Driven: 2010 Subaru Legacy, the car Subaru needs...

[Glenn]

Is this the production version?

Looks somewhat like a Nissan Altima...with a roof/windowline similar to the first gen B5 VW Passat.

 

[riverc0il]

Is this the production version?

Looks somewhat like a Nissan Altima...with a roof/windowline similar to the first gen B5 VW Passat.

It screams Nissan Altima. That is definitely a major step down from the current exterior. Bummer. Maybe I will be buying used instead of new. And there are other AWD options on the market as well. Subbie took a sure sale in a year or two and clouded it with doubt with this remodel.

 

[wa-loaf]

Is this the production version?

Looks somewhat like a Nissan Altima...with a roof/windowline similar to the first gen B5 VW Passat.

It screams Nissan Altima. That is definitely a major step down from the current exterior. Bummer. Maybe I will be buying used instead of new. And there are other AWD options on the market as well. Subbie took a sure sale in a year or two and clouded it with doubt with this remodel.

It wouldn't be too bad, but the headlights throw the whole thing off. They look ridiculous.

 

[Philpug]

Don't pass complete judgment until you see the car in person, it does look better balanced. On that note, even going back to my original post, the car is not for me. Reasons...

1. I want a wagon, the wagon will not be offered in the states
2. It is too big, I don;t need a car this big, I don't want a car this big
3. I don't want an Outback, just because I need storage space, doesn't mean I want a pseudo SUV.
4. Yes, they added some nice features, but they lowered build quality, just touch the dash materials on the current Legacy and this one.
5. Handling, I like a lower center of gravity. Yes, compared to most, Subies have a lower CG, but a Legacy Wagon is lower than the Outback.

 

[Geoff]

4. Yes, they added some nice features, but they lowered build quality, just touch the dash materials on the current Legacy and this one.

Isn't "build quality" the manufacturing quality? Orange peel paint, poor hood & door alignment, squeaks & rattles, failures due to poor assembly....

Sounds like you're complaining about material quality. When the US dollar collapsed a few years ago, I'd assume that all the Japanese car companies opted to skimp on materials to cost reduce the next version of their low end and mid-level cars. It kind of makes you wonder where else they shaved a few bucks.

 

[Philpug]

Isn't "build quality" the manufacturing quality? Orange peel paint, poor hood & door alignment, squeaks & rattles, failures due to poor assembly....

Sounds like you're complaining about material quality. When the US dollar collapsed a few years ago, I'd assume that all the Japanese car companies opted to skimp on materials to cost reduce the next version of their low end and mid-level cars. It kind of makes you wonder where else they shaved a few bucks.

Yes, I should have referred to it as material quality.

 

[wa-loaf]

So I just saw an add online from Audi. They are going to be selling the TDI version's here. http://www.audiusa.com/us/brand/en.html?csref=38243901215856635

 

[powbmps]

This thread makes me miss my GT. sniff

Phil, do you have any photos?

 

[Philpug]

This thread makes me miss my GT. sniff

Phil, do you have any photos?

I didn't bother taking any pics since it will be very common place shortly.

 

[ComeBackMudPuddles]

this review of the new 2010 legacy provides food for thought:

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/29/first-drive-2010-subaru-legacy-improves-commercial-appeal-reta/

 

[eastcoastpowderhound]

3. I don't want an Outback, just because I need storage space, doesn't mean I want a pseudo SUV.
.

I've never thought of the/my outback as a psuedo SUV...hell, its a 4cyl! Its just a wagon with more clearance...I don't think of the audi allroad or the volvo XC as psuedo SUVs either...more like an alternative to an suv. The new foresters look more like a wanna-be suv to me than the outbacks.

 

[eastcoastpowderhound]

So I just saw an add online from Audi. They are going to be selling the TDI version's here. http://www.audiusa.com/us/brand/en.html?csref=38243901215856635

I'm in Austria right now and my rental car is an A3 1.9L TDi...fun little drive, tight steering and a solid road feel up to 160k/100mph...starts to get a little light at 200K/125mph...and its the S-line model. The thing sips fuel though...122miles averaging 90mph+ and I haven't even used 1/4 of a tank. looking forward to the drive back to Munich in about an hour. Gotta love the german autobahns...where else can you be going 100mph and get passed like you are standing still!
They've got the new 4 door porsche outside the airport in munich...would love to take one of those for a ride!

 

[riverc0il]

this review of the new 2010 legacy provides food for thought:

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/29/first-drive-2010-subaru-legacy-improves-commercial-appeal-reta/

Looks like a lot of improvements went into the new model!! All that AND a reduced price tag, nice. The look still isn't growing on me. Maybe it will look better with a spoiler. :blink: This was a bit concerning:

When we inquired about the possibility of selling a Legacy equipped with the torque-rich 2.0-liter diesel boxer currently on offer in Europe, Subaru officials were decidedly non-committal. While the price of U.S. diesel has dropped precipitously over the past several months, significant reengineering costs would have to be figured in accommodate North America's far inferior fuel quality, and the company is unsure about being able to produce such models at a profit. By their own estimates, Subaru officials confide that they believe that that the leader in affordable diesel, Volkswagen, is "subventing" their stateside TDI offerings "by several thousand dollars" – a nice way of saying that they're losing money on each unit sold in order to test the waters and gain share.

What's up with that, Camp? No diesel for the US after all?

 

[wa-loaf]

I'm in Austria right now and my rental car is an A3 1.9L TDi...fun little drive, tight steering and a solid road feel up to 160k/100mph...starts to get a little light at 200K/125mph...and its the S-line model. The thing sips fuel though...122miles averaging 90mph+ and I haven't even used 1/4 of a tank. looking forward to the drive back to Munich in about an hour. Gotta love the german autobahns...where else can you be going 100mph and get passed like you are standing still!
They've got the new 4 door porsche outside the airport in munich...would love to take one of those for a ride!

Sweet. I had a Golf wagon diesel there a few years ago. Six speed manual and the thing hauled ass. Nothing like driving bumper to bumper in rush hour at 120mph. :-D

 

[Geoff]

I've never thought of the/my outback as a psuedo SUV...hell, its a 4cyl! Its just a wagon with more clearance...I don't think of the audi allroad or the volvo XC as psuedo SUVs either...more like an alternative to an suv. The new foresters look more like a wanna-be suv to me than the outbacks.

My 1987 S-10 Blazer had small 6 cylinder engine that put out a mighty 110 horsepower. The base model had a 2.5L 4 cylinder that put out an awesome 92 horsepower. I don't think anyone could argue that a 4 cylinder S-10 Blazer wasn't an SUV. A complete P.O.S? Sure. A 2010 Outback with a 6 cylinder engine puts out 256 horsepower. Cylinders, displacement, and horsepower have nothing to do with whether something is an "SUV". Ground clearance, a 4wd system, and a body with a rear tailgate make it an SUV.

By the way, for CAFE rating, a Subaru Outback is in the "light truck" category just like all the other SUVs. ...or at least it was in the mid-1990's the last time I looked. The whole reason the SUV category exists is to sneak passenger cars with poor fuel economy into a non-car category. Another instance where the federal government meddled with the market. They killed off the good ol' station wagon since automakers had to disguise it as a 'van' or a 'light truck' to escape passenger car CAFE requirements. That's why you can't get useful cars like a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry as a station wagon in the US while they're available elsewhere in the world. In the US, you can only get the wagon versions those platforms disguized as SUVs.

 

[wa-loaf]

That's why you can't get useful cars like a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry as a station wagon in the US while they're available elsewhere in the world. In the US, you can only get the wagon versions those platforms disguized as SUVs.

I don't buy that. The mileage hit in converting an Accord or Camry to station wagon is negligible. Station wagons died because soccer moms switched to min-vans and the rest of the folks were told that SUV's were much cooler and practical than the station wagon. Station wagons went away due to lack of interest. In Europe high gas prices kept the folks who needed a little extra space and fuel efficiency buying wagons.

 

[Geoff]

I don't buy that. The mileage hit in converting an Accord or Camry to station wagon is negligible. Station wagons died because soccer moms switched to min-vans and the rest of the folks were told that SUV's were much cooler and practical than the station wagon. Station wagons went away due to lack of interest. In Europe high gas prices kept the folks who needed a little extra space and fuel efficiency buying wagons.

Go read up on CAFE history. That's not why it's done that way in the US. Detroit stopped making those huge station wagons because they were legislated into oblivion. Detroit could provide the same passenger and cargo capacity as a light truck and be exempted from CAFE regulations. Soccer moms didn't buy Blazers, Broncos/Exploders, and Cherokees because they hated station wagons. They bought them because station wagons were removed from the market. Those early SUVs sucked. They were unreliable. They drove horribly. If you needed the space, you had no other option than an SUV or a minivan.

The bigger station wagons with higher horsepower engines would apply to the average fleet fuel economy. Every one of those sold meant they couln't sell a high margin premium performance car. It turned out that many/most buyers wanted the utility of a station wagon so SUV and minivan sales exploded.

 

[wa-loaf]

Go read up on CAFE history. That's not why it's done that way in the US. Detroit stopped making those huge station wagons because they were legislated into oblivion. Detroit could provide the same passenger and cargo capacity as a light truck and be exempted from CAFE regulations. Soccer moms didn't buy Blazers, Broncos/Exploders, and Cherokees because they hated station wagons. They bought them because station wagons were removed from the market. Those early SUVs sucked. They were unreliable. They drove horribly. If you needed the space, you had no other option than an SUV or a minivan.

The bigger station wagons with higher horsepower engines would apply to the average fleet fuel economy. Every one of those sold meant they couln't sell a high margin premium performance car. It turned out that many/most buyers wanted the utility of a station wagon so SUV and minivan sales exploded.

Huge wood paneled station wagon does not = Camry/Accord wagon.

 

[Geoff]

Huge wood paneled station wagon does not = Camry/Accord wagon.

No, but it's all about average fleet economy for US built cars. Camry and Accord are built in the US and thus qualify as US cars. As soon as you build cars in the US, the cars you import don't count against your average fleet fuel economy. Any sale that can be moved to "light truck" allows you to substitute a high margin performance car without hurting your average fleet fuel economy. A "Crossover SUV" is just a station wagon that can be reclassified as a light truck using CAFE loopholes so it doesn't count for CAFE laws.

That's why you see Camry/Accord wagons everywhere else in the world but not in North America. I think it's really screwed up.

SUVs also escape from most tinted window regulations while the car on the same platform looks like a fishbowl.

Edited:
I looked up some numbers. From 1990 through 2010, CAFE for passenger cars has been 27.5 mpg. The CAFE for light trucks over that same timeframe has gradually risen from 20 mpg to 23.5 mpg. Vehicles with high load capacity (8000 pound GVWR) are exempted though that number was just increased. Those are big pickup trucks. A Subaru Outback doesn't get 27.5 mpg. Thus the incentive to classify it as a light truck. It also helps explain why the Legacy Wagon vanished in the US.

This is from the department of transportation:

Authority to establish vehicle classifications for the purposes of calculating CAFE was delegated to NHTSA. Specifically, the definitions are as follows:

1) Passenger Car – any 4-wheel vehicle not designed for off-road use that is manufactured primarily for use in transporting 10 people or less.

2) Truck – a 4-wheel vehicle which is designed for off-road operation (has 4-wheel drive or is more than 6,000 lbs. GVWR and has physical features consistent with those of a truck); or which is designed to perform at least one of the following functions: (1) transport more than 10 people; (2) provide temporary living quarters; (3) transport property in an open bed; (4) permit greater cargo-carrying capacity than passenger-carrying volume; or (5) can be converted to an open bed vehicle by removal of rear seats to form a flat continuous floor with the use of simple tools.

 

[eastcoastpowderhound]

My 1987 S-10 Blazer had small 6 cylinder engine that put out a mighty 110 horsepower. The base model had a 2.5L 4 cylinder that put out an awesome 92 horsepower. I don't think anyone could argue that a 4 cylinder S-10 Blazer wasn't an SUV. A complete P.O.S? Sure. A 2010 Outback with a 6 cylinder engine puts out 256 horsepower. Cylinders, displacement, and horsepower have nothing to do with whether something is an "SUV". Ground clearance, a 4wd system, and a body with a rear tailgate make it an SUV.

By the way, for CAFE rating, a Subaru Outback is in the "light truck" category just like all the other SUVs. ...or at least it was in the mid-1990's the last time I looked. The whole reason the SUV category exists is to sneak passenger cars with poor fuel economy into a non-car category. Another instance where the federal government meddled with the market. They killed off the good ol' station wagon since automakers had to disguise it as a 'van' or a 'light truck' to escape passenger car CAFE requirements. That's why you can't get useful cars like a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry as a station wagon in the US while they're available elsewhere in the world. In the US, you can only get the wagon versions those platforms disguized as SUVs.

wow, go and get all technical on me. so if someone jacks up a saab 9.3x its now an SUV? a legacy wagon gets to be a wagon, but you take the same car and add some clearance and side panels and its now an SUV? i'm sticking with wagon despite all the CAFE and legislative mumbo jumbo. quacks like a duck, walks like a duck...