Subaru Bubble Burst?....Problems Looming for Subaru?

[dgoodhue]

Well the bubble didn't burst this month

 

http://media.subaru.com/pressrelease/806/1/subaru-america-inc-announces-september-2015-sales-best

 

46 consecutive month over month of gains is very impressive. The low volume BRZ is the only bubble at Subaru that is bursting.

[FLlegacy]

A low volume car selling in low volume lol. Who would of thunk it! It will definitely burst by next month for sure! (<--that was sarcasm in case you missed it)

[YeuEmMaiMai]

I don't think subaru has ever aimed at the higher end market and probably never will. That is not who their target demographic is, although it has already been stated the average buyer for subaru has income around 80k a year. So it isn't they can't afford nicer they just like their subarus. Like me and my wife right now we look at safety first and Subaru is the leader there whether it be the awd or the reinforced passenger area. Reliability is another big issue for us and so far we have had nothing but good things to say, except the headgasket thing in our 03 forester, but we made the repair as more of a maintenance item than necessary repair the car ran fine for over two years with leaking gaskets. And when I traded it in it was still running great.

 

They tried once with the SVX, you know this thing here

 

[Penguin]

I abandoned Subaru from consideration when they dropped the Legacy GT.

 

I want a decent sized sedan that is fun to drive, has plenty of power, and is nice inside to travel in. Winter weather capability is no longer mandatory for me at this point though.

 

I found a solution that involves an LS3 V8 and RWD.... hell of a lot more fun than a Legacy GT ever was.

[FLlegacy]

They tried once with the SVX, you know this thing here

 

That wasn't luxury even for its time. It was meant to be a sports car...and in that regard subaru was well ahead of their time. The engine in the svx is still sought after for cheap swaps. So the svx wasn't a complete failure.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[FLlegacy]

I abandoned Subaru from consideration when they dropped the Legacy GT.

 

I want a decent sized sedan that is fun to drive, has plenty of power, and is nice inside to travel in. Winter weather capability is no longer mandatory for me at this point though.

 

I found a solution that involves an LS3 V8 and RWD.... hell of a lot more fun than a Legacy GT ever was.

 

I can appreciate a powerful v8 rwd, but GM will never get my business again. Too much goes wrong that in this day and age should not, same reason I won't buy a dodge/chrysler product. Ford is a long shot but still a possibility. We all have our own priorities and as long as Subaru builds safe cars with decent performance they will be my first choice.

[Max Capacity]

We decided it was time to get rid of the GF's 2008 Ford Escape. She wanted a car with a 6 cylinder. We test drove a Legacy with the 3.6, then one with a 2.5. We liked the 3.6 much better. A couple day's later we drove a Ford Fusion with the 2.0 ecoboost then an Outback with the 3.6.

 

While riding in the Outback I turned and looked over my left shoulder, at all the room back there, and said, "this car just makes sense".

 

We thought about for a week and then ordered a 2016 3.6R Outback with eyesight.

 

I have 3 ski friends that have bought 5 Outbacks since I bought my 05 Legacy GT Wagon. They all had other car brands and really didn't think about Subaru before.

[GTEASER]

http://jalopnik.com/subaru-is-still-tromping-all-other-manufacturers-in-rat-1734459329

[ripstik]

http://jalopnik.com/subaru-is-still-tromping-all-other-manufacturers-in-rat-1734459329

 

I wonder how much more growth they will need to have to bring back the GT!!! It's funny how they say Subaru is SUV based, it's a little bit true now that i think about it, i always thought of them as cars/crossovers. to me the outback is still the car it was in the early 2000's, not the SUV that it is today and the forester is still the stubby little car crossover thing, which i hasn't really changed except for an awkwardness reduction. the only model they had that started as an SUV was the tribeca and it flopped harder than a fat kid on a high dive

[SubieDriver]

The main reasons the Tribeca flopped were small-ish size for a mid-sized SUV, and being underpowered with the 3.0. It wasn't really underpowered, but the car mags all said it was, so people stayed away. When the '08 came out, my local dealer said sales were outpacing the previous-gen by a good margin, then gas prices went up to $4/gallon, and sales tanked. They never recovered.

 

If they had updated it (and stretched it a bit) when they were supposed to (2010-11) it probably would have recovered. They panicked when sales tanked, and refused to put any more money in it. Basically, they shot themselves in the foot (like they've done many times in the past).

 

They get a bee in their bonnet about something not working, when it's usually their own fault, so they pull the plug rather than fix the problem. Tribeca, SVX, Baja, Legacy GT, Legacy Wagon, etc. are some good examples of them cutting bait when they were on the cusp of making something really good work for them.

[FLlegacy]

Of all the subies I think the tribeca has the most loyal owners, those who have actually owned one can appreciate how good it really is. CUV that handles like a car and can keep pace on the road. MPG aren't great but certainly competitive with other awds. The third row is ok, but definitely not for adults unless you a have to. Good brakes classic subaru awkward styling in the front good seating position. Visibility is a ding for sure compared to the other cars in their lineup.

 

If there would have been a real refresh instead of a quick "fix" like was done it could have grown sales easily. We enjoy ours and plan to keep it even when we get something newer for the wife to drive.

[The B4]

Tribeca didn't get a quick fix, it got the most massive refresh Subaru could have given a car save a redesign. All panels were new except the roof and it went in a completely different direction styling wise. Subaru actually made expensive structural cuts into the d pillar to open larger third row and and rear windows to go along with the new side mirrors. It received a completely new engine, revised suspension, a revamp in interior tech, new 3rd row access mechanism, and an adjusted price. What Subaru couldn't fix on the Tribeca were its 16.9 gallon gas tank and its poor utilization of of interior space including its too small 3rd row.

 

The Tribeca's refresh was anything but a quckfix.

 

Also, I don't agree with your opinion on loyalty. My personal opinion would be WRX or Baja.

[dgoodhue]

Of all the subies I think the tribeca has the most loyal owners, those who have actually owned one can appreciate how good it really is.

 

I would define loyal owners as owners who are repeat buyers. Tribeca sales were decent in the first 3 models years 2006, 2007, 2008 (15k+ per year) and then it dropped off like a cliff down to 2xxx/year units. By looking at later sales the 2006, 2007, 2008 owners weren't purchasing new Tribeca's. The average length of ownership of a new car is around 6 years, so in theory 2006-8 owners should have been help driving 12-14 Tribeca sales.

[dgoodhue]

Subaru itself has 59% brand loyalty. Obviously 59% is within the brand not the same model.

[ripstik]

In my mind the outback is the clear winner of customer loyalty for subaru with the impreza being a close second. I know so many people that have owned 2 or more generations of the outback its almost a joke. it's like once you have an outback what are going to move to next? nothing will beat the price point while maintaining the amount of capability, reliability, styling, and quality.

[YeuEmMaiMai]

That wasn't luxury even for its time. It was meant to be a sports car...and in that regard subaru was well ahead of their time. The engine in the svx is still sought after for cheap swaps. So the svx wasn't a complete failure.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

 

if you say so... the price tag says otherwise at24-28K back in 1991 that was not everyday car territory...

[SubieDriver]

Tribeca didn't get a quick fix, it got the most massive refresh Subaru could have given a car save a redesign. All panels were new except the roof and it went in a completely different direction styling wise. Subaru actually made expensive structural cuts into the d pillar to open larger third row and and rear windows to go along with the new side mirrors. It received a completely new engine, revised suspension, a revamp in interior tech, new 3rd row access mechanism, and an adjusted price. What Subaru couldn't fix on the Tribeca were its 16.9 gallon gas tank and its poor utilization of of interior space including its too small 3rd row.

 

The Tribeca's refresh was anything but a quckfix.

 

Also, I don't agree with your opinion on loyalty. My personal opinion would be WRX or Baja.

 

Wasn't the "massive refresh" just a light massaging of the body panels that were already designed for the aborted SAAB version (other than maybe the grille)? GM probably paid for all of it. Once GM was out of the picture, Subaru was afraid to put anything more into it.

[laufu]

Tribeca didn't get a quick fix, it got the most massive refresh Subaru could have given a car save a redesign. All panels were new except the roof and it went in a completely different direction styling wise. Subaru actually made expensive structural cuts into the d pillar to open larger third row and and rear windows to go along with the new side mirrors. It received a completely new engine, revised suspension, a revamp in interior tech, new 3rd row access mechanism, and an adjusted price. What Subaru couldn't fix on the Tribeca were its 16.9 gallon gas tank and its poor utilization of of interior space including its too small 3rd row.

 

The Tribeca's refresh was anything but a quckfix.

 

Also, I don't agree with your opinion on loyalty. My personal opinion would be WRX or Baja.

 

To Paraphrase what SubieDriver said...

 

I would say it was a quick fix by Subaru. The designs were already done by Saab for the 9-6X and if I remember correctly Saab even planned a short wheelbase version to be built as a two door model! When Saab (or GM) abandoned the idea of using a Subaru for a Saab SUV, Subaru picked up the pieces and ran with it.

 

Saab 9-6x concept at the Saab museum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCL_JV_lNbQ

 

 

Also about the 16.9 fuel tank, in late 2009 or early 2010, I completed a survey from SoA asking what I like in about my Tribeca. One of the questions ranked my feelings toward (1-5) upgrading the fuel tank to provide a range of almost 400 miles. The survey never mentioned how they planned on doing it, but it shows Subaru was listening.

 

Doing some math, 400 miles/ 21 miles per gallon equals ~19 gallons. Just a little bigger than the Gen5 Legacy/Outback's 18.5 tank. Don't know where they put it, but it is interesting none the less.

[The B4]

Wasn't the "massive refresh" just a light massaging of the body panels that were already designed for the aborted SAAB version (other than maybe the grille)? GM probably paid for all of it. Once GM was out of the picture, Subaru was afraid to put anything more into it.

 

To Paraphrase what SubieDriver said...

 

I would say it was a quick fix by Subaru. The designs were already done by Saab for the 9-6X and if I remember correctly Saab even planned a short wheelbase version to be built as a two door model! When Saab (or GM) abandoned the idea of using a Subaru for a Saab SUV, Subaru picked up the pieces and ran with it.

 

Saab 9-6x concept at the Saab museum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCL_JV_lNbQ

 

 

Also about the 16.9 fuel tank, in late 2009 or early 2010, I completed a survey from SoA asking what I like in about my Tribeca. One of the questions ranked my feelings toward (1-5) upgrading the fuel tank to provide a range of almost 400 miles. The survey never mentioned how they planned on doing it, but it shows Subaru was listening.

 

Doing some math, 400 miles/ 21 miles per gallon equals ~19 gallons. Just a little bigger than the Gen5 Legacy/Outback's 18.5 tank. Don't know where they put it, but it is interesting none the less.

 

Definitely not a quick fix. The panels were based on the Saab version, but Subaru still made the massive changes to the actual structure in addition to using those panels. Subaru still ended up redoing the D pillar, grille, hood, and front bumper, side mirrors, 3rd row access redesign, new engine, and revised suspension.

 

Major structural chassis changes aren't quick fixes. They are extremely expensive. If they were cheap, the Camry would have a revised roofline instead of black plastic covering the C pillar to give the illusion of one.

[SubieDriver]

I wish GM hadn't sold off their Fuji Heavy shares. I would have loved to have SAAB versions of all the Subie models - European styling and interiors with Japanese reliability. A match made in heaven.

 

When SAAB was going bankrupt, I really wished that Subaru (or Fuji Heavy) would buy them, since there were already several Saabaru models designed - it would have made perfect sense, and it wouldn't have needed much new development to get it off the ground.

 

I still wish they would.

[laufu]

Definitely not a quick fix. The panels were based on the Saab version, but Subaru still made the massive changes to the actual structure in addition to using those panels. Subaru still ended up redoing the D pillar, grille, hood, and front bumper, side mirrors, 3rd row access redesign, new engine, and revised suspension.

 

Major structural chassis changes aren't quick fixes. They are extremely expensive. If they were cheap, the Camry would have a revised roofline instead of black plastic covering the C pillar to give the illusion of one.

 

I agree, not a quick fix at all.

 

However studying the time line of the 9-6x development, I would say Subaru had already started on the Saab 9-6x not too long after the B9 Tribeca was completed and the 9-6x design work was already built into the cost of the B9 development.

 

I say this because GM sold it's shares of Fuji Heavy Industries in late 2005. When GM cut ties with Fuji, it forced Subaru to abandon the work on the 9-6x. Then Fuji president Kyoji Takenaka stated the 9-6x was already 1 year into development. That would put it at 2004, around the same time as when the design work for the B9 would have been completed.

 

I guess when GM canceled the 9-6x, Saab (GM) never claimed any rights to the 9-6x design. I am also guessing Fuji never stopped develop of the 9-6x. When Fuji began sensing trouble brewing with the B9's reception, Fuji finished the development of the 9-6x program and called it the Tribeca.

 

Sorry to derail the topic...and the long post, wife has control of the DVR.

 

To bring it back on topic, let me say barring any crazy scandals (looking at you VW), I don't think Subaru's bubble will be bursting anytime soon. If you ask me, Subaru doom may come when gasoline engines goes away. The next gen propulsion technology will render the horizontal engine and symmetrical AWD obsolete and along with Subaru's calling card.

[ripstik]

• The next gen propulsion technology will render the horizontal engine and symmetrical AWD obsolete and along with Subaru's calling card.

You bite your tongue. there will always be a need for symmetrical AWD. I don't doubt the system will undergo some serious changes but if my front wheels can't put out the same power as my rear wheels Idk what I'd do (probably buy an old subi and run it on home made corn juice)

[Ellesedil]

• 
  

You bite your tongue. there will always be a need for symmetrical AWD. I don't doubt the system will undergo some serious changes but if my front wheels can't put out the same power as my rear wheels Idk what I'd do (probably buy an old subi and run it on home made corn juice)

 

The Model S P85D does what you just described, but it's not branded as "symmetrical all wheel drive".

[laufu]

• 
  

You bite your tongue. there will always be a need for symmetrical AWD. I don't doubt the system will undergo some serious changes but if my front wheels can't put out the same power as my rear wheels Idk what I'd do (probably buy an old subi and run it on home made corn juice)

 

Ok then, maybe you should sit down before reading this.

 

The new Subaru Viziv Future concept that will be at this year Tokyo auto show. ICE powering the front and electric motors powering the back. Looks like a competitor for the Mini Clubman and Nissan Juke.

 

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/10/07/impreza-5-door-concept-headlines-subaru-tokyo-lineup/

 

But hey good news Japan gets a more luxurious WRX, WRX S4 SportVita.

Bad news, with the WRX S4 SportVita, why make a Legacy GT?

Good news again...new WRX STI S207!

[FLlegacy]

Tribeca didn't get a quick fix, it got the most massive refresh Subaru could have given a car save a redesign. All panels were new except the roof and it went in a completely different direction styling wise. Subaru actually made expensive structural cuts into the d pillar to open larger third row and and rear windows to go along with the new side mirrors. It received a completely new engine, revised suspension, a revamp in interior tech, new 3rd row access mechanism, and an adjusted price. What Subaru couldn't fix on the Tribeca were its 16.9 gallon gas tank and its poor utilization of of interior space including its too small 3rd row.

 

The Tribeca's refresh was anything but a quckfix.

 

Also, I don't agree with your opinion on loyalty. My personal opinion would be WRX or Baja.

 

By loyalty I meant keeping the cars not replacing them with like models. The changes they made were ultimately superficial you would be hard pressed to actually sit in one and tell much of a difference between the model years.