Waylander Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 I've been trying to do some research on it, but it seems there aren't many threads that do a direct comparism, aside from that its ridiculous high in height with its suspension system. How good is the engine? Does it have turbo capabilities? Can you make it look like a 2.5i Legacy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tantal Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 It's not a contest, is it? I mean, what do you want? Do you want a car or are you more of a truck guy? Do you care about driving or do you not mind having to slow down a lot for corners. The only difference between these cars is the outback is jacked up a couple inches, has a softer ride, much taller tires, and handles like crap by comparison. Oh yea it has smaller brakes too but most people complain about the GT brakes anyway. Otherwise, they are the same car. No contest, and shouldn't require much if any consideration. Just figure out what you want and buy that car. The difference between the 3.0 and 2.5T engines are somewhat significant, but nowhere close to the handling differences. Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STG Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 At 3% hp loss per 1,000 ft. altitude, the difference between a normally aspirated 3.0 liter and a turbo 2.5 could very well be significant. The turbo engine will compensate for much of the loss due to atmospheric density. The N/A engine just loses power. My stock GT handles the weather and roads around Yellowstone and Northwest Wyoming just fine. I use my F250 diesel for off-roading. If your driving includes gravel and graded dirt roads, the GT is fine. The Outback will traverse slightly rougher roads, but it's not a 4X4 truck with a two speed transfer case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leggtnut Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 I debatted between the 2 for about 2 months before I ordered by GT. I wanted 250HP so it was between the gt and the h6. I liked both and both had the get up and go I needed for my style and area I drive. I ended up with the GT because of the interior color choices. I personally don't care much for the tope, so I got the GT. Also, it put a bigger smile on my face when I drove it . Ben (2014 Outback SAP w/ eyesite, 2014 Tribeca Limited, 2006 LGT limited sedan) Subaru Ambassador PNW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyboy333 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 The 3.0 has less torque also, and I have heard that it would blow itself to bits if turboed. It basically boils down to GT=performance and OB=luxury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLegacy99 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 GT= instant gratification Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbroo Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 I've been trying to do some research on it, but it seems there aren't many threads that do a direct comparism, aside from that its ridiculous high in height with its suspension system. How good is the engine? Does it have turbo capabilities? Can you make it look like a 2.5i Legacy? I think the OB sedans are sweet, the engines dont have alot of off the line power but from 30mph to 80mph there a beast, but I do feel the ride height is high, but some lowering springs will do the trick. With turbo capabilities you can add a turbo but really wont have much improvement, I mean the 3.0's have 250 hp, same as the LGT turbos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbroo Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 At 3% hp loss per 1,000 ft. altitude, the difference between a normally aspirated 3.0 liter and a turbo 2.5 could very well be significant. The turbo engine will compensate for much of the loss due to atmospheric density. The N/A engine just loses power. My stock GT handles the weather and roads around Yellowstone and Northwest Wyoming just fine. I use my F250 diesel for off-roading. If your driving includes gravel and graded dirt roads, the GT is fine. The Outback will traverse slightly rougher roads, but it's not a 4X4 truck with a two speed transfer case. I have an N/A and go to the mountains almost every weekend and I can keep up with big V8 trucks, I just haft to keep the speed, or I lose power like you said, just dont have the pickup but can take turns at higher speeds than SUV's or trucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STG Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 I have an N/A and go to the mountains almost every weekend and I can keep up with big V8 trucks, I just haft to keep the speed, or I lose power like you said, just dont have the pickup but can take turns at higher speeds than SUV's or trucks Those trucks are sucking the same thin air. Unless they have turbos (not superchargers), their loss is proportional to yours. That's why I bought a (turbo'd Powerstroke). http://stg.home.bresnan.net/PIKES-DSCN0085.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garandman Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 I've been trying to do some research on it, but it seems there aren't many threads that do a direct comparism, aside from that its ridiculous high in height with its suspension system. How good is the engine? Does it have turbo capabilities? Can you make it look like a 2.5i Legacy? The engine is superb but has about 15% whp less than the turbos. The torque curve is nearly flat and has good torque from 1,400 rpm up. Ignoring the ride height, replacing the OEM tires with better aftermarket rubber (like the Goodyear F1 GS D3's I got) totally transforms the car and handling limits are very high. see http://www.legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45117 for video clips. Who Dares Wins スバル Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.