Jump to content
LegacyGT.com

Motor Trend 3.0R Review


tdoggydog

Recommended Posts

Retarded review.

 

"Just don't expect the additional comfort and luxury the Legacy offers over the WRX without a performance sacrifice."

 

How one can be so ignorant to not realize the same car comes with an engine surpassing WRX peformance.

 

I hate those high school dropouts writing car reviews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never expected an even-handed Subaru Legacy review from any of the mainstream auto press.

 

Most of them are morons, and those who aren't are either too busy reviewing other things, or know where their bread is buttered, and that isn't on the Subaru side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I generally find Car and Driver slightly less retarded than the rest.

 

And who spends 32K on a WRX? I thought they started around 25K? Why would you get NAV on a sport compact such as a WRX?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a mostly positive review...not sure why there was a need to refer the WRX as often as they did. It's not even in the same class

 

I would guess because it is a better known car.

 

The review was pretty good though. At least it was mentioned in the same league as Audi. Finally someone that isn't star struck by a name brand, and can compare product quality to product quality!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subaru could be an Acura/Audi tier sports model maker 'if they chose to'…

 

They seem to like flirting with the post Honda, pre Acura/Audi lines.

 

We all know the GT is a sleeper, as is the 3.0R

 

My guess is SOA is to comfy with the Outback image and is gun shy on alternate marketing.

 

Oddly, they seem to be the only 'sports sedan' in the segment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subaru could be an Acura/Audi tier sports model maker 'if they chose to'…

 

They seem to like flirting with the post Honda, pre Acura/Audi lines.

 

We all know the GT is a sleeper, as is the 3.0R

 

My guess is SOA is to comfy with the Outback image and is gun shy on alternate marketing.

 

Oddly, they seem to be the only 'sports sedan' in the segment.

 

Changing segments is a tremendously difficult thing to do. To date there have been lots of failures. Most recently, the VW Phaeton. It will be interesting to see if Nissan is capable of doing it withe the GT-R, especially with the Spec V. There just aren't that many people with $125K that will spend it on a Nissan, but that remains to be seen. I know if I had it I would. But, back to the original statement. It is extremely hard to cross over into a different image/segment. And SOA will certainly not do it at the cost of their money maker, the outback. They are trying it with other cars, ie the tribeca for the crossover segment, and now, possibly the Forester for the crossover segment. Should be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subaru had been pushing upscale over the last half-decade, but they pulled back from that push. Now they're trying to go mainstream, as that's where the money is - higher volume = higher profits = more options/selection down the road.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subar had been pushing upscale over the last half-decade, but they pulled back from that push. Now they're trying to go mainstream, as that's where the money is - higher volume = higher profits = more options/selection down the road.

 

+1

 

Toyota doesn't make it's money off of lexus, it makes it off of camrys. Same goes for ford. They have been taking a major hit because of the drop in F-150 purchases, amongst a whole host of other reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subaru doesn't have the infrastructure, or spare capital to compete with Camry, and other mainstream cars.

 

Almost everything that BECOMES mainstream, becomes mainstream because it is a complete product, and fills a role well.

 

It does not work to try to go mainstream in hopes that it will return more profit in order to become a more complete product and fill the role better later.

 

Mostly I am speaking about amenities and optional equipment. Legacy doesn't have it to go mainstream, and you can't go mainstream without it, and hope for it later.

 

Subaru is much better suited to build products that fill their NICHE extremely well, and solidify their position, rather than leveraging their position to go mainstream against a lot of established players who don't like to let new players in for free.

 

Take another industry... portable electronics.

 

Apple dominates because it's products are spectacular (although not perfect) right out of the box, and make a reputation for themselves. The iPod first, then the iPhone more recently. They gained HUGE marketshare and market penetration in the already crowded cell phone industry, by being so fantastic a product that it overcomes it' drawbacks in terms of technical specs, and it's restrictive and expensive usage arrangements with AT&T.

 

iPod has done so well that it has pulled a "kleenex", where the brand name is so ubiquitous that it becomes a common noun for all products of it's genre, rather than just a proper noun name of a product.

 

It did so by being fantastic first, and gaining acceptance because of it.

 

It was not merely a likeable but too limited product first, and then finally got what it should have had initially after it gained acceptance. It doesn't work that way very often, if at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subaru could be an Acura/Audi tier sports model maker 'if they chose to'…

 

They seem to like flirting with the post Honda, pre Acura/Audi lines.

 

We all know the GT is a sleeper, as is the 3.0R

 

My guess is SOA is to comfy with the Outback image and is gun shy on alternate marketing.

 

Oddly, they seem to be the only 'sports sedan' in the segment.

 

Keep in mind that the LGT is already lumped into the entry lux segment with the A4, G35, S40, TSX and IS-250. It doesnt need to splinter off a distinct luxury brand.

 

How often to see the LGT compared to a bread and butter sedan like the Accord, Camry or Altima. Never happens.

 

The current LGT is clearly outpaced in terms of features. The beefy engine, AWD and driving dynamics is what keeps it in the fray.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mostly I am speaking about amenities and optional equipment. Legacy doesn't have it to go mainstream, and you can't go mainstream without it, and hope for it later.

 

Can you clarify what you mean by this? ie name these amenities and optional equipment?

 

As far as I can tell, the only thing the 2009 camry has that the 3.0r doesn't have is bluetooth, VSC, and traction control. The 6 cylinder accord has the option for a back up sensor and reverse camera, but that is all from what I can tell. Now, it would seem that these could be overcome by the fact that the 3.0r has AWD, but that is debatable.

 

As far as the iPod and iPhone go, that is somewhat of apples to oranges. Apple was a very well established company before they made the iPod. Also, at the time, the MP3 market was fairly empty. They dominated that market because they made a very good, easily recognizable product, and because they advertised the shit out of it. They were then able to enter the cell phone market, an already crowded segment, with a hybrid of an already existing product. It isn't like they started selling toasters, the iPhone is an iPod that is also a phone. And, you can argue that it is much easier to cross over into consumer electronics, where the market is crowded, but the people will spend a couple hundred on either a chance buy, or an impulse buy. This is very different from the car market, both in terms of product life (5-10 years vs 1-2 years), and level of commitment from the buyer.

 

Long story short, one of the main reasons that both toyota and honda have better sales, is not because their products have many more options, etc. It is because they use money to advertise, something which seems to be completely foreign to Subaru. I mean seriously, when was the last time you heard someone set out to buy a car and said I will only buy one with traction control, or a back up camera? People don't go to Subaru show rooms to compare, because they don't think of it, because Subaru doesn't advertise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BigT, the key phrase you said, that Subaru historically has not done, that Subaru owners are continually frustrated about, is:

 

 

...

It is because they use money to advertise, something which seems to be completely foreign to Subaru.

...

 

The only time they've done any serious advertising on TV was when they were pushing the Outbacks with Crocodile Dundee. Those were memorable commercials, and they resulted in a boatload of sales (with half the people thinking Subaru was an Australian brand).

 

Since then, they really haven't had any really good commercials. The Sheryl Crow commercials were lame, didn't show enough of the product, and didn't elicit passion for the brand.

 

Subaru has been doing better in advertising lately, but they still have a long way to go to grab the awareness of the general public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Long story short, one of the main reasons that both toyota and honda have better sales, is not because their products have many more options, etc. It is because they use money to advertise, something which seems to be completely foreign to Subaru. I mean seriously, when was the last time you heard someone set out to buy a car and said I will only buy one with traction control, or a back up camera? People don't go to Subaru show rooms to compare, because they don't think of it, because Subaru doesn't advertise.

 

I'm sure I am not unique in that regard and Subaru probably loses a lot of buyers because it is not very good at letting people know the GT even exits.

 

Perhaps ironically, this is the reason I will be getting a GT. The features that matter to me are the basics of the car… AWD, Manual, Powerful engine… not the stuff mainstream ad campaigns are made of: gimmick 1, gimmick 2, etc.

 

There is nothing else in the segment that is even close to the GT. AT, FWD is standard and just plain not gonna happen… not for my 27K.

 

The amenities are useless to me if I don't drive the way I want to. (Although I am not really sure what amenities it is really lacking compared to the other in the segment…)

 

Paul Hogans curse lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you clarify what you mean by this? ie name these amenities and optional equipment?

 

As far as I can tell, the only thing the 2009 camry has that the 3.0r doesn't have is bluetooth, VSC, and traction control. The 6 cylinder accord has the option for a back up sensor and reverse camera, but that is all from what I can tell. Now, it would seem that these could be overcome by the fact that the 3.0r has AWD, but that is debatable.

 

They have a lot more colors, alot more availability, and a lot more configurability.

 

The Spec B and 3.0R have memory seats, but the GT limited, and 2.5i Limited do not. Navigation is optional on some, not on others, and mandatory on the Spec B...

 

The thing is, the mainstream doesn't buy cars like I do. As far as I can tell, they decide that it is time to go take a look, and go see what is in stock at various dealers. They want, say, a 4-door sedan, around 28-32k.

 

So, then they go look at Ford, Chevy, Honda, Toyota, and maybe they get to Mazda, Subaru and Volvo, VW and Audi...

 

And they sit in the car, and look at how things are layed out, and the salesmen talk about how you can connect your ipod, and your cell phone, and how much mileage the car gets, and how many colors it comes in. Maybe the Subaru and Audi dealers talk about how good AWD is in the rain and the winter, but that doesn't get any more emphasized than the rear-view camera that can see behind the very high trunk lid.

 

and the people say... wow, this is a nice car... Bob and Jane at work have one like this that they got last christmas, and they like it a whole lot. Let's get one, maybe in blue.

 

They don't have laser-beam focus on performance potential, AWD traction, and a manual transmission option.

 

If subaru can't show "mr. and mrs John Q. Public" a car that they like, they move on.

 

They certainly don't fly to Vermont to find a deal on a Garnet Red over Black leather GT Limited with two sets of wheels and an Access Port tuner thrown in, and drive it back to Iowa. Only I do that.

 

As far as the iPod and iPhone go, that is somewhat of apples to oranges. Apple was a very well established company before they made the iPod. Also, at the time, the MP3 market was fairly empty. They dominated that market because they made a very good, easily recognizable product, and because they advertised the shit out of it.

 

I will agree with you that advertizing is a big part of Subaru's problem. But availability and configurability is a big thing, too. People need to be able to get what they want, even if they haven't made up their mind when they come on the Subaru lot. Subaru's way or the highway is too restrictive.

 

Long story short, one of the main reasons that both toyota and honda have better sales, is not because their products have many more options, etc. It is because they use money to advertise, something which seems to be completely foreign to Subaru. I mean seriously, when was the last time you heard someone set out to buy a car and said I will only buy one with traction control, or a back up camera? People don't go to Subaru show rooms to compare, because they don't think of it, because Subaru doesn't advertise.

 

Agree with you. But even if they did advertize, Subaru would need to deliver, that means dealer stock, and that means car configurability with more than merely 4 grayscale paint colors, and maybe a blue, red, or brown. With Subaru, you can't even choose your interior color anymore.

 

I am just saying that Subaru doesn't run it's operation like a "big player" they run their operation like a timid wall-flower, and part of it is because they don't have a lot of money.

 

But they need to be BOLD first, and that boldness gets attention and sales. Timidity and 'hope' for sales doesn't get you into the mainstream.

 

My analogy to Apple is that Apple was in the doldrums when they weren't bold. When they were bold, and put their reputation on the line, they did so with a bold, well designed, featured, and marketed product. They didn't just say "here, try this iPod..." in a timid voice. If Apple doesn't offer much configurability, it is because they know they can command the sale on a strong product, despite it's narrow optional configuration. They command their niche, they don't do "mousey".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will agree with you that advertizing is a big part of Subaru's problem. But availability and configurability is a big thing, too. People need to be able to get what they want, even if they haven't made up their mind when they come on the Subaru lot. Subaru's way or the highway is too restrictive.

 

 

 

Agree with you. But even if they did advertize, Subaru would need to deliver, that means dealer stock, and that means car configurability with more than merely 4 grayscale paint colors, and maybe a blue, red, or brown. With Subaru, you can't even choose your interior color anymore.

 

These are very good points. Someone over at SOA should take a look at this.

 

This raises the other question, which is What kinds of cars should subaru be making? They can't produce a million cars a year, because they will have them sitting around until 2012. They aren't a big operation, which means that they would have to be very in-tune with their customer base to get production standards correct. And this brings up the inevitable downfall of Subaru: SOA makes no decisions whatsoever regarding product line. SOJ makes all the decisions and is completely out of touch with the American public. Subaru hired a non Japanese native for the first time to a position of authority at Subaru World wide only about a year ago. I'm not saying that Japanese natives aren't capable of running a subsidiary in NA, but to date the people at SOJ have not. It is very ironic, because FHI states that NA is their primary target market, but they certainly don't act like it. They didn't bring the WRX over because they thought we wouldn't get it, and now it is one of their best selling vehicle. They are nuts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Retarded review.

 

"Just don't expect the additional comfort and luxury the Legacy offers over the WRX without a performance sacrifice."

 

How one can be so ignorant to not realize the same car comes with an engine surpassing WRX peformance.

 

I hate those high school dropouts writing car reviews.

 

you must be referring to the Spec B because it is the fastest Legacy :lol:

Stay Stock Stay Happy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reagrding options, I'm not entirely so sure… I don't necessarily disagree, but Honda and Acura don't offer options, just engine, trans and Nav, right?

 

Most makers offer no more than 8 or 9 colors to Sub's 6… so maybe. My guess is they are missing the least popular.

 

Now if you mean features in each package, I suppose. Mem seats and Bluetooth kind of stuff. I think it is a bit of a stretch to consider them not well appointed, though (not that anyone said as much)

 

Ultimately it probably comes back to, IMO, exposure and (for some very significantly) size vs the rest of the segment.

 

SOA sells Outbacks. They do little to market themselves at all beyond that image. They did with the B9 or Forrester marginally, but I don't ever recall a WRX or Impreza commercial, let alone a Legacy

 

Nothing like: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqmhME_qRU8&feature=related]YouTube - subaru legacy touring wagon & legacy b4 ad[/ame]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SOA does make decisions regarding product line... they are the ones who thought it was a good idea to no longer make a legacy wagon...

 

Where do you get your information? I have heard from multiple sources that they are puppets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmm.

 

The fact of the USDM Legacy. As opposed to the Japanese-built ROW Legacy/Liberty.

 

Let's see here.

fewer model options

fewer colors

fewer drivetrain/suspension combinations

no interior color choice

no Blitzen

no Tuned by STI

no Spec B automatics

no Spec B 3.0R

no longer any Legacy wagon

no appearance differentiation from Spec B to other Legacies.

no WRB paintjob

no replaceable stereo option

no McIntosh or any other factory upgrade

no HID option

no STI catalog parts. SPT is a very pale imitation.

no sense of design in the fact that the 07-current legacy tail lights don't line up with the trunk seam line on the sedan. (and one can't use the DOT reflector regulation excuse. the reflectors are separate, in the bumper. they couldn't leave the JDM tail lights well enough alone, and those do match the seam line. Someone had to be particular enough to actually consciously mess that up, and that boggles my mind.)

 

And, likely, no S402, either.

 

what is the control group?

the Impreza and Forester lines don't have as much disparity, because they are built in Japan, and imported, and those lines are much closer in execution to their ROW counterparts.

 

And, none of the rest of the world, (frankly, not even Canada, I don't think, and they build Legacy wagons at SIA, on the same line at the same time as the USDM cars) have condemned the Legacy Wagon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use