SteVTEC Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 [url]http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/subaru/legacy/100397025/roadtestarticle.html?articleId=102623&tid=edmunds.h..wkedmunds.roadtests.1g.*[/url] bleh...they really didn't like the 5EAT. Their comments are exactly what I was afraid of. Good when running hard, and good when poking around, but anything in between = in the wrong gear ususally and lag from the turbo. I think I'll stick with the 5MT if I end up getting a 2.5GT. If I really want an automatic I think the better linearity of the 3.0R would be more suitable for me. They got a 15.4 @ 91 which isn't bad, but that was with a 2500 rpm brake torque and they said that times were a full second slower launching from a dead idle. That's a 16.4 unless you're brake torquing. I think somebody else here ran about that. YUCK! Definitely will be sticking with the 5MT if I get the 2.5GT. I'd love to see some 3.0R times for comparison purposes. Didn't really read anything else. I'm a motor guy so I usually just skim to that section. I really like Edmunds's review and editorial style though so enjoy. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken S Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 As it's been noted by other 5EAT owners, the behavior of the tranny changes quite a bit over the break-in period. The model tested by Edmunds was a pre-production unit and probably didn't have quite the learning period a vehicle with a single owner could have. I've found that my 5EAT has significantly increased responsiveness over it's first 1000 miles to the point where the same level of throttle input will cause it to hold a gear longer. I did notice when it was brand new that the tranny shift points were heavily biased towards economy. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeGT Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 Overall, a positive review for the new Legacy. It's interesting how they gave the sound system a fairly good review, even when considering the test vehicle didn't have a subwoofer. I've seen much lower scores in some other cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goneskiian Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 One of the better reviews I've read. Just reminds me how much I like mine! :wink: :lol: Cheers! -Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3.7L H6 Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 I liked the article. I think their qualms with the tranny-motor match are a bit exaggerated. When I drove one I was nothing but grins, and that was in the Eco mode. I think that the auto would be just fine for a lazy bum like me. :D Fav part: "We're still not crazy about the rear-seat legroom, and the price of the GT Limited is a little steep, but those factors seem insignificant when you consider the price, size and feature content of such cars as the Audi A4 Avant wagon, VW Passat wagon and Mazda 6 wagon." This is the a gust in the beginning of a hurricane. Mark my words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycl Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 Pretty good review I think. In regards to the stereo evaluation being 8/10 without the subwoofer, i wonder how they'd assess the 13 speaker McIntosh - 11/10? :D Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycl Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 Also, 0-60mph in 7.0 s for a 2.5L 5EAT? This pales in comparison to the twin-scroll 2.0 5eat with an at least 6.8s 0-62mph here in Aus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05LegacyGT330Ci Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 Yah looked like a great review all that bashed was the auto which I could care less that they bash and the rear seat room whichall my friends said was quite generous and didn't mind sitting in. '05 Black Legacy GT Wagon 5-spd '02 Topaz/Black 330Ci 5-spd Drift Ryder's School of Rally Arts, coming to an Australia near you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunderkind Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 Well there were some news and articles how north americans are fat... I blame it all to McDonalds! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 [quote name='wunderkind']Well there were some news and articles how north americans are fat... I blame it all to McDonalds![/quote] I blame it on all the fat Americans! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Throttlejockey Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 [quote]The turbocharged Legacy GT starts at about $26,000, but even for that price you won't get leather, dual-zone climate control, power seats or a sunroof[/quote] No dual zone climate on the GT? They must have been reading the brochure for that info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanoswrx Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 They actually had a review of the stereo too, pretty much summed up my thoughts. "This is a very nice stereo. The sound quality is much better than one would expect from a Subaru" and thats with their test model without the sub, add the factory sub and your set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Zevil Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 I think that the rear seat legroom is more than adequate.. it's not a Luxo-liner. Buy a lincoln or something if you want to haul people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godwhomismike Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 [quote] Another problem we noted was the lack of a navigation system. It's not that we're trying to outspend the next guy when it comes to buying a new car, but the spirit, nature and heritage of Subaru says that these are cars you'll want to take on an adventure, be it on- or off-road. What better companion for that summer kayaking adventure or a winter ski trip than a navigation system? We think it should at least be an option for those who want to make the most of the Legacy's adventurous side — certainly the Outback will have one, right? [/quote] I couldn't have said it any better if I wanted it. Those are my exact feelings on the absence of the navigation option. - Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerdave Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 Yeah, I have to agree on rear legroom. There's no car in this size that has great limo-like legroom. I heard all this talk about how the G35 sedan had a roomy back seat. Drove one, then sat in the back behind the driver's seat... I was expecting a limo... NOT. It wasn't much better than a E46 BMW or the Legacy. And the Legacy is WAY better than the other object of my automotive lust, the RX8, so it's all a matter of perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scubie02 Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 Personally I never get the hue and cry about having a nav system. I mean, I have maps in the car... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godwhomismike Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 [quote name='racerdave']Yeah, I have to agree on rear legroom. There's no car in this size that has great limo-like legroom. I heard all this talk about how the G35 sedan had a roomy back seat. Drove one, then sat in the back behind the driver's seat... I was expecting a limo... NOT. It wasn't much better than a E46 BMW or the Legacy. And the Legacy is WAY better than the other object of my automotive lust, the RX8, so it's all a matter of perspective.[/quote] Hmmmm RX-8: [quote name='godwhomismike'][quote name='B4_Maniac']I have actuly been haveing unpure thoughts about going back to an RX8. I miss the 50/50 weight distribution..and the awsome 6mt..and the rotary sound.. Quick guys gimme some negetives to keep me from thinking such evil thoughts..[/quote] That's Easy... - 13 mpg - much higher insurance - almost 100 lb-ft of torque less than the Legacy GT - 237 hp - 13 less hp than the Legacy GT - tiny trunk - torture chamber rear seating area - Engine flooding - Eats oil Need any other reasons? :D - Mike[/quote] LOL Nice car, but I've heard of way too many headaches it causes. - Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mono Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 [quote name='SteVTEC']http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/subaru/legacy/100397025/roadtestarticle.html?articleId=102623&tid=edmunds.h..wkedmunds.roadtests.1g.* bleh...they really didn't like the 5EAT. Their comments are exactly what I was afraid of. Good when running hard, and good when poking around, but anything in between = in the wrong gear ususally and lag from the turbo. I think I'll stick with the 5MT if I end up getting a 2.5GT. If I really want an automatic I think the better linearity of the 3.0R would be more suitable for me. They got a 15.4 @ 91 which isn't bad, but that was with a 2500 rpm brake torque and they said that times were a full second slower launching from a dead idle. That's a 16.4 unless you're brake torquing. I think somebody else here ran about that. YUCK! Definitely will be sticking with the 5MT if I get the 2.5GT. I'd love to see some 3.0R times for comparison purposes. Didn't really read anything else. I'm a motor guy so I usually just skim to that section. I really like Edmunds's review and editorial style though so enjoy. Steve[/quote] Those 1/4 mile are disappointing to me. This goes back to my point that this car needs more horsepower. I can see the the manual verision shaving a 1/2 second at best. For $28K, it should be at least 270 hp. The engine must have been detuned by Subaru. Bring on the STi version or some serious performance mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drift Monkey Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 [quote name='Mono'][quote name='SteVTEC']http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/subaru/legacy/100397025/roadtestarticle.html?articleId=102623&tid=edmunds.h..wkedmunds.roadtests.1g.* bleh...they really didn't like the 5EAT. Their comments are exactly what I was afraid of. Good when running hard, and good when poking around, but anything in between = in the wrong gear ususally and lag from the turbo. I think I'll stick with the 5MT if I end up getting a 2.5GT. If I really want an automatic I think the better linearity of the 3.0R would be more suitable for me. They got a 15.4 @ 91 which isn't bad, but that was with a 2500 rpm brake torque and they said that times were a full second slower launching from a dead idle. That's a 16.4 unless you're brake torquing. I think somebody else here ran about that. YUCK! Definitely will be sticking with the 5MT if I get the 2.5GT. I'd love to see some 3.0R times for comparison purposes. Didn't really read anything else. I'm a motor guy so I usually just skim to that section. I really like Edmunds's review and editorial style though so enjoy. Steve[/quote] Those 1/4 mile are disappointing to me. This goes back to my point that this car needs more horsepower. I can see the the manual verision shaving a 1/2 second at best. For $28K, it should be at least 270 hp. The engine must have been detuned by Subaru. Bring on the STi version or some serious performance mods.[/quote] It doesn't need more hp. It has plenty. Notice he ran it with a 5EAT WAGON! Geez, some people are never satisfied... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanoswrx Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 I think the car has a lot of hp as is, I did a little test against my friends 2005 STI and he only gained 1-2 car lengths on me, which is probably about 1/2 a second at the most, so this car should be able to run low 14's easy. By the way I had a MT :) Also about the leg room, I find it very adequite, I am 6'1". I tried sitting behind the drivers seat yesterday and my knees didn't touch the back of the seat at all, they had about 2-3 cm of clearance, which is pretty good for a car of this size. I found the back seats to be very comfortable and could easily go on a long trip in them. Really besides the tires, and my personal wish of wanting the JDM front bumper, this car is pretty much perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godwhomismike Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 [quote name='Drift Monkey'][quote name='Mono'][quote name='SteVTEC']http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/subaru/legacy/100397025/roadtestarticle.html?articleId=102623&tid=edmunds.h..wkedmunds.roadtests.1g.* bleh...they really didn't like the 5EAT. Their comments are exactly what I was afraid of. Good when running hard, and good when poking around, but anything in between = in the wrong gear ususally and lag from the turbo. I think I'll stick with the 5MT if I end up getting a 2.5GT. If I really want an automatic I think the better linearity of the 3.0R would be more suitable for me. They got a 15.4 @ 91 which isn't bad, but that was with a 2500 rpm brake torque and they said that times were a full second slower launching from a dead idle. That's a 16.4 unless you're brake torquing. I think somebody else here ran about that. YUCK! Definitely will be sticking with the 5MT if I get the 2.5GT. I'd love to see some 3.0R times for comparison purposes. Didn't really read anything else. I'm a motor guy so I usually just skim to that section. I really like Edmunds's review and editorial style though so enjoy. Steve[/quote] Those 1/4 mile are disappointing to me. This goes back to my point that this car needs more horsepower. I can see the the manual verision shaving a 1/2 second at best. For $28K, it should be at least 270 hp. The engine must have been detuned by Subaru. Bring on the STi version or some serious performance mods.[/quote] It doesn't need more hp. It has plenty. Notice he ran it with a 5EAT WAGON! Geez, some people are never satisfied...[/quote] They probably mashed the pedal down to the floor, which don't work well with the automatic version. Plus they were using a pre-production version. I drove the 5EAT version of the LGT limited sedan for over a half hour, took it beyond the century mark, and was really getting on the car, and the automatic responded very well, it had very brisk acceleration, and didn't notice any of the quirkness with the auto tranny they had. The only thing it did was pause a bit when I accidently downshift two gears quickly with the button shifters, it didn't do anything for a second or two, then bucked like a bull and downshifted. Other than that, I had a lot of fun with the car, enjoyed the turbo, which I couldn't hear even with the windows up adn the radio off (I'd get the turbo to kick in and then let off the gas - it was slient). - Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mono Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 They had to do a brake torque at 2500 rpms for the 15.4 run. 2500 rpms is where the turbo begins to kick in so I would say they did it correctly. I have a feeling Edmunds knows a lot about testing cars since they do it all the time. The MT sedan will be quicker and low 14's might be possible, but I'll bet you will have to lauch at like 5,000 rpms to pull low 14's. That can't be a good thing for the drivetrain. The review sounds very promising overall. I just like a lot of power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunderkind Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 I believe there's the Dodge Magnum AWD. How about that one Mono? And it's domestic too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerdave Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 Same with me and legroom kanos... just fine. I just read the handling/braking part of the review. Very positive. All it does is reaffirm my pick of a 5MT GT wagon... not that it needed reaffirming. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mono Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 [quote name='wunderkind']I believe there's the Dodge Magnum AWD. How about that one Mono? And it's domestic too![/quote] That's one ugly vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.