2010 Tribeca Fail

[MJ in PA]

So, on the GT, what did they add in exchange for cutting folding mirrors with turn signals, electroluminescent gauges, 4 stage seat heaters, 5 speed auto option, standard leather and fog lamps, coolant gauge, LSD, and several other features? A bigger back seat and more cup holders?

 

Also, the dash on the 2010 just looks cheap - not sure if it's more the materials or the design there.

 

On the mechanical side, I'd be especially wary of the CVT on the 2.5i.

[Verwilderd]

So, on the GT, what did they add in exchange for cutting folding mirrors with turn signals, electroluminescent gauges, 4 stage seat heaters, 5 speed auto option, standard leather and fog lamps, coolant gauge, LSD, and several other features? A bigger back seat and more cup holders?

 

Also, the dash on the 2010 just looks cheap - not sure if it's more the materials or the design there.

 

On the mechanical side, I'd be especially wary of the CVT on the 2.5i.

 

So that we can compare apples to apples, let's take the spec b and gt limited fully loaded, since they are pretty close in price (you are mixing the lower trim levels that they have added)

 

Things the spec b has that the 2010 gt doesn't

LSD, folding mirrors, turn sigs, coolant gauge, alcantara, maybe a couple others

 

Things the GT has that the spec b doesn't

8 in nav screen, bluetooth, more hp, more torque, 8 cupholders , a back seat a human adult can fit in, it's wider, more headroom, larger truck, ability to open truck from outside without remote, better/larger tires, more integrate VDC, maybe a couple others.

 

Things I've chosen to exclude (you may or may not agree here)

-Bilsteins don't count, as both cars will perform on a track and in fact the suspension setup on the specb is slightly worse in stock form

-SI-drive, doesn't count as it's a gimmick

-Fog lights don't count because they can be added and still be close in price to the specb (now you have an option to not pay for them it you don't want them)

-4 stage heated seats, I think most people use a highest setting, then after they warm up, they turn it down to the low or otherwise have it off....

-the looks, as that is subjective

 

Now, I'm sure there are some things I'm forgetting, however I think I've hit most of the major parts....when you look at the list, the new gt has much more functionality than the old. In addition, it received some toys that the old one didn't have...and from what I see, aside from folding mirrors, there wasn't much lost to offset the gains on the new one. Past that, the things that were lost, are things that don't really cost much to claim they've cost cut.

[theGeneral]

 

Also, the dash on the 2010 just looks cheap - not sure if it's more the materials or the design there.

 

Both

[Guest]

07-09 SpecB's 6MT is FAR FAR superior unit to the POS cable operated 5mt dervied 6MT in 2010+ boat. No comparison. It's at least $2500-3000 cost cutting right there, and we're not counting the Torsen rear diff.

[Guest]

So that we can compare apples to apples, let's take the spec b and gt limited fully loaded, since they are pretty close in price (you are mixing the lower trim levels that they have added)

 

Things the spec b has that the 2010 gt doesn't

LSD, folding mirrors, turn sigs, coolant gauge, alcantara, maybe a couple others

 

Things the GT has that the spec b doesn't

8 in nav screen, bluetooth, more hp, more torque, 8 cupholders , a back seat a human adult can fit in, it's wider, more headroom, larger truck, ability to open truck from outside without remote, better/larger tires, more integrate VDC, maybe a couple others.

 

Things I've chosen to exclude (you may or may not agree here)

-Bilsteins don't count, as both cars will perform on a track and in fact the suspension setup on the specb is slightly worse in stock form

-SI-drive, doesn't count as it's a gimmick

-Fog lights don't count because they can be added and still be close in price to the specb (now you have an option to not pay for them it you don't want them)

-4 stage heated seats, I think most people use a highest setting, then after they warm up, they turn it down to the low or otherwise have it off....

-the looks, as that is subjective

 

Now, I'm sure there are some things I'm forgetting, however I think I've hit most of the major parts....when you look at the list, the new gt has much more functionality than the old. In addition, it received some toys that the old one didn't have...and from what I see, aside from folding mirrors, there wasn't much lost to offset the gains on the new one. Past that, the things that were lost, are things that don't really cost much to claim they've cost cut.

 

The 07-09 SpecB's 6MT is FAR FAR superior unit to the POS cable operated 5mt dervied 6MT in 2010+ boat. No comparison. It's at least $2500-3000 cost cutting right there, and we're not counting the Torsen R180 rear diff.

[MAINIAC SPEC B]

So that we can compare apples to apples, let's take the spec b and gt limited fully loaded, since they are pretty close in price (you are mixing the lower trim levels that they have added)

 

Things the spec b has that the 2010 gt doesn't

LSD, folding mirrors, turn sigs, coolant gauge, alcantara, maybe a couple others

 

Things the GT has that the spec b doesn't

8 in nav screen, bluetooth, more hp, more torque, 8 cupholders , a back seat a human adult can fit in, it's wider, more headroom, larger truck, ability to open truck from outside without remote, better/larger tires, more integrate VDC, maybe a couple others.

 

Things I've chosen to exclude (you may or may not agree here)

-Bilsteins don't count, as both cars will perform on a track and in fact the suspension setup on the specb is slightly worse in stock form

-SI-drive, doesn't count as it's a gimmick

-Fog lights don't count because they can be added and still be close in price to the specb (now you have an option to not pay for them it you don't want them)

-4 stage heated seats, I think most people use a highest setting, then after they warm up, they turn it down to the low or otherwise have it off....

-the looks, as that is subjective

 

Now, I'm sure there are some things I'm forgetting, however I think I've hit most of the major parts....when you look at the list, the new gt has much more functionality than the old. In addition, it received some toys that the old one didn't have...and from what I see, aside from folding mirrors, there wasn't much lost to offset the gains on the new one. Past that, the things that were lost, are things that don't really cost much to claim they've cost cut.

The 6 speed in the 10 LGT is not the same 6 speed as in Spec. B & STI

[Verwilderd]

You are correct, but it will still do the job. Actually the transmission itself is pretty good...as far as the shifter itself, yes that's different.

[MJ in PA]

-4 stage heated seats, I think most people use a highest setting, then after they warm up, they turn it down to the low or otherwise have it off...

 

Actually, 3 is my favorite setting!

 

Anyway. Subaru is clearly a company on the way down, in terms of product. No more non-outback wagon, fewer choices, fewer features overall. If sales are up, I guess it was a good business decision. American consumers are largely stupid. But I refuse to accept the downgrades. The 2010 should offer everything the previous gen did, plus additional features like HID headlights.

[Guest]

You are correct, but it will still do the job. Actually the transmission itself is pretty good...as far as the shifter itself, yes that's different.

 

The discussion was about cost-cutting, you seem to conveniently forget. The 10+ 6MT unit is no doubt far less costly to make compared to the SpecB's 6MT.

 

Your claim that the transmission itself is pretty good is completely unfounded. Noone put enough miles on these nor upgraded power to see how much it holds. Probably noone even opened one to asses the gear sizes. If they had to cram the extra gear it's not impossible the unit is weaker than the BL/BP's 5MT.

[SLegacy99]

Less power, more expensive, and crappier gas mileage than the competition. The Tribeca isn't gonna sell until they address at least some of that.

[Verwilderd]

The discussion was about cost-cutting, you seem to conveniently forget. The 10+ 6MT unit is no doubt far less costly to make compared to the SpecB's 6MT.

 

Your claim that the transmission itself is pretty good is completely unfounded. Noone put enough miles on these nor upgraded power to see how much it holds. Probably noone even opened one to asses the gear sizes. If they had to cram the extra gear it's not impossible the unit is weaker than the BL/BP's 5MT.

 

If you're gonna take that argument, you cannot say it sucks. In addition they didn't just cram another gear into the old one.

[CTATV]

dont like the new exterior...

[The B4]

Less power, more expensive, and crappier gas mileage than the competition. The Tribeca isn't gonna sell until they address at least some of that.

 

The tribeca is less expensive, faster, better handling, better equipped, and has mileage on par with almost every other midsize SUV in its class

 

The Tribeca's problems are rear seat leg room, bells and whistle type features & content, and most importantly awareness from lack of advertising. SIA has also switched over a lot of Tribeca's production to Legacy and Outback sometime last year to manufacture faster selling product.

[SLegacy99]

The tribeca is less expensive, faster, better handling, better equipped, and has mileage on par with almost every other midsize SUV in its class

 

Really?

 

Tribeca: $30,495, 256 HP, 247 Trqs., 16/21 MPG

Edge: $26,920, 265 HP, 250 Trqs., 18/25

Highlander: $25, 705 ($27,600 V6), 270 HP, 248 Trqs., 18/24

Traverse: $29,224, 281 HP, 266 Trqs., 17/24

Murano: $28,050, 265 HP, 248 Trqs., 18/23

[Verwilderd]

Are you comparing comparable models?

[theGeneral]

Actually, 3 is my favorite setting!

 

Anyway. Subaru is clearly a company on the way down, in terms of product. No more non-outback wagon, fewer choices, fewer features overall. If sales are up, I guess it was a good business decision. American consumers are largely stupid. But I refuse to accept the downgrades. The 2010 should offer everything the previous gen did, plus additional features like HID headlights.

 

Sales are WAY up so your theory is weak.

[MJ in PA]

Sales are WAY up so your theory is weak.

 

I'm talking about the product, not the company. Walmart is profitable selling crap, and Subaru can be too apparently.

[Mad1]

So that we can compare apples to apples, let's take the spec b and gt limited fully loaded, since they are pretty close in price (you are mixing the lower trim levels that they have added)

 

 

-SI-drive, doesn't count as it's a gimmick

 

 

As a newcomer to Subaru and someone who will not mod the car I think

SI-Drive is much more than a gimmick. Using the "I" setting and driving

conservatively you can match the fuel economy of the NA versions, I got

27mpg bringing it from New Mexico to Texas. A quick switch to "S#" and you have yourself a rocket, a completely different car! I really like it.

[rock2534]

Really?

 

Tribeca: $30,495, 256 HP, 247 Trqs., 16/21 MPG

Edge: $26,920, 265 HP, 250 Trqs., 18/25

Highlander: $25, 705 ($27,600 V6), 270 HP, 248 Trqs., 18/24

Traverse: $29,224, 281 HP, 266 Trqs., 17/24

Murano: $28,050, 265 HP, 248 Trqs., 18/23

 

How fast do you really need to go in a heavy suv? You don't get any of the above mentioned if you want a speed demon. We picked up an 09 Tribeca Limited early this year, was a corp demo completely loaded with 7k mi. Sticker was 41k, we got it for 30k. It is quite fast for what it is, and the wife likes it. I wouldn't buy this vehicle for myself nor would have I paid the sticker price, but at that price and for her it is a good vehicle, and I have no problems driving it. We also shopped the highlander and pilots, but they were even more expensive. The forester is ok, but it pales in comparison to the tribeca.

 

There is plenty of room in the second and even the third row for normal size people, if you are 6'5" you should just accept that most vehicles will be a tight fit. We plan on keeping this thing for a long time.

 

I am not that picky, so the materials used for the dash and interior does not bother me in the least. I realize it is a subaru and not an Infiniti or BMW. If you want the highest end materials, you should not be shopping subaru. Anyway, it is a good vehicle in my opinion, as long as the price is right, that makes all the difference.

[Guest]

The tribeca is less expensive, faster, better handling, better equipped, and has mileage on par with almost every other midsize SUV in its class

 

I don't know about that. I drove Beca and found the steering feel to be very poor. It truly responds like 1970 Caddy. The damping felt not bad, but between the steering feel and the roll the car handles sloppily. Our 02 Suzuki XL-7 body-on-frame SUV handles way better and could run circles around Beca.

 

I haven't driven many SUVs though so can't really compare to "average".

[The B4]

bull unclemat... I had one as a loaner and that thing took curves like a champ. For an SUV i could drive it very aggressively. I know the XL-7 is way worse handling as I've had one of those as a loaner as well and that was heavily the suck.

 

SLegacy99

 

You are looking at base prices and FWD. The Tribeca has a lot more standard equipment than most of the competition. For AWD and comparably equipped:

 

Tribeca: $33,190, 16/21 MPG

Edge: $35,390, 17/23

Highlander: $35,760, 17/23

Traverse: $40,760, 16/23

Murano: $36,110, 18/23

Pilot: $36,155, 16/22

Veracruz: $36,645, 16/22

CX-9: $33,540, 15/21

XC90: $41,345, 14/20

 

From Popular Mechanics Crossover test

 

http://i45.tinypic.com/120j82d.jpg

 

The sporty Subaru was one of the best-handling models in the test. Of course, given Subaru’s rally racing heritage, we expected some of that pedigree would rub off on this flagship vehicle. Next to the Mazda, the Subaru had the most talented footwork and posted high speeds in our handling tests. It was the easiest of the bunch to snake through the cones, and the most fun, too. On the street, all our testers were fans of the Subaru’s poise. However, the steering was particularly heavy at lower speeds.

[Verwilderd]

-SI-drive, doesn't count as it's a gimmick

 

 

As a newcomer to Subaru and someone who will not mod the car I think

SI-Drive is much more than a gimmick. Using the "I" setting and driving

conservatively you can match the fuel economy of the NA versions, I got

27mpg bringing it from New Mexico to Texas. A quick switch to "S#" and you have yourself a rocket, a completely different car! I really like it.

 

It's a gimmick. Just don't step on the gas as much and you'll get the same mpg....plus, you're 1mpg more doesn't mean anything in the long term anyway. I've gotten over 30 in s# on the highway...this just comes down to how you drive. All the SI-drive is really doing is adjusting the throttle position so you have your foot on the peddle all the way down, but not have the throttle open 100%. You can do the same thing by not being lazy and pressing the peddle all the way.

 

It's lame.

[Verwilderd]

SLegacy99

 

You are looking at base prices and FWD. The Tribeca has a lot more standard equipment than most of the competition. For AWD and comparably equipped:

 

Tribeca: $33,190, 16/21 MPG

Edge: $35,390, 17/23

Highlander: $35,760, 17/23

Traverse: $40,760, 16/23

Murano: $36,110, 18/23

Pilot: $36,155, 16/22

Veracruz: $36,645, 16/22

CX-9: $33,540, 15/21

XC90: $41,345, 14/20

 

 

This is what many people seem to forget when cross shopping other manufacturers. If you are going to talk prices (this is directed at 99legacy), you need to compare apples to apples. If you don't, then you'll always find a cheaper vehicle out there...that doesn't mean it's a better value.

[krzyss]

There is plenty of room in the second and even the third row for normal size people, if you are 6'5" you should just accept that most vehicles will be a tight fit.

 

I am not sure what is your definition of 'normal size people' but only my 7 year old could have fit in 3rd row in Tribeca (when I was checking it a few years ago access was only from passenger side - bad idea). If she needed a child seat 3rd row would not accomodate her.

 

Krzys

[SLegacy99]

The Tribeca has a lot more standard equipment than most of the competition.

 

This is what many people seem to forget when cross shopping other manufacturers. If you are going to talk prices (this is directed at 99legacy), you need to compare apples to apples. If you don't, then you'll always find a cheaper vehicle out there...that doesn't mean it's a better value.

 

 

This is precisely my point and why I chose the base model 6 cylinders to compare. Sorry, no apples to apples. Not when you are examining what is the most cost effective option for 7 passengers. Say youre are buying ice cream and you want vanilla. But you could buy the more expensive chocolate ice cream with M & Ms and nuts and you get less. Then you remember that you just wanted plain vanilla anyway and thats what you buy. Thus, see the Tribeca's sales for the last 18 months.