in the Forester XT. It's a newer engine and this is the platform Subaru will be migrating everything to.

Given the choice between that an a 3.6R Legacy/Outback it would be a tough call. I would get the Legacy before an Outback though. The 3.6R will probably have a slight edge on dependability and the 2.0 Turbo be a little more fun to drive.

Unfortunately you're not getting a manual transmission with either one of those right now.

They are coming out with a 2.4 DIT turbo next year, probably for the STI and a new SUV, but I think for the vehicles you're looking at that's not going to be something worth trying to wait for.


----------



## dlague (Apr 21, 2017)

After driving and Ford Explorer and BMW X5, an Mercedes ML 350, a Volvo XC90, and a Lexus RX350 not sure Subaru is going to make the cut.  Those all had more power.  But they also all use more gas.  Heart is still with Subaru but the others are more fun.

Sent from my SM-G930P using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Apr 21, 2017)

Well, most all of those options are luxury vehicles, so yeah, there will obviously be a noticeable difference.   Even the Explorer will be a noticeable step up from a 4cyl Subaru.  Though Subaru's AWD system might be better than most of those. 

Sent from my XT1565 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 21, 2017)

dlague said:


> After driving and Ford Explorer and BMW X5, an Mercedes ML 350, a Volvo XC90, and a Lexus RX350 not sure Subaru is going to make the cut.  Those all had more power.  But they also all use more gas.  Heart is still with Subaru but the others are more fun.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930P using AlpineZone mobile app



You owe it to yourself to check out the Toyota Highlander. Really nice. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## jimk (Apr 21, 2017)

I have a 2014 Outback 2.5, bought new in 2013 and it now has about 50K miles.  I drive like a geezer and prefer higher mileage so have never felt like I needed more power and I took the car to Colorado and beyond on two long trips involving high altitudes.  I'm happy with the vehicle, no mechanical problems so far, and I think it is real solid in snowy situations, but I have never liked the way my transmission feels in normal suburban driving.  Real clunky, seems like there is a second of hesitation between when you step on the gas and acceleration begins.  I am curious if the 3.6 would do better, or maybe the new Outback 2015 model year does better?  Also, I'm a cheap technophobe and did not get the back-up camera.  Sort of regret that as the rear sightlines aren't great due to low cut rear windows.  My son has a 2015 Forester that I've driven quite a bit and it's much friendlier to drive with respect to sightlines and smooth transmission.


----------



## dlague (Apr 21, 2017)

Well bought the Explorer.  I really wanted to get the Subaru but could not get past the under powered feeling.  I drove one again after driving like 6 other vehicles and it felt so sluggish.  Even the VW Tiguan felt quicker.  

Sent from my SM-G930P using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Glenn (Apr 22, 2017)

Cool. Let us know how you like it. Don't forget the snow tires. :grin:


----------



## Edd (Apr 22, 2017)

I rented a Ford Escape for a week recently. I don't know which engine it had but it certainly had more power than my 4 cylinder Forester. Nice infotainment system; it was my first time messing with CarPlay. It's something I'd consider buying but the gas mileage didn't seem great.


----------



## Tin (Apr 22, 2017)

Just had to replace another oil pressure switch in the 2.5 (3rd in 3 years), oil is also pissing out the PCV and valve cover gaskets throwing it all over the exhaust so the car smells awful, and it is going through a quart every 1000 miles thanks to the shit piston ring issue that all Subarus up to 2013 have. I'm doing the PCV and valve cover gaskets today and I'm starting to put heavier weight oil in. Our landlord's 2011 Forester is approaching 80k and is drinking oil through the piston rings, she is having to put 2-3 quarts in between changes these days. These things flat out suck when comparing them to most other vehicles.


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 22, 2017)

Tin said:


> Just had to replace another oil pressure switch in the 2.5 (3rd in 3 years), oil is also pissing out the PCV and valve cover gaskets throwing it all over the exhaust so the car smells awful, and it is going through a quart every 1000 miles thanks to the shit piston ring issue that all Subarus up to 2013 have. I'm doing the PCV and valve cover gaskets today and I'm starting to put heavier weight oil in. Our landlord's 2011 Forester is approaching 80k and is drinking oil through the piston rings, she is having to put 2-3 quarts in between changes these days. These things flat out suck when comparing them to most other vehicles.



Wow.  I have heard these issues with older Subarus.  Thankfully we have not had any issues.  Our 2017 has been great...knock on wood.  We put 50k on our 2005 Outback 3.6 and had no issues at all.  That turned me on to Subarus.  I credit my wife for finding that car....she has a knack for knowing what to get.


----------



## Tin (Apr 22, 2017)

thetrailboss said:


> Wow.  I have heard these issues with older Subarus.  Thankfully we have not had any issues.  Our 2017 has been great...knock on wood.  We put 50k on our 2005 Outback 3.6 and had no issues at all.  That turned me on to Subarus.  I credit my wife for finding that car....she has a knack for knowing what to get.



The 3.6 is decent but the non-turbo 2.5 from 96-2013 could be the worst motor ever mass produced.


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 22, 2017)

Tin said:


> The 3.6 is decent but the non-turbo 2.5 from 96-2013 could be the worst motor ever mass produced.



That's what I've heard. Dodged that bullet. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## dlague (Apr 24, 2017)

Tin said:


> The 3.6 is decent but the non-turbo 2.5 from 96-2013 could be the worst motor ever mass produced.



I have to agree!  We bought the Subaru and never really got on it while test driving and on or first trip skiing driving I-70 some of those ascents we a challenge requiring that it be pegged to keep up with traffic going up hill.  Passing other cars was also not its strength.

We had a 2.5 non turbo.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jun 28, 2017)

https://www.consumeraffairs.com/new...es-may-have-defective-piston-ring-071714.html

Unwilling to do right by their customers over the head gasket issue for like 20 years.  Now refusing to do right by customers on defective piston rings.  Not good.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jun 28, 2017)

deadheadskier said:


> https://www.consumeraffairs.com/new...es-may-have-defective-piston-ring-071714.html
> 
> Unwilling to do right by their customers over the head gasket issue for like 20 years.  Now refusing to do right by customers on defective piston rings.  Not good.



Wonder if this was resolved?  The article is from three years ago.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jun 28, 2017)

whoops.  haha.  a friend shared it on Facebook.  doh!


----------



## thetrailboss (Jun 28, 2017)

deadheadskier said:


> whoops.  haha.  a friend shared it on Facebook.  doh!



No worries.  I love it when folks post stuff on FB that is either really dated or obviously fake.


----------



## frapcap (Jun 29, 2017)

deadheadskier said:


> https://www.consumeraffairs.com/new...es-may-have-defective-piston-ring-071714.html
> 
> Unwilling to do right by their customers over the head gasket issue for like 20 years.  Now refusing to do right by customers on defective piston rings.  Not good.



Head gaskets suck with them. 

However, I'm on my second short block for oil consumption through the rings on my 2015 n/a 2.5. 
So far, the Tri City dealer has been great to me. 
Oddly enough, the different bore/stroke/hardware combination on my '13 BRZ has it eating zero oil.


----------



## andrec10 (Jun 30, 2017)

Tin said:


> The 3.6 is decent but the non-turbo 2.5 from 96-2013 could be the worst motor ever mass produced.



I had a 2011 Outback that had 95k on it when I traded it in and used no oil. I did put synthetic in it though for its entire life. Mind you, I put all those miles in less than 4 years. I have a 2015 Legacy 3.6R with no issues, but it only has 22k on it. I work from home now, so most of that is ski miles....


----------



## dlague (Jul 1, 2017)

I had a Subaru for a whole month and never had oil issues never even changed the oil.  Thanks to a woman that decided to go through a read light.

Sent from my SM-G930P using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Jul 1, 2017)

dlague said:


> I had a Subaru for a whole month and never had oil issues never even changed the oil.  Thanks to a woman that decided to go through a read light.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930P using AlpineZone mobile app



No problems with my 2017. It is a redesigned model though. Love it.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Warp Daddy (Oct 21, 2017)

Just pulled the trigger and ordered 2018 Outback Limited loaded , traded my 2012 same model got top buck and then some My new dealer 3 hrs away was 4 k under the local dealer . Loved my ' 12 , still got my wife's '14 Rav XLE niice backup second local hop tool


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 22, 2017)

Warp Daddy said:


> Just pulled the trigger and ordered 2018 Outback Limited loaded , traded my 2012 same model got top buck and then some My new dealer 3 hrs away was 4 k under the local dealer . Loved my ' 12 , still got my wife's '14 Rav XLE niice backup second local hop tool



Does it have the EyeSight?  I use mine a lot.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Oct 23, 2017)

thetrailboss said:


> Does it have the EyeSight?  I use mine a lot.


 Yup !   We custom ordered ( done it before ) couldn't find the color Dark Blue Pearl with white leather heated seats  with the options we wanted , so will get this some between Thanksgiving and Christmas .

how are you liking yours so far ?


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 23, 2017)

Warp Daddy said:


> Yup !   We custom ordered ( done it before ) couldn't find the color Dark Blue Pearl with white leather heated seats  with the options we wanted , so will get this some between Thanksgiving and Christmas .
> 
> how are you liking yours so far ?



I have the four cylinder 2.4 Premium.  Love it.  Awesome mileage.  Awesome AWD performance in snow.  After one year, very happy.  Only (major) downside, is that beware that if you a rock hits your windshield and it cracks that you have a very long wait for a replacement windshield.  It took me over two months to get a windshield for mine because of the EyeSight.  They had NO windshields for my car on the entire continent.  

The EyeSight makes my commute a real breeze.  It saves me hard braking and sets the pace in traffic.  It is one step below fully autonomous driving in my mind.  I also use the lane assist and that helps keep the car in the lane nicely for me.  The blind spot detector has saved me multiple times.


----------



## benski (Oct 23, 2017)

thetrailboss said:


> I have the four cylinder 2.4 Premium.  Love it.  Awesome mileage.  Awesome AWD performance in snow.  After one year, very happy.  Only (major) downside, is that beware that if you a rock hits your windshield and it cracks that you have a very long wait for a replacement windshield.  It took me over two months to get a windshield for mine because of the EyeSight.  They had NO windshields for my car on the entire continent.
> 
> The EyeSight makes my commute a real breeze.  It saves me hard braking and sets the pace in traffic.  It is one step below fully autonomous driving in my mind.  I also use the lane assist and that helps keep the car in the lane nicely for me.  The blind spot detector has saved me multiple times.



Strange. I had my windshield on my 2011 Impreza replaced in a few hours of cracking in New York. Maybe your guy was not prepared or there was a supply issue. I am looking to buy a Crosstrek soon. Any advice?


----------



## darent (Oct 23, 2017)

I owned a 2000 2.5 outback, had it for 12 years and it never burned any oil.I really liked the car but it was the most expensive car I ever owned to maintain.Spent a fortune on brakes, they always felt spongy and the constant check engine light thing drove me nuts.The rear subframe rusted and broke at 75000 and I got rid of it.Don't no if I would buy another Subaru.


----------



## 180 (Oct 23, 2017)

eyesight is the best


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 23, 2017)

benski said:


> Strange. I had my windshield on my 2011 Impreza replaced in a few hours of cracking in New York. Maybe your guy was not prepared or there was a supply issue. I am looking to buy a Crosstrek soon. Any advice?



It was a supply issue because the windshield has special tinting for the EyeSight system.  

On another note, apparently Subaru has an issue with thin windshields.  So much so that there is a class action claim.


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 23, 2017)

benski said:


> Strange. I had my windshield on my 2011 Impreza replaced in a few hours of cracking in New York. Maybe your guy was not prepared or there was a supply issue. I am looking to buy a Crosstrek soon. Any advice?



And the Crosstrek is nice.  I did not go with it because it seemed too small for the price.  Then again I have a kid and we do a lot of local and distant travel that necessitated having some more room.  I don't know if the Crosstrek has EyeSight as an option.

For what it is worth my 2017 Outback now has about 12,000 miles and I am getting 30 mpg average.


----------



## benski (Oct 24, 2017)

thetrailboss said:


> And the Crosstrek is nice.  I did not go with it because it seemed too small for the price.  Then again I have a kid and we do a lot of local and distant travel that necessitated having some more room.  I don't know if the Crosstrek has EyeSight as an option.
> 
> For what it is worth my 2017 Outback now has about 12,000 miles and I am getting 30 mpg average.



The Crosstrek has eyesight. You can't get it with the basic though. I never ran out of room in my Impreza but came close, hence the Crosstrek is the right side.


----------



## benski (Oct 24, 2017)

Eyesight is more than $1,000 extra for the Crosstrek on Subaru website.


----------



## benski (Oct 24, 2017)

thetrailboss said:


> It was a supply issue because the windshield has special tinting for the EyeSight system.
> 
> On another note, apparently Subaru has an issue with thin windshields.  So much so that there is a class action claim.



I am referring to the fact they were out of stock, not that they had some unique properties.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Oct 24, 2017)

thetrailboss said:


> And the Crosstrek is nice.  I did not go with it because it seemed too small for the price.  Then again I have a kid and we do a lot of local and distant travel that necessitated having some more room.  I don't know if the Crosstrek has EyeSight as an option.
> 
> For what it is worth my 2017 Outback now has about 12,000 miles and I am getting 30 mpg average.




Hey not  bad for altitude driving. 

Here in the flatlands or hill country , get 34 mpg on my 2012 Outback Ltd 2.5 for summer travel  30 in the winter. Use our Rav Xle for. Local hopping 

The  new one we ordered is supposedly better mpg .


----------



## WoodCore (Oct 24, 2017)

benski said:


> Eyesight is more than $1,000 extra for the Crosstrek on Subaru website.




Worth every penny! Have it in my Outback and love it, especially the adaptive cruise control.


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 24, 2017)

WoodCore said:


> Worth every penny! Have it in my Outback and love it, especially the adaptive cruise control.



The only issue with mine is that when I am driving along and there is a car full-stopped ahead of me the car might not see it resulting in a hard brake.


----------



## benski (Oct 24, 2017)

thetrailboss said:


> The only issue with mine is that when I am driving along and there is a car full-stopped ahead of me the car might not see it resulting in a hard brake.



Are you saying when it stops the car for you, it breaks too hard?


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 24, 2017)

benski said:


> Are you saying when it stops the car for you, it breaks too hard?



If I am following a car, and it "sees it", I am fine.  It is awesome.  But when I am cruising along with nobody in front of me and I suddenly come upon stopped traffic in the distance, it takes a bit too long for the car to "see" the stationary car in front of me and to react.  So you go from 60 mph to 0 a bit too quickly.  Granted you can adjust the delay on the steering wheel.  I have done it once and may do it again.


----------



## SkiingInABlueDream (Oct 24, 2017)

thetrailboss said:


> If I am following a car, and it "sees it", I am fine.  It is awesome.  But when I am cruising along with nobody in front of me and I suddenly come upon stopped traffic in the distance, it takes a bit too long for the car to "see" the stationary car in front of me and to react.  So you go from 60 mph to 0 a bit too quickly.  Granted you can adjust the delay on the steering wheel.  I have done it once and may do it again.



What happens if the road is slippery in that situation? As in, too slippery to slow down in time, yikes!


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 24, 2017)

SkiingInABlueDream said:


> What happens if the road is slippery in that situation? As in, too slippery to slow down in time, yikes!



If it is snowing hard or raining hard, then EyeSight turns off.


----------



## ViciousV609 (Oct 25, 2017)

Purchased a 2011 legacy in 2014 this was febuary 2014 drove from jersey to rutland in a blizzard subie strong  unstoppable with snow tires
	

	
	
		
		

		
			








Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk


----------



## benski (Oct 25, 2017)

ViciousV609 said:


> Purchased a 2011 legacy in 2014 this was febuary 2014 drove from jersey to rutland in a blizzard subie strong  unstoppable with snow tires
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Did that effect the ventilation? My 2011 Impreza's ventilation smelled strongly of gas when I turned it on with the front berried in 3 feet of snow last year. The smell went away when i backed away from the snow.


----------



## ViciousV609 (Oct 25, 2017)

benski said:


> Did that effect the ventilation? My 2011 Impreza's ventilation smelled strongly of gas when I turned it on with the front berried in 3 feet of snow last year. The smell went away when i backed away from the snow.


I noticed allitle hesitation then i got out and knocked it all off after i took the photo but didnt notice and gas smell


Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk


----------



## bdfreetuna (Oct 27, 2017)

You might want to get a hood with a scoop for the intercooler off a 2010-2014 Legacy GT.

For additional ventilation :lol:


----------



## ViciousV609 (Oct 30, 2017)

bdfreetuna said:


> You might want to get a hood with a scoop for the intercooler off a 2010-2014 Legacy GT.
> 
> For additional ventilation [emoji38]


Lol

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk


----------



## skijay (Mar 4, 2018)

I've followed this topic for a while.  I finally was rewarded with the dreaded news EVERY Subaru owner doesn't want to hear, "you need to replace your head gasket".  I thought for sure that the model year 2009 and above were no longer impacted.  My 2.5 engine uses the Subaru super coolant, has been changed, and I've had the every 30k service done at the dealer.  I'm at 155k and I am going to an independent mechanic for a second opinion and an estimate.  the Subaru dealer wants $2,200 for the repair.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Mar 4, 2018)

skijay said:


> I've followed this topic for a while.  I finally was rewarded with the dreaded news EVERY Subaru owner doesn't want to hear, "you need to replace your head gasket".  I thought for sure that the model year 2009 and above were no longer impacted.  My 2.5 engine uses the Subaru super coolant, has been changed, and I've had the every 30k service done at the dealer.  I'm at 155k and I am going to an independent mechanic for a second opinion and an estimate.  the Subaru dealer wants $2,200 for the repair.


That sucks. Thats how my 1998 Forester kicked the bucket at 200k ish miles.

All non-turbo Subarus need proactive 100k headgasket service. Expensive lesson to learn.

Even the new ones IMO. Turbos are the exception, way beefier HG design.

Sent from my LG-D850 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Callaghan (Mar 16, 2018)

skirjay said:


> I've followed this topic for a while.  I finally was rewarded with the dreaded news EVERY Subaru owner doesn't want to hear, "you need to replace your head gasket".  I thought the Bathmate was good. for sure that the model year 2009 and above were no longer impacted.  My 2.5 engine uses the Subaru super coolant, has been changed, and I've had the every 30k service done at the dealer.  I'm at 155k and I am going to an independent mechanic for a second opinion and an estimate.  the Subaru dealer wants $2,200 for the repair.



I feel for you, brother. I hope you get a positive feedback from the independent mechanic, but I wouldn't hold my breath. It is what it is, sadly.


----------



## JimG. (Mar 16, 2018)

I've owned 5 Subarus, 3 of them currently. All of them have over 150,000 miles on them, one had 350,000 until it was rear ended and totaled.

I have never needed to replace a head gasket. Just luck?


----------



## AdironRider (Mar 16, 2018)

JimG. said:


> I've owned 5 Subarus, 3 of them currently. All of them have over 150,000 miles on them, one had 350,000 until it was rear ended and totaled.
> 
> I have never needed to replace a head gasket. Just luck?




Did you buy them with over 150k on them? 

Its is pretty much a guarantee the head gaskets will go on the 2.5, and it appears on the newer models also. I think you got very lucky.


----------



## hammer (Mar 16, 2018)

JimG. said:


> I've owned 5 Subarus, 3 of them currently. All of them have over 150,000 miles on them, one had 350,000 until it was rear ended and totaled.
> 
> I have never needed to replace a head gasket. Just luck?



Two Subarus, two head gasket replacements...one at 120K miles and the other just below 80K miles.  You were lucky.


----------



## JimG. (Mar 16, 2018)

AdironRider said:


> Did you buy them with over 150k on them?
> 
> Its is pretty much a guarantee the head gaskets will go on the 2.5, and it appears on the newer models also. I think you got very lucky.



Bought them all new.

Who buys a used car with 150K on the odometer?


----------



## JimG. (Mar 16, 2018)

hammer said:


> Two Subarus, two head gasket replacements...one at 120K miles and the other just below 80K miles.  You were lucky.



My wife keeps telling me I'm lucky but I think she is referring to the fact that I married her.


----------



## Quietman (Mar 16, 2018)

JimG. said:


> Bought them all new.
> 
> Who buys a used car with 150K on the odometer?



I do. Bought my current 2007 van with 155k 2 years for $2,200.  Bought the 2000 van my wife drives in 2012 for $1,200 with 180k on it. Body was mint as it was a Ohio/Florida car.  Car now has 305k and a trans with 98K on it(replaced last year for $900), and I would take it on any length trip.  I can do most maintenance and minor repairs so I buy used and drive them into the ground.  I usually get at 4 or more years out of $2k cars.  We also have a 2001 Saturn that I paid my brother $100 for as a backup if one of the vans needs work.  It doesn't get used much at all.


----------



## benski (Mar 16, 2018)

On my second Subaru. My 2011 Impreza made it 80-85K, without the head gaskets breaking. My 2018 Crosstrek has a 2.0 liter engine, so maybe that will be more reliable. Only thing is the CarPlay sometimes needs 2 tries to connect.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 16, 2018)

I had a 04 Legacy wagon as a work vehicle.  On that car the HG went at 94K miles.  Virtually all of the company Subarus had the same problem and eventually that company switched to Ford Escapes for better reliability.  

My brother bought a used Outback at 100k miles which had already had the HG replaced.  He ended up doing it again at 160K miles.  Sean is an amateur mechanic and takes meticulous care of his cars, so it wasn't abuse.

The list of personal friends who have had to replace the HG on their Subies is long.  

The company should treat this issue as a recall and not standard maintenance like they have for literally decades now. 

Despite their great utility, snow performance and reasonable purchase price, I'll never buy one.  I view Subaru as the single most unethical mainstream car manufacturer.  No thanks 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## spring_mountain_high (Mar 20, 2018)

deadheadskier said:


> I had a 04 Legacy wagon as a work vehicle.  On that car the HG went at 94K miles.  Virtually all of the company Subarus had the same problem and eventually that company switched to Ford Escapes for better reliability.
> 
> My brother bought a used Outback at 100k miles which had already had the HG replaced.  He ended up doing it again at 160K miles.  Sean is an amateur mechanic and takes meticulous care of his cars, so it wasn't abuse.
> 
> ...



never admitting a problem is a very japanese way of doing business...having worked as in-house legal for a large japanese electronics company i have many experiences trying to defend the indefensible when it comes to product defects/reliability/performance.

as a subaru owner who has also replaced the HG (and transmission at 100K!), i will never be purchasing a subaru again either

doing all of the regular recommended service, the money i've poured into non-regular maintenance on this car could have been a sizeable down payment on a more reliable vehicle


----------



## bdfreetuna (Mar 22, 2018)

I had a 98 Forester blow a headgasket around 200k miles but I was a dumbass at the time and barely checked the oil etc. It was a beater car and I treated it like one.

Transmissions on Subarus are pretty bullet proof but I'm referring to the manual transmissions. The 6MT STi and Spec B trannies are legendary in the abuse they can take. The 5MT is also known to last beyond the life of the car even with increased power and mods. Unless you're playing with launch control they should never normally break.

I've owned 5 manual tranny Subies and never once had to service the transmission beyond fluid change and those cars went 200k to 300k+ miles.

Just got my 08 Legacy GT back from the tuner yesterday... upgraded to Koni Yellow with H&R springs. Also put in the Cobb SF intake + airbox, as I'd already put a Mishimoto turbo inlet. Huge gains.

Tuned for 20psi target boost but I haven't even boosted over 12psi since it got out of the shop.. the powers just more than you can use on a normal road.

325 awhp 349 awtq .... 135k miles... perfect results on compression and leakdown tests... aka.. the engine is mint.



By the way it only should cost like $200 to replace HG on your non-turbo Subies. Do it every 80k miles no matter if it's a 2.0 2.2 2.5

It's not like they go bad right away, just do them when you do your timing belt.

Yes Subaru should include it as part of their 80k service but by now its common knowledge


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 22, 2018)

I have not seen nor heard a HG repair on a Subaru cost less than $1500.  A quick Google search says the average is $1600+

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## bdfreetuna (Mar 22, 2018)

HG repair is a lot more expensive since your engine probably overheated and caused damage

Just replacing the gaskets before a problem arises is pretty quick and easy

edit what I mean to say is just do it when you do your timing belt... it's not going to be much more than $200 for parts and very little additional labor... should be able to get both done for $1k which isn't much more than just the timing belt / water pump service anyway.

If you do it separately you'll pay more. If you let them blow and overheat your engine you'll pay a lot more.


----------



## skijay (Mar 22, 2018)

$200 for a HG replacement?  It takes about one hour of labor just to get access to the area. 

For model years 2009 and up a 10 year super coolant replaced the previous coolant.  With the super coolant a conditioner / additive was to be used as this prolonged the life of the sealant on the HG gasket thus stretching out the lifespan of the HG to around 225K.   I learned a lot about the HG on these things. Unfortunately, my servicing dealer didn't follow the maintenance requirement for my vehicle on the coolant change as I now have the failing head gaskets. The additive is to prevent "leaks". 

It now appears the FB engine series doesn't suffer from HG failures.  I'll have to see if that holds true at 150k.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Mar 23, 2018)

well the coolant/conditioner was basically how they avoided having to do a recall, or at least avoided responsibility.

it never solved the problem but who knows it might buy you a few extra miles


----------



## hammer (Mar 23, 2018)

skijay said:


> $200 for a HG replacement?  It takes about one hour of labor just to get access to the area.
> 
> For model years 2009 and up a 10 year super coolant replaced the previous coolant.  With the super coolant a conditioner / additive was to be used as this prolonged the life of the sealant on the HG gasket thus stretching out the lifespan of the HG to around 225K.   I learned a lot about the HG on these things. Unfortunately, my servicing dealer didn't follow the maintenance requirement for my vehicle on the coolant change as I now have the failing head gaskets. The additive is to prevent "leaks".
> 
> It now appears the FB engine series doesn't suffer from HG failures.  I'll have to see if that holds true at 150k.



My son's car is an 09 and it has the coolant, and the HG still went...which is likely why Subaru covered the replacement even though the basic warranty had expired.


----------



## skijay (Mar 23, 2018)

I complained to SOA and I got a $750 loyalty rebate.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Mar 24, 2018)

If you have one of the new direct injection engines you need to walnut blast the valves every 50k miles or so.

This is a crappy design because normally in port injection engines the gasoline is sprayed onto the valves and cleans it naturally this way, preventing carbon build up.

Subaru doesn't really have any appealing current products IMO. They peaked between 1999-2009.

Afaik Toyota has the only self cleaning direct/port injection-hybrid engine out right now, they are leading the pack when it comes to that.

I'll stick with the EJ257 and when my timing belt is due in 30k miles I'll have it rebuilt with forged rods, pistons, rings etc.

Nice thing about boosting the torque to 349 ft lbs is I can actually get pretty good gas mileage as you barely need to touch the pedal for a nice push. I was getting around 30mpg highway today which is better than stock. Averaged around 26mpg to Killington and back but that included a few instances of flooring it to pass several cars at a time and fairly spirited driving overall.


----------



## Edd (Jun 20, 2018)

Test drove a Crosstrek today and was impressed with the interior room. If I can get the wife on board it’ll be a likely replacement for her car. 

I’m at 116k on my 2010 Forester with no significant maintenance issues. If the HG blows on me I’ll probably eat shit on the costs and keep it running as long as I can. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## deadheadskier (Jun 20, 2018)

Edd said:


> Test drove a Crosstrek today and was impressed with the interior room. If I can get the wife on board it’ll be a likely replacement for her car.
> 
> I’m at 116k on my 2010 Forester with no significant maintenance issues. If the HG blows on me I’ll probably eat shit on the costs and keep it running as long as I can.
> 
> ...


We just ordered a VW Golf Alltrack.  You should test drive one

I'll let you take ours for a spin, but it won't arrive until October.  We had to special order ours to get the colors J wants in a manual transmission

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## benski (Jun 21, 2018)

Edd said:


> Test drove a Crosstrek today and was impressed with the interior room. If I can get the wife on board it’ll be a likely replacement for her car.
> 
> I’m at 116k on my 2010 Forester with no significant maintenance issues. If the HG blows on me I’ll probably eat shit on the costs and keep it running as long as I can.
> 
> ...



I have one and it’s a solid car. No problems so far other than occasionally not being able to connect my IPhone 6s over the cord but it has worked as it supposed to with my iPhone X. I find the advances Cruz control impressive. Great for traffic as it does a good job keeping as good distance from car in front of it.


----------



## Edd (Jun 21, 2018)

deadheadskier said:


> We just ordered a VW Golf Alltrack.  You should test drive one
> 
> I'll let you take ours for a spin, but it won't arrive until October.  We had to special order ours to get the colors J wants in a manual transmission
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



Nice looking ride. I’m all about a real wagon.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jun 21, 2018)

Edd said:


> Nice looking ride. I’m all about a real wagon.



Does look nice, but I could probably never bring myself to buy a VW given the issues my family had with a Jetta that was ALWAYS in the shop or VW's emissions scam.


----------



## Edd (Jun 21, 2018)

thetrailboss said:


> Does look nice, but I could probably never bring myself to buy a VW given the issues my family had with a Jetta that was ALWAYS in the shop or VW's emissions scam.



Yes, I agree. I owned 4 in a row in my younger days and love how they (and Audis) perform but there are maintenance issues that I’m too cheap to deal with.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jun 21, 2018)

Edd said:


> Yes, I agree. I owned 4 in a row in my younger days and love how they (and Audis) perform but there are maintenance issues that I’m too cheap to deal with.



Yes, my brother's A4 is another reason why I won't buy VW or Audi.  The Audi was never less than $1,500 each visit!


----------



## SkiingInABlueDream (Jun 21, 2018)

thetrailboss said:


> Yes, my brother's A4 is another reason why I won't buy VW or Audi.  The Audi was never less than $1,500 each visit!



What year is/was it? I'm considering buying an A4.


----------



## Edd (Jun 21, 2018)

SkiingInABlueDream said:


> What year is/was it? I'm considering buying an A4.



My wife also had an A4 (2001) and the repair cost of absolutely anything made me roll my eyes in disgust.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jun 21, 2018)

thetrailboss said:


> Does look nice, but I could probably never bring myself to buy a VW given the issues my family had with a Jetta that was ALWAYS in the shop or VW's emissions scam.


The emissions scam was certainly disheartening, but no more so than the decades long head gasket issue Subaru refused to do right by their customers with.  I dealt with it, my brother dealt with it and l couldn't even tell you how many friends.  I know you have had good luck with your car, but the history of Subaru is a huge turn off to me. 

There are basically five models of cars that come in the configuration we want: five doors, awd, manual transmission, decent gas mileage.  Alltrack, Sportwagen, Forrester, Crosstrek and Compass.   The VW driving dynamics is far superior than the others.  We chose the Alltrack for the added ground clearance over the Sportwagen

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Jun 21, 2018)

SkiingInABlueDream said:


> What year is/was it? I'm considering buying an A4.



No idea.  It has been about 10 years or so.  It was an early-2000's model.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jun 21, 2018)

deadheadskier said:


> The emissions scam was certainly disheartening, but no more so than the decades long head gasket issue Subaru refused to do right by their customers with.  I dealt with it, my brother dealt with it and l couldn't even tell you how many friends.  I know you have had good luck with your car, but the history of Subaru is a huge turn off to me.
> 
> There are basically five models of cars that come in the configuration we want: five doors, awd, manual transmission, decent gas mileage.  Alltrack, Sportwagen, Forrester, Crosstrek and Compass.   The VW driving dynamics is far superior than the others.  We chose the Alltrack for the added ground clearance over the Sportwagen
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



So far my car only has 23k on it.  I certainly am wary of this potential issue.  Hope it doesn't become a problem.


----------



## sull1102 (Jun 21, 2018)

thetrailboss said:


> So far my car only has 23k on it.  I certainly am wary of this potential issue.  Hope it doesn't become a problem.


It most likely will not be an issue for you. The only true way to avoid a Subaru head gasket issue is to get a turbo, they always have utilized a much higher quality material for the turbo motor's head gasket due to increased pressure. That being said, as far back as the second half of m/y 2004  they have improved. That was when they made the initial change to a new design. Then in 09 and 11 they went in and did another few changes here and there. 

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Jul 9, 2018)

We’re at a strange decision point choosing between the Crosstrek and Outback. My wife doesn’t care for the styling of the 2018 Forester, although the 2019 looks to be interesting. 

The Outbacks are going for 0% financing, to get rid of the 2018s. The Crosstreks don’t have that deal.  It’s amazing how the various sized SUVs cross over in terms of prices; with the trim level being a major factor. 

I test drive a Honda CRV and Nissan Rogue this week. The CRV is truly impressive, with more cargo space than the Outback, which blurs the lines since the Outback is on a more substantial platform and feels more high end. The Rogue has all of the toys, it just feels lethargic and body-rolly, which is not something I’m picky about these days. I love the many included options on the Rogue, it is just so goddamn boring to drive. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## sull1102 (Jul 9, 2018)

Go Outback over Crosstrek if the financing is that good and the final deal is right. The Crosstrek is just an Impreza hatchback with plastic cladding and a 1.5inch lift kit, while the Outback is the top model for the brand until the 2019 model year.

The poor Nissan guys seem to really struggle to get any power out of that motor in the Rogue. A coworker just bought his second one and went in saying the one thing he hated about the first was no power, but now he's getting up there in age and the lack of any zoom zoom isn't an issue for him. He did say they made almost no improvement in that power dept in the three year jump.

One car I might strongly recommend you just go take a quick look and test drive, the Mazda CX-5/7(orginally wrote 3 which is probably too small). Those are some really fun to drive crossovers and pricing should be competitive to Subie.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Jul 9, 2018)

Edd said:


> We’re at a strange decision point choosing between the Crosstrek and Outback. My wife doesn’t care for the styling of the 2018 Forester, although the 2019 looks to be interesting.
> 
> The Outbacks are going for 0% financing, to get rid of the 2018s. The Crosstreks don’t have that deal.  It’s amazing how the various sized SUVs cross over in terms of prices; with the trim level being a major factor.
> 
> ...



The 0% was too good to turn down for us as well.  We also considered the CRV but the dealer turned us off.


----------



## heiusa (Jul 9, 2018)

I have my first Subaru, an Impreza and I am on my 4th Rogue.   They both are good cars you really need to drive them and see which one feels the best both in handling and how the driver seat feels.   I feel like the driver seat in the Impreza doesn’t give me enough support on a  long drive where I feel that the rogue is more comfortable on a long drive.  They both are quality vehicles and you can’t go wrong with either one.   I would definitely factor in things like the convenience of the location for service and which one feels more comfortable in the driving position and with the controls and even things like Bluetooth connection to your phone.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jul 9, 2018)

Edd said:


> We’re at a strange decision point choosing between the Crosstrek and Outback. My wife doesn’t care for the styling of the 2018 Forester, although the 2019 looks to be interesting.
> 
> The Outbacks are going for 0% financing, to get rid of the 2018s. The Crosstreks don’t have that deal.  It’s amazing how the various sized SUVs cross over in terms of prices; with the trim level being a major factor.
> 
> ...



What trim Outback are you looking at?  That makes a big difference.  I have the 2.5 Premium and it is perfect for me.  The EyeSight, Lane Assist, Blind Spot Monitors, and other safety features work great and were big selling points.  As one persons said it is about fit and style.  I liked the controls, phone connection, audio system, and other bells and whistles.  I did have a hard time not looking further at the CRV, but the Outback had everything I wanted and pretty much was almost built for me.  And it is still getting over 27 mpg average.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jul 9, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> Go Outback over Crosstrek if the financing is that good and the final deal is right. The Crosstrek is just an Impreza hatchback with plastic cladding and a 1.5inch lift kit, while the Outback is the top model for the brand until the 2019 model year.
> 
> The poor Nissan guys seem to really struggle to get any power out of that motor in the Rogue. A coworker just bought his second one and went in saying the one thing he hated about the first was no power, but now he's getting up there in age and the lack of any zoom zoom isn't an issue for him. He did say they made almost no improvement in that power dept in the three year jump.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I think Mazda makes more compelling cars than Subaru, Honda or Nissan.  Our last three purchases were Mazdas.  Only made the switch to the VW Alltrack for the most recent purchase because you can get it with MT.  Unfortunately, Mazda never released the CX5 with MT in the states.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## benski (Jul 9, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> Go Outback over Crosstrek if the financing is that good and the final deal is right. The Crosstrek is just an Impreza hatchback with plastic cladding and a 1.5inch lift kit, while the Outback is the top model for the brand until the 2019 model year.
> 
> The poor Nissan guys seem to really struggle to get any power out of that motor in the Rogue. A coworker just bought his second one and went in saying the one thing he hated about the first was no power, but now he's getting up there in age and the lack of any zoom zoom isn't an issue for him. He did say they made almost no improvement in that power dept in the three year jump.
> 
> ...



Just be aware Mazda is still holding out from Andriod auto and Apple Carplay. There is a big diffrence in the usability of Carplay and Andriod Auto and whatever any car manufacture or Blackberry puts out.


----------



## Edd (Jul 10, 2018)

thetrailboss said:


> What trim Outback are you looking at?  That makes a big difference.  I have the 2.5 Premium and it is perfect for me.  The EyeSight, Lane Assist, Blind Spot Monitors, and other safety features work great and were big selling points.  As one persons said it is about fit and style.  I liked the controls, phone connection, audio system, and other bells and whistles.  I did have a hard time not looking further at the CRV, but the Outback had everything I wanted and pretty much was almost built for me.  And it is still getting over 27 mpg average.



We were checking out a premium with a moonroof. No eyesight was on it but I do want that. I’m hoping to identify a car on Friday and make an offer. One tiny bummer is that you have to move up to limited trim to get push button start. I had a loaner Honda HRV last week and enjoyed that feature. It’s standard in the Honda and Nissan cars. 

I could live with the Crosstrek since we’ll still have a Forester kicking around to haul a bunch of stuff/people if needed. The Outback was very nice to drive, though.


----------



## Edd (Jul 10, 2018)

thetrailboss said:


> The 0% was too good to turn down for us as well.  We also considered the CRV but the dealer turned us off.



Years ago when I was car shopping I got a don’t-give-a-shit vibe from the Honda dealer so I didn’t even test drive. This time I did and I liked the salesman fine. He told me there’s no incentives offered because “Honda doesn’t have to offer them”. I suspect that’s true but it dampens my enthusiasm somewhat. 

I’ve never owned a Honda but they really have a distinct feel/design that I respect. I feel similar about Subaru. Nissan is a bit harder to pin down. The Rogue I checked out had a hell of a panoramic sunroof though. It’s part of a “sun and sound” package, which includes a 9 speaker Bose stereo.


----------



## Edd (Jul 10, 2018)

deadheadskier said:


> Yeah, I think Mazda makes more compelling cars than Subaru, Honda or Nissan.  Our last three purchases were Mazdas.  Only made the switch to the VW Alltrack for the most recent purchase because you can get it with MT.  Unfortunately, Mazda never released the CX5 with MT in the states.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app





benski said:


> Just be aware Mazda is still holding out from Andriod auto and Apple Carplay. There is a big diffrence in the usability of Carplay and Andriod Auto and whatever any car manufacture or Blackberry puts out.



The Mazda CX-5 is hands down the best looking option in the compact SUV segment IMO. Additionally, along with the Rogue, it has a 40-20-40 rear seat drop down configuration, and that is huge for a ski car carrying 4 people and all of their gear without a rooftop box. You’d think that would be a no-brainer standard feature on every Subaru. 

Unfortunately, the Mazda also gets the worst MPG, along with lacking CarPlay. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## sull1102 (Jul 10, 2018)

If you're into the Apple ecosystem then carplay could be enough to sell you, if you aren't into cars at all and are just kind of meh about spirited driving on a Sunday morning. Personally, could care less for it when the big guys like BMW, Land Rover, Jaguar, and more have just barely started to experiment with Carplay and Android Auto. As for MPG, if you can wait a few weeks maybe two months, Mazda is coming out with a legitimately revolutionary petrol motor that gets diesel mpg with petrol horsepower and no spark plugs... Insane.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Jul 10, 2018)

Edd said:


> We were checking out a premium with a moonroof. No eyesight was on it but I do want that. I’m hoping to identify a car on Friday and make an offer. One tiny bummer is that you have to move up to limited trim to get push button start. I had a loaner Honda HRV last week and enjoyed that feature. It’s standard in the Honda and Nissan cars.
> 
> I could live with the Crosstrek since we’ll still have a Forester kicking around to haul a bunch of stuff/people if needed. The Outback was very nice to drive, though.



I have the Premium with EyeSight, Push Button, and Moonroof.  I love it.  27.5 Mpg average.  



Edd said:


> Years ago when I was car shopping I got a don’t-give-a-shit vibe from the Honda dealer so I didn’t even test drive. This time I did and I liked the salesman fine. He told me there’s no incentives offered because “Honda doesn’t have to offer them”. I suspect that’s true but it dampens my enthusiasm somewhat.
> 
> I’ve never owned a Honda but they really have a distinct feel/design that I respect. I feel similar about Subaru. Nissan is a bit harder to pin down. The Rogue I checked out had a hell of a panoramic sunroof though. It’s part of a “sun and sound” package, which includes a 9 speaker Bose stereo.



I did love my Honda Civic (2008 ) model.  It was hard not to consider a Honda, but the price, dealer, and "we don't have to offer any deals" attitude all pushed us away.  Plus I had heard so-so reviews of the CRV AWD system.  It all depends on what you like.


----------



## 180 (Jul 11, 2018)

Eyesight is the best thing ever.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jul 11, 2018)

thetrailboss: On your Subaru just consider headgaskets 100,000 mi service. It'll be a few hundred bucks at the most, you'll have to do it probably one time in your ownership to be safe. Subaru owners should also look for the tell tale cloudy radiator fluid, I suppose whenever you look under the hood. I've owned 6 Subarus most of which where very high mileage with no HG issues. One time I did have HG blow around 190k miles in a 1998 Forester.

That said,


----------



## Edd (Jul 23, 2018)

Edd said:


> The Outbacks are going for 0% financing, to get rid of the 2018s. The Crosstreks don’t have that deal.  It’s amazing how the various sized SUVs cross over in terms of prices; with the trim level being a major factor.



Looked hard at Outbacks today. Wife wants leather seats and I want Eyesight. Getting both is pricier than we’d like. Grrr...


----------



## sull1102 (Jul 23, 2018)

Get Eyesight, DO NOT CAVE! It is one of the best systems in the road, on par with the Germans and Brits. The leather will get very hot in the sun and will age quicker than cloth .

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## benski (Jul 23, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> Get Eyesight, DO NOT CAVE! It is one of the best systems in the road, on par with the Germans and Brits. The leather will get very hot in the sun and will age quicker than cloth .
> [/URL]



As a college student, I am really questioning the leather better than cloth theory. In a 10 year old car cloth leather really sucks, meanwhile cloth just looks a little warn. If you care about keeping the car cool in the summer, buy a car shade for $8, they make a huge difference.


----------



## bigbog (Jul 23, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> .........As for MPG, if you can wait a few weeks maybe two months, Mazda is coming out with a legitimately revolutionary petrol motor that gets diesel mpg with petrol horsepower and no spark plugs... Insane.



Thanks for mentioning, should be interesting.   Will be waiting for the 19s to arrive before maybe picking up a new car.  Will hang onto my 92' Accord till then.  Was waiting to see what the 19's will look/drive like....now will have Mazda to look at too....however, in reality, I won't be adding anything on to the 4Runner till the little single garage turns into a double...one way or another.


----------



## Edd (Jul 24, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> Get Eyesight, DO NOT CAVE! It is one of the best systems in the road, on par with the Germans and Brits. The leather will get very hot in the sun and will age quicker than cloth [/URL]



We both caved and went for a limited with leather, ES, nav, but not remote start which annoys me. Picking up on Friday. Nicest car I’ve ever bought by a long shot. I hope I run that thing for 15 years.


----------



## Scruffy (Jul 24, 2018)

Edd said:


> We both caved and went for a limited with leather, ES, nav, but not remote start which annoys me. Picking up on Friday. Nicest car I’ve ever bought by a long shot. I hope I run that thing for 15 years.



Congrats! Good luck with it.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jul 24, 2018)

Edd said:


> We both caved and went for a limited with leather, ES, nav, but not remote start which annoys me. Picking up on Friday. Nicest car I’ve ever bought by a long shot. I hope I run that thing for 15 years.



NICE!!!!  Congrats!!!


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## sull1102 (Jul 24, 2018)

Great choice, congrats on the buy

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Jul 25, 2018)

Thanks everyone!


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## deadheadskier (Jul 25, 2018)

Enjoy.  Can always add an after market remote starter for not too much money.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Glenn (Jul 25, 2018)

Congrats Edd!


----------



## sull1102 (Jul 25, 2018)

I think you'll find that the remote starter is not the necessity that it once was. New motors warm up pretty quick and they get coolant following through the heater core quick to get you heat before it's fully warmed up. 

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## andrec10 (Jul 25, 2018)

Edd said:


> We both caved and went for a limited with leather, ES, nav, but not remote start which annoys me. Picking up on Friday. Nicest car I’ve ever bought by a long shot. I hope I run that thing for 15 years.



Did you get the 3.6? I have a 18 with that and its soo smooth. I diod get the remote start, only thing that bugs me about it as when you open the door, the car shuts off. Security feature. Also no access to stsart the car from your phone, as opposed to our Jeep Grand Cherokee.


----------



## Edd (Jul 25, 2018)

No, we went 2.5. Yes, I saw a YouTube vid about the motor shutting off and I think that would bug me too. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## bigbog (Jul 26, 2018)

Congrats....have fun with it!


----------



## Edd (Aug 2, 2018)

180 said:


> Eyesight is the best thing ever.



Yeah, I’m very glad we got that. The adaptive CC works amazingly well. I drove in stop and go traffic on Rt 1 in Maine yesterday and that was a surreal experience. Set it to 25 mph, planted my feet on the floor and watched it nearly drive itself for 10 minutes.


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 2, 2018)

Edd said:


> Yeah, I’m very glad we got that. The adaptive CC works amazingly well. I drove in stop and go traffic on Rt 1 in Maine yesterday and that was a surreal experience. Set it to 25 mph, planted my feet on the floor and watched it nearly drive itself for 10 minutes.



I use it everyday.  Like auto pilot on a plane, I literally use it all but the first and last couple minutes of driving.  It is a great insurance policy.


----------



## benski (Aug 2, 2018)

thetrailboss said:


> I use it everyday.  Like auto pilot on a plane, I literally use it all but the first and last couple minutes of driving.  It is a great insurance policy.



Same. I just wish eyesight cc would stay on when the car stops for more than a second. I think stop and go traffic is when it’s most useful.


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 3, 2018)

benski said:


> Same. I just wish eyesight cc would stay on when the car stops for more than a second. I think stop and go traffic is when it’s most useful.



Agreed on both points


----------



## sull1102 (Aug 3, 2018)

For now that's technically a legal thing, Uncle Sam has some regulations that make it not doable for now as things are in most vehicles. The cars are able to do it, at least most are, with the sensors and systems they currently use so you'll see that change in the future.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## benski (Aug 4, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> For now that's technically a legal thing, Uncle Sam has some regulations that make it not doable for now as things are in most vehicles. The cars are able to do it, at least most are, with the sensors and systems they currently use so you'll see that change in the future.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app



What, drive themselves? Or at least threw stop and go traffic.


----------



## sull1102 (Aug 4, 2018)

Both, but I'm talking next year or two you should see ACC opened up so manufacturers can allow the system to work as it was always intended in stop and go. And then five years down the road or so is when you'll get the genuinely autonomous, not just Tesla's autopilot, features in high end luxury cars.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## benski (Aug 4, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> Both, but I'm talking next year or two you should see ACC opened up so manufacturers can allow the system to work as it was always intended in stop and go. And then five years down the road or so is when you'll get the genuinely autonomous, not just Tesla's autopilot, features in high end luxury cars.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app



Why don’t they work as intended now.  Holding the break in stop and go traffic for more than 3 seconds seams like little to ask for.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Aug 4, 2018)

Edd said:


> Test drove a Crosstrek today and was impressed with the interior room. If I can get the wife on board it’ll be a likely replacement for her car.
> 
> I’m at 116k on my 2010 Forester with no significant maintenance issues. If the HG blows on me I’ll probably eat shit on the costs and keep it running as long as I can.



Your car might not be worth salvaging if the HG goes out.

You need to replace it, IMO, soon based on your mileage to enjoy another 100k worry free miles. Much much cheaper to do now. If you wait until the HG goes out you could be looking for a donor engine.

edit: I see I'm late to respond and maybe you have a new car already


----------



## Edd (Aug 4, 2018)

bdfreetuna said:


> Your car might not be worth salvaging if the HG goes out.
> 
> You need to replace it, IMO, soon based on your mileage to enjoy another 100k worry free miles. Much much cheaper to do now. If you wait until the HG goes out you could be looking for a donor engine.
> 
> edit: I see I'm late to respond and maybe you have a new car already



I saw awhile back that you were recommending preventative maintenance for HGs. That’s new to me. I’ll check with our mechanic to see if it’s worth doing.


----------



## sull1102 (Aug 4, 2018)

Edd said:


> I saw awhile back that you were recommending preventative maintenance for HGs. That’s new to me. I’ll check with our mechanic to see if it’s worth doing.


Don't be shocked if he says oh yeah you should always do those on a Subaru. With HGs on any motor there are signs to look for check your coolant see if it looks oily, check your oil see if it looks like coffee or at all milky. Also check your coolant levels, if you notice over time that some is disappearing then you my friend have a decision to make in the next 3-6 months cause it is going to happen, just a matter of when.

As for is it worth it to do the job, well if you own that car outright aka no payments on it title in your name that's a big bonus. A lease on something comparable is going to be a nice $240+ monthly payment plus a little bump on the insurance, but its also a brand new car. You could sell that 2010 fozzy as is right now before the HGs go and then it's someone else's issue. You take the 8-10 grand from the sale on the lease and it's paid for for three years. Personally, if I owned that car since it was new, cared for it properly and everything else was in good shape, I'd replace those head gaskets and the timing belt all at once, yes I know it's tough to pull the trigger on a $2200 job but that car would last me to 220K easily with all that work. You are basically deciding if you want that Forester around until 2024 or dump it now.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## sull1102 (Aug 4, 2018)

benski said:


> Why don’t they work as intended now.  Holding the break in stop and go traffic for more than 3 seconds seams like little to ask for.


Uncle Sam's different laws and regulations prevent it, for now. Same reason we can't get certain options on vehicles that are available abroad, things like sonar to detect water levels and until fairly recently laser LED headlights. One example would be the BMW i3, when it came out you could not get a sunroof here in the states, but you could drive one on US roads with a sunroof if it had vehicle manufacturer plate on it. The way the glass panels were designed didn't meet crash regulations or something along those lines, but it did meet the EU regs so it was available overseas from Day 1. Here it took two model years before regulations were changed and the option sheet grew a bit.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Aug 5, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> As for is it worth it to do the job, well if you own that car outright aka no payments on it title in your name that's a big bonus. A lease on something comparable is going to be a nice $240+ monthly payment plus a little bump on the insurance, but its also a brand new car. You could sell that 2010 fozzy as is right now before the HGs go and then it's someone else's issue. You take the 8-10 grand from the sale on the lease and it's paid for for three years. Personally, if I owned that car since it was new, cared for it properly and everything else was in good shape, I'd replace those head gaskets and the timing belt all at once, yes I know it's tough to pull the trigger on a $2200 job but that car would last me to 220K easily with all that work. You are basically deciding if you want that Forester around until 2024 or dump it now.



Had the timing belt replaced at 101k along with a ton of other work. I’m good about oil changes and tire rotations, but I’m neglectful about tune-ups. Unfortunately, maintenance of the HG did not come up, and I just checked the bill to make sure. 

As it turns out, my wife will take over the Forester for her primary car; she does 25k miles a year and we don’t want to subject the new Outback to that. A lease would not work for her with the mileage. At the moment, I’m keeping my fingers crossed that it’ll last 2+ years. Not the best plan ever but sometimes you get lucky.


----------



## sull1102 (Aug 5, 2018)

Edd said:


> Had the timing belt replaced at 101k along with a ton of other work. I’m good about oil changes and tire rotations, but I’m neglectful about tune-ups. Unfortunately, maintenance of the HG did not come up, and I just checked the bill to make sure.
> 
> As it turns out, my wife will take over the Forester for her primary car; she does 25k miles a year and we don’t want to subject the new Outback to that. A lease would not work for her with the mileage. At the moment, I’m keeping my fingers crossed that it’ll last 2+ years. Not the best plan ever but sometimes you get lucky.


Good move on the timing belt! That was very smart, see a lot of people that try to push it and blow those Subaru motors. If you've done the belt, to me at least, the decision was made then to keep it and invest. I can tell you if you go out there today check your coolant level today with a cold motor, write it in your phone where it is in relation to the full line, then check it in a week. If there is no change, check it September 15th WITH A COLD MOTOR if there's no change by then your head gaskets are 100% okay for now. Just go back and check it every three months at that point, or more if you are willing. As soon as you notice any change or you notice that oily rainbow when you pop the reservoir cap, well start saving because time is ticking. 

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## bdfreetuna (Aug 6, 2018)

Good advice from sull1102 ... if you don't want to do HG know what to look for in the coolant.

Only thing I'm questioning from Sull and a lot of people is the bill to replace HG preemtively. If the heads are damaged or warped from overheating (HG failure) it's gonna be $2000.

But anyone looking to do this preemtively... call John's Suby Repair in Goshen MA. I don't want to give quotes on their behalf but the bill is a fraction. When you get a low quote from a good shop like that it becomes a total no brainer if you like your car.

Not just beating this dead horse for Edd but for anyone reading I think it's important to settle the topic. This applies to all 2.0, 2.2, 2.5L naturally aspirated EJ series motors. I don't know if it applies to FA20 or FA24 (newer direct injection) but I would not want those motors anyway (on those you get the pleasure of walnut blasting your valves every 50,000 miles).

I still drive a Subaru because it's the best bang for the buck with a manual transmission, best AWD(depends which model though) and fun/fast to drive. I don't have head gasket concerns though because I've already learned that lesson (and anyway I have an EJ255 forced induction now with 140k on the clock and perfect compression/leakdown tests).

TBH if you don't want to do HG on that Forester I'd just sell it on Craigslist and buy a cheap Rav4 2005-2012, similar enough and less stuff to worry about. The Rav4 from those years have an optional V6 that I highly recommend for fun factor. This is what my wife drives and it's no slouch.


----------



## benski (Aug 11, 2018)

My 2018 Crosstrek roof rails look like they are on backwards. They are wider towards the front than the back. I think this is wrong. Am I correct? It looks like I could take them off and turn them around.


----------



## Edd (Aug 12, 2018)

benski said:


> My 2018 Crosstrek roof rails look like they are on backwards. They are wider towards the front than the back. I think this is wrong. Am I correct? It looks like I could take them off and turn them around.



That sounds nuts but doctors operate on the wrong body parts. They don’t look like this?


----------



## benski (Aug 12, 2018)

Edd said:


> That sounds nuts but doctors operate on the wrong body parts. They don’t look like this?
> 
> View attachment 23958



I can’t tell which direction the rails are facing.


----------



## Edd (Aug 12, 2018)

The more substantial connections between the rail and the roof are towards the back of the car. The front looks to have a thinner pillar. If you’re correct, I’m sure the dealer will readily correct it. I wouldn’t try to change it myself. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## sull1102 (Aug 12, 2018)

That is the correct orientation, the design is looking to improve aero and wind noise.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## benski (Aug 12, 2018)

Edd said:


> The more substantial connections between the rail and the roof are towards the back of the car. The front looks to have a thinner pillar. If you’re correct, I’m sure the dealer will readily correct it. I wouldn’t try to change it myself.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone



I am talking about the rail itself.


----------



## Edd (Aug 12, 2018)

benski said:


> I am talking about the rail itself.



Yes, that’s what I’m talking about. I’m ignoring the crossbars and basket in that picture.


----------



## sull1102 (Aug 12, 2018)

So everything looks good, but to clarify for anyone looking in the future, the roof rails are the black pieces directly attaching to the vehicle, crossbars attach to the roof rails, basket attachs to crossbars. Nowadays most lightweight baskets can face either direction, most crossbars are tapered for better aero and same with the roof rails. Admittedly the rails certainly do look a little odd, one of things that once you notice it it bothers you...

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## benski (Aug 12, 2018)

Edd said:


> Yes, that’s what I’m talking about. I’m ignoring the crossbars and basket in that picture.



I meant the crossbar. The pillar rail that goes from front to back obviously can’t go on backwards.


----------



## Edd (Aug 12, 2018)

benski said:


> I meant the crossbar. The pillar rail that goes from front to back obviously can’t go on backwards.



Ok, that’s why the rails being backwards sounded insane to me. Easy fix, obviously.


----------



## sull1102 (Aug 12, 2018)

benski said:


> I meant the crossbar. The pillar rail that goes from front to back obviously can’t go on backwards.


Crossbars are also attached properly. Picture an airplane wing, it's wider and rounded on the cutting sides and drapes off to the back, that allows for less wind noise in the cabin, something Subie always struggles with for decades now, and slightly better MPG. You want to keep them so the wide end of facing forward.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Scruffy (Aug 12, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> Crossbars are also attached properly. *Picture an airplane wing*,* it's wider and rounded on the cutting sides and drapes off to the back, that allows for less wind noise in the cabin*, something Subie always struggles with for decades now, and slightly better MPG. You want to keep them so the wide end of facing forward.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app



 Damn, those liars in physics class and their lift theory. Who knew it was all about noise. :-o


----------



## Glenn (Aug 13, 2018)

Here's a vid of a guy installing OEM ones on his 2018: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-GMxjsdeYs


----------



## SkiingInABlueDream (Aug 24, 2018)

Something I just thought of WRT the head gaskets issue. It could potentially reduce the resale of the car to zero. I have an 07 Impreza that I bought back in Nov for embarrassingly too much, and didn't know HG were a problem point for Subarus. Im currently buying a new car and getting $1700 on trade-in . According to KBB that's in range for my model in fair-to-ok shape. But the dealer doesn't know (or care) that my car needs a $1700 head gasket job. Tunas comment (about a shop that'll do that job for less) notwithstanding (because I have never heard that repair priced less anywhere else), basically my car has zero value. Granted, my car is a base model impreza 2.5i which was cheap as shit even in it's day and compared to my 04 wrx, so it's value would not have been too much even in perfect shape.  But it seems crazy that this car, with only ~100k miles, is basically a parts car now.


----------



## 180 (Aug 24, 2018)

I am selling my 2012 Impreza, 80k fair shape.  Tires are 1 year old (snows).  Asking 6k.  PM for more details.


----------



## 180 (Aug 28, 2018)

anybody ever replace the door regulator on the power window?


----------



## sull1102 (Aug 28, 2018)

Done more than fair share of 'em but I'll tell you what, when it came to doing it on the Subie I have to after hours of cursing at the sky. I could not believe how tough it was to change the regulator on the Forester at least.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## 180 (Aug 28, 2018)

AGREE, watching the youttube video shows how tough it is.


----------



## Edd (Oct 25, 2018)

There’s a warranty extension for all 2018 models. It covers the CVT for 10 years/100k miles. Searches tell me that this has been done for previous years also. Can’t find much on the cause for the latest extension, but the reasons aren’t likely good. Nice to have the extra coverage. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 26, 2018)

Edd said:


> There’s a warranty extension for all 2018 models. It covers the CVT for 10 years/100k miles. Searches tell me that this has been done for previous years also. Can’t find much on the cause for the latest extension, but the reasons aren’t likely good. Nice to have the extra coverage.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone



Got a notice for my 2017.  Same thing.  Makes me wonder.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Oct 26, 2018)

Got mine for my 2018 Outback LTD , hmmmmm


----------



## sull1102 (Oct 26, 2018)

And that's why I have CVTs. You're just asking for something to go wrong, especially in a heavier vehicle like the Outback and Foz.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 26, 2018)

http://www.subarucomplaints.com/trends/cvt/


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 26, 2018)

The only big gripe so far for my 2017 Outback, now with 26k miles on it, is the thin windshield.  It cracks very easily. I’ve already gone through two windshields. First one was a real pain because they had a backorder of two months on it.  Average MPG is 30. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## sull1102 (Oct 26, 2018)

Big BIG BIG BIG HUGE Subaru recall coming in the next few weeks here that will involve all models. Could take a year or more to actually do the work as it involves engine removal and pull apart. Not sure what model years just yet, will post when I find out. You will want to jump in the line very early if you can.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 27, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> Big BIG BIG BIG HUGE Subaru recall coming in the next few weeks here that will involve all models. Could take a year or more to actually do the work as it involves engine removal and pull apart. Not sure what model years just yet, will post when I find out. You will want to jump in the line very early if you can.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app



Can you give more information? 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Edd (Oct 27, 2018)

Here’s something. 

https://www.torquenews.com/1084/subaru-could-issue-massive-recall-affecting-many-us-models


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## sull1102 (Oct 27, 2018)

thetrailboss said:


> Can you give more information?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


Once I hear more, whether from internal or public I'll let you know. It will be ALL Imprezas, Foresters, Outbacks, WRXs, possibly including the turboed versions as well as the naturally aspirated and it will be both stick shift and CVT models. Its an issue with the 2.5L that they put in everything. Model years is the big unknown, could be 06 and newer, aka the basic revision update they did, or could be even more than that and include back to 03 on some models like the Forester. This will be as big as when Toyota replaced Tacoma frames for free a few years ago and gave Enterprise and every other rental agency a ton of business for a year plus.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 27, 2018)

Edd said:


> Here’s something.
> 
> https://www.torquenews.com/1084/subaru-could-issue-massive-recall-affecting-many-us-models
> 
> ...



Holy sh^%!


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 27, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> Once I hear more, whether from internal or public I'll let you know. It will be ALL Imprezas, Foresters, Outbacks, WRXs, possibly including the turboed versions as well as the naturally aspirated and it will be both stick shift and CVT models. Its an issue with the 2.5L that they put in everything. Model years is the big unknown, could be 06 and newer, aka the basic revision update they did, or could be even more than that and include back to 03 on some models like the Forester. This will be as big as when Toyota replaced Tacoma frames for free a few years ago and gave Enterprise and every other rental agency a ton of business for a year plus.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app



Sounds like the article that was posted might be the issue....i.e. a defective spring in engines.  Yikes.


----------



## Glenn (Oct 28, 2018)

thetrailboss said:


> Sounds like the article that was posted might be the issue....i.e. a defective spring in engines.  Yikes.



Given the boxer engine, that'll require a lot more work vs. a traditional engine.


----------



## Edd (Oct 28, 2018)

sull1102 said:


> Once I hear more, whether from internal or public I'll let you know.



Mind explaining the internal part? I’m not aware of what you do.


----------



## sull1102 (Oct 28, 2018)

Edd said:


> Mind explaining the internal part? I’m not aware of what you do.


And that's a good thing that allows me to share a little bit more than if you did know. I'm in the industry well above the retail level and not with Subaru, but it's a pretty small industry when you get to a certain point and you hear things through the grapevine. The article posted is almost spot on, there's also a chance that this is a way to admit to the head gasket problems that have troubled Subarus for going on 20 years now.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## sull1102 (Oct 28, 2018)

Glenn said:


> Given the boxer engine, that'll require a lot more work vs. a traditional engine.


Ding, ding, ding, ding! 10 points for you sir. The boxer is great for driving dynamics, really the best option, but for things like this it is the worst. The whole motor will be coming out of the car for this particular recall and that will really boost those billable shop hours, good for the techs and good for techs looking for work because Subaru dealers will likely be looking into hiring a whole bunch more on pretty short notice.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Glenn (Oct 29, 2018)

I'm sure the good ones will figure out ways to make it a faster job than the book rate indicates.


----------



## Edd (Oct 29, 2018)

Fixing engine issues all the way back to 2003 sounds insane to me. But, I do have a friend who had his Tundra frame replaced after owning the truck for well over 10 years. No charge. Our 2010 Forester is still running strong at 125k but having engine defects fixed FOC would be a dream come true. I won’t get my hopes up. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## sull1102 (Oct 29, 2018)

Edd said:


> Fixing engine issues all the way back to 2003 sounds insane to me. But, I do have a friend who had his Tundra frame replaced after owning the truck for well over 10 years. No charge. Our 2010 Forester is still running strong at 125k but having engine defects fixed FOC would be a dream come true. I won’t get my hopes up.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


Everything I'm hearing days this recall will be in the same scale as Toyota giving out new frames on those Tacoma and Tundra trucks, best vehicles ever made 

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Oct 30, 2018)

Since this is a Subaru nerd thread anyway I’ll post this pic of an aftermarket stereo we just installed in the 2010 Forester. It looks and sounds shockingly good compared to the previous unit.


----------



## sull1102 (Oct 30, 2018)

Edd said:


> Since this is a Subaru nerd thread anyway I’ll post this pic of an aftermarket stereo we just installed in the 2010 Forester. It looks and sounds shockingly good compared to the previous unit.
> 
> View attachment 24119


Looks great dude! Nice work, looks factory installed even

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Glenn (Oct 30, 2018)

That's cool! Works with CarPlay as well.


----------



## sull1102 (Oct 30, 2018)

Quick update on the upcoming recall, new line of thought is maybe Outbacks, Legacys, and Imprezas MIGHT not get called in because they are built in Indiana. The Fozzy, BR-Z, WRX, and WRX STI are Japanese built and the BR-Z has been mentioned time and time aagin

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## sull1102 (Nov 3, 2018)

It's in the news past couple days now and I'm very surprised to some degree. Recall is for Fozzys BRZs Imprezas and Crosstreks for 2012-2013.

Sent from my Pixel using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## gmcunni (Dec 20, 2018)

2015 outback failed an oil consumption test today (oil down about a quart every 3 months).... getting a new engine installed in a couple weeks.


----------



## thetrailboss (Dec 20, 2018)

gmcunni said:


> 2015 outback failed an oil consumption test today (oil down about a quart every 3 months).... getting a new engine installed in a couple weeks.



Yikes


----------



## Glenn (Dec 20, 2018)

Wow! Did they state what they thought the cause was?


----------



## gmcunni (Dec 20, 2018)

Glenn said:


> Wow! Did they state what they thought the cause was?



no, but it was my wife at the shop today and she just wanted to get home so she wasn't asking many questions.

covered under warranty so that's good.  I'll likely be taking it in so I'll try to get some details from the service mgr on it.  But from what my wife said it is not uncommon.    We had reported low oil 3 changes ago.  the replaced something but that didn't fix it.  last time we arranged to do a consumption test.  they filled the oil and after 1200 miles we had to bring it back in.  that was today.  When wife went in they told her if it fails they need to replace the engine and she can't drive the car off the lot.  She freaked.   so it failed but they said it wasn't a bad lost amount so they topped her off with oil and ordered a new engine. said it would be in after Christmas.  We needed the subi this weekend, taking the family to Breckenridge and the jeep isn't good for 4 people + gear.


----------



## Ol Dirty Noodle (Dec 21, 2018)

Probably burnt piston rings or valve stem seals if it wasn’t leaking but was losing that much


----------



## Glenn (Dec 21, 2018)

Keep us posted on what the results are. At least you can still use the car until the new engine comes in.


----------



## Edd (Feb 22, 2020)

My 10 year old Forester with 148k miles has been problematic recently. An intermittent starting issue proved beyond my mechanic’s ability to diagnose. It spent four days at the dealership and multiple issues were addressed to the tune of $1800+. 

That was a month ago. Last night it didn’t start again. Not turning over but the battery isn’t dead. Likely a starter. 

This is leading to conversations about a new car but our Outback is less than two years old. I’d like to get the Forester to last a couple more years so we’re done with the Outback payments but that’s getting tough to justify. Also, the Forester still has the original head gaskets which obviously worries me. 

Edit: And today the sumbitch started right up which means I have yet another intermittent problem. Last one went months before it was diagnosed. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Smellytele (Feb 22, 2020)

Aren’t subarus know for timing belt issues after 100k


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Edd (Feb 22, 2020)

Smellytele said:


> Aren’t subarus know for timing belt issues after 100k
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



Not to my knowledge. The maintenance guide says to replace at 105k, which is what I did. Newer Subarus use a chain, I think.


----------

