Subaru marches on in U.S. but more work ahead

[The B4]

Cheap is not just materials, but also design. All the angular badly proportioned elements of the new interior cry "cheap".

 

The center console and door cards are particularly offensive on the new car. As is the longitudal stitching on the seats reminescent of living room armchairs for fat people.

 

I don't see a problem with the center console other than the blue plastic which actually looks nice when lit. The materials of the center console are nicer except for the cupholder cover. The door cards are not as stylish as the outgoing car but are functional and soft on ever touch point. And Subaru has never been a leader in making comfortable seats. the vertical stitching helps tremendously in comfort. If the seats had more bolstering they'd be perfect. I'm skinny enough though that'd no USDM Subaru seat in the last 10 years keeps me from bracing myself in sharp turns.

[Verwilderd]

They must have retracted the marketing memo, then:

 

http://i46.tinypic.com/9j2mnr.jpg

 

I'd say 10% is pretty significant.

 

10% is only maybe 2mpg difference....not much I'd say...maybe $100 savings a year.

[Verwilderd]

Also, under the big "" it says "up to" 10%....that doesn't mean you'll even see that much of a gain. In fact, with the way I work the throttle, I get better mpg in the S# than in I.

[IwannaSportSedan]

I get roughly 26mpg when I cruise on the interstate, which I do 150-180 miles at a time, several times a year. And I commute at highway speed every day of the week.

 

10% more, which should be do-able at cruise... would be 28.6mpg. and that is the high-test stuff, which is selling at about 3$ a gallon right now.

 

All for a switchable ECU calibration set, and an electronic knob on the console.

 

Not only that... but if I had SI-drive... a flick of the knob, and I get access to full power when I would want it. The car wouldn't be PERMANENTLY TUNED for one setting or the other. That is the whole point.

 

Do you want a car that is permanently tuned for CAFE regulations, and leaving easy potential off the table...

 

Or do you want all the power, even when you aren't exploiting it, when a simple switch could save a couple of gallons of gas for later, when you DO switch over to sport sharp.

 

I'd sacrifice mileage for potential power, if I have to choose one or the other.

 

The switch just would allow the driver to choose on the fly, as often as I want, rather than ONLY choosing when I buy the car initially.

 

How is that not an advantage?

 

All the bullcrap entertainment screens and what not that they stuff into cars anymore, I would give NAV, and all of that up for good dynamics control systems, which improve the versatility and adaptability, and widen the range between efficiency and performance.

 

Why would such improvements NOT be a step forward. I have been plenty critical of some of Subaru's decisions, but SI-drive seemed like a decent feature to include, that didn't seem to have a detriment to the BL Legacy's cost.

 

Other cars adopting similar systems seem to bear that out.

[Verwilderd]

I guarantee that if you had the si-drive you'd play with it for a bit and then end up leaving it alone. It doesn't do what you think it does. And when cruising you won't notice much difference....only when accelerating. But you aren't going to notice a difference to warrant paying for it.

[IwannaSportSedan]

I would probably set it for default sport, rather than default "I"

 

And when cruising at speed, with the cruise set, I might leave it or set it to I.

 

And when I want to give it a go and push the car a bit, sport sharp is there.

 

And what about paying for it? It was standard equipment on the 2007 GT and 3.0R Legacies and Outbacks, and they didn't change that much in price, compared to 2005-2006, as well as the 07-09 gaining other features, like Aux-in stereos, folding rear seats, and the like.

 

So exactly what is the price premium, if the car didn't change that much in price?

 

Even if I were to concede the premise, that it is a gimmick... (which doesn't make much sense at all, Subaru is better than spending production costs on unverifiable features. They'd have never put it on a car in the first place...) Why would Subaru have an impetus to put money into developing the software, or putting the pieces in the car?

 

...and if they could do that, why would they make it meaningless? OR conversely, if it were meaningless, why not improve it's effectiveness and make it more desireable, rather than just canceling it in ONLY ONE MARKET, north america. Where they conicidently consistently cut the availability of options and features.

 

And the ROW markets, built from the Japanese factory, typically with better options and far more variable option configurations, they still have the SI-Drive features.

[Viber]

Subaru reminds me of the American car makers in the 1980's, resting on their laurels and letting the bean counters have too much influence on the product. Based on the 2010 Legacy, I'd say Subaru quality is on the way down. But sales are up. You could argue that sales are a lagging indicator of quality, but we'll see what the future holds. Right now, I would not buy a Subaru, even though I'm happy with my '07 Legacy.

 

Up is down, and down is up for Subaru currently. They turned the Legacy from a Audi, BMW and Infiniti fighter, into a stale Camry alternative while Suzuki of all companies is daring people to compare their Kizashi mid-sizer to a TSX and A4

[Verwilderd]

Ok... justify your statements.

 

1)How is this brand new top end Infiniti M56 employing a feature that Subaru has already used, and has chucked for the US market, but continues to use elsewhere...

 

2)What results is SI-drive not showing? (and annoying is a subjective evaluation that not everyone is assured to agree with you on...)

 

 

3) I want to hear more than just "gimmick" from a person KNOWN to denegrate the outgoing model, in favor of the new model, who has shown himself to not be objective.

 

You don't have to be objective, but I want to hear more than just insults and denegration. I want to hear actual qualitative, or quantitative information as to WHY you thing it is ineffective.

 

 

4)Personally, I would love to see SI-Drive 2.

Bilstein PSS10 cockpit adjustable dampers linked into the system...

gearbox shift maps on a theoretical 6EAT-SS or Dual-clutch gearbox

drive by wire profile, fuel map changes, timing curves, turbo boost pressure limit on models with turbos,

exhaust-system valve control to open the exhaust backpressure and volume...

center and rear electronic limited slip diff controls and AWD bias profiles (basically multi-profile VTD, linked to the SI-drive setting).

and changing the traction and stability control profiles.

 

Make it adjustable for Sport, Cruise, and Weather/low traction. Add a race mode (TC and Stability off, ABS off or very high limits) for STI or other Subaru high performance models.

 

If Porsche can do PASM, and Sport Chrono can uncork PSM and other performance settings, Ferrari can have it's Manettino switch and even Infiniti luxury cars can have variable performance settings... Subaru already has SI drive, why not fully integrate it, and go big.

 

A switch that changes the tuning seems like a benefit for diversity. Don't you support diversity?

 

So I have finally had a chance to read this thread completely and chose this quote to talk about. Now I have taken this quote above and put numbers on it in order to better discuss the points. In addition, I took out the crap in it that won't apply to this.

 

4) So first, let me qualify myself in saying that I love my 2008 and like the 2010 (haven't fallen in love with it like I have my 08...however when in the 2010, I really do enjoy it). Also, while yes I sell Subarus, I'm first and foremost an enthusiast and typically don't jump on the band wagon for new changes. So I would say all in all, I have a fairly unbiased opinion on these two cars as I like both. I think both have their strong points and both have their weak points.

 

1) Now, from what you have said, you don't fully understand what the Infinite's system actually does. However that is not important. Let's say it does the exact same thing as the "all great SI-drive". Now just because Infinite has put this in their cars doesn't mean it is going to be successful. There are many brands out there that put tons of crap on their cars to make them "cool". In the long run, just because a manufacturer uses some "neat" things on their vehicles doesn't mean they are good/functional/useful. In addition, you fail to realize that the infinite is also considerably more expensive. Every time you try to compare the LGT to another car, you always pick one that is much more expensive and then say the LGT is decontented, which means you aren't exactly comparing apples to apples. Because if you're going to say that, there is always going to be a car that has something another doesn't, however it is not going to be the exact same price. Now, you state that the JDM/EDM versions still keep the SI-drive, however when you look at costs for the exact same vehicle, you will find that those models are more expensive. So if you want to pay more, then by all means, go by one of those (however I doubt you will). You must understand though, that what sells in one market and may be seen as "cool" may not be in another. So for the LGT in this market the SI-drive was not something that helped increase sales...so they deleted them for something else all the while keeping vehicle costs low.

 

2) Now as far as the performance and functionality, if you have never driven with it, you cannot state ANYTHING with regards to how great it is or isn't because you truly have no idea. You are basing everything you type off of literature...but you aren't reading the fine print in it either. So when in "I" mode, it says you can get "UP TO" 10% increase in fuel economy. That say increase can be had by adjusting the way you drive. In addition, most people who I've talked to AS WELL AS myself have not seen any different in mpg when being in "i" vs "s" or "s#". The only thing the "i" really does is scale back performance...so when you push the throttle in 100% the actual plate isn't opening 100%. From there other things such as boost as affected. But all in all, it's not needed. I promise you, if you had it on your car, you will play with it for a few weeks and from there it will be a hassle...you'll probably want it on s# all the time or just leave it in s. This is similar to the dccd on the sti. Most people play with it for a few weeks and then never mess with it...or if they do, it's only to play with it and not use it for what its intention is.

 

With regards to the new 2010, the mapping is not like the "i" mode in the previous legacies with the si-drive. It is actually mapped to be in between s and s#. Also, if you are soooooo worried about mpg, then you should be buying a turbo car. You don't buy a sports car to get good gas mileage. You buy one for the performance. Plus, if you were to have your car tuned, you can increase the gas mileage and get the same or possibly better in s# as you think you would in i. But you need to understand that on the stickers on cars, were it has the mpg, those big numbers are an average of what was achieved on city and highway. So if you just back off on the throttle, you will achieve the same mileage or better in "s" or "s#" as you would in "i" mode. If this thing were soooooo great, it would be in every car...but it's not.

 

3) With regards to what you would want in a car, if a manufacturer were to put those things in your perfect car, it would be way more expensive then what the legacy is. In fact, the nice thing about cars is that there are companies that make those parts. If you want them soooooo badly, then go buy them and put them on. In fact, it would (in the long run) be cheaper for you to add them and be better than if a manufacturer were to do it....even then, you would probably end up wanting more and change those things anyway. So what's the point. If a manufacturer could put all these things on your "wish list" and get the car to a reasonable price where people would actually buy them, I guarantee you there would be better out there and you would end up complaining because you want that stuff and not the crap that's on there now. You will find that aftermarket companies always make things better than the manufacturer itself because that's the only thing they do and so things like r&d are cheaper, it is cheaper to make etc. When a car manufacturer makes something and uses it, they have to look at many other aspects to make sure they can produce a car that's affordable, that people will want to buy and is reliable all the while turning a profit so that they can stay in business. It is not as simple as you would like to think.

 

So, in conclusion to my long essay, the point is that the SI-drive does not do what you think it does. And in the long run, it doesn't help sell cars. In fact, when it first came out, many tuners didn't like it because when tuning they had to compensate tunes to account for the change the si-drive would make if the driver decided to switch. Even places like rallitek didn't care for it and most people who have a vehicle with the si-drive will tell you this: "it's neat, but I don't have to have it...it doesn't make enough of a difference to make it a must". In addition, let's say it truly does increase mpg in ALL cases with EVERY driver and it does get exactly 10% more gas mileage all the time....that increase it not going to make a difference in your yearly gas expensive....even if you drive in "i" mode 100% of the time. There is the trend here about mpg and if you can get a better mpg, even if it's only 1 mpg better, you are going to save tons and tons of money. Well, the truth is, you won't. Take hybrids for example. They were huge last year. But they were slightly more expensive to buy and there were many articles stating that your huge increase in gas savings would not pay off the increase in cost of the vehicle in a normal vehicle's lifespan. You are putting waaaaaaay too much into the mpg "savings" from the si-drive on a car that wasn't even designed for great gas mileage. If that's what you want, and you can can't afford the extra $100 a year in gas, then you probably can't afford this vehicle and need to be looking at alternatives.

 

And lastly, because you've said this many, many, many, many times...if you really want a BMW for you next car, go get it. No one is telling you not to. However realize that you are going to be paying more for this car, and the reliability sucks on them. So be prepare to open your wallet and shell out money...not to make the car better, but to keep it running. So bash Subaru all you want and say they decontented it...you'll find it to be worse over at BMW. But the things you are complaining about with Subaru are stupid and the gains the car has received have far outweighed the losses....so much so, that more and more people are buying this car and buying them faster than they did the all great previous version. While I too like the 2005-2009 models a little better for looks, the features and capabilities on the 2010 are much better. All in all, you get more car, more power, and more features for about the same cost as the previous model. Unlike the few on here, most people have taken noticed (not because it looks like a Camry, but because it's an exceptional value) and have purchase/are buying.

[MJ in PA]

Bottom line is we get an inferior car with fewer features than they do in Europe and Japan. It's the little things - the cool features - that can make a difference in a purchase decision. There's very little about the new Legacy that would really make me want to buy one. It's now a plain, vanilla car that happens to have AWD.

[IwannaSportSedan]

I'll take some time to read that, and respond to it...

 

But I took SI-drive at face value when Subaru released it, I take Infiniti (a car dealer should know how to spell a car brand correctly, and it ends with an "I" as a brand name, and ends as a "y" as a mathematical concept. It doesn't end with an E in the english language.)

 

And the second initial thing...

 

I have driven a Subaru with SI-Drive, and I did notice a bit of a difference. But it was a dealer loaner, so I only had it for a couple days. Otherwise, and let me make this loud so that it is perfectly clear. I DON'T SPEND WEEKS DRIVING OTHER PEOPLE'S CARS.

 

If that is a disqualification for talking about the subject, then we may as well close up this whole forum.

 

The third...

The BL Legacy favorably compared to cars that WERE more expensive. I cross shopped it with cars more expensive, I did not cross shop with Camry, Accord, or Altima. If the BL Legacy didn't exist, I would be likely driving an Audi right now.

 

I compared this feature to a brand new car that just introduced the same feature, the Infiniti M. Infiniti is not in the business of putting nonsense into it's flagship sedan. And according to people that are supposed to KNOW, the SI-Drive feature was not a gimmick when it was introduced three years ago, either.

 

If Legacy doesn't want to be aspirational to own, nor a better value compared to more expensive vehicles, it is going to be an also-ran piece of cheap mainstream trash. The same styrofoam cup of a car as a Camry, Accord, and the rest. I don't buy those kind of cars. I buy cars that are a good value. Maybe I can only afford a re-useable plastic travel mug of a car, and not a fine crystal goblet of a car... but I don't buy styrofoam throw-away, if you catch my analogy.

 

I am going to go back and continue reading the rest of that post...

[IwannaSportSedan]

Point1:

How the hell does Subaru know whether SI Drive increased sales or not? They didn't offer it as an option, it was standard equipment, and there were other reasons why the later BL Legacy didn't sell. MOST OF WHICH WAS SUBARUS COMPLETE LACK OF MARKETING ATTENTION. PEOPLE STILL DON'T RECOGNIZE MY BL LEGACY.

 

To blame SI Drive for not improving sales figures is stupid. Did the turn signal folding mirrors hurt sales figures too? What about the EL-gauges?

 

Subaru of AMERICA decided to cheap the hell out. The general design of the car got more mainstream and SOA continued that trend by stripping out a good portion of the standard features list, as well, KNOWING that the car was not going to de directed toward enthusiasts.

 

That is the reason these features are missing. Nothing else fits the facts.

 

Point 2:

You haven't been paying attention. I SAID I WOULD GIVE UP MPG FOR PERFORMANCE. I bought a 2005, which doesn't have SI drive. AND it is accessPort tuned for even more performance yet, which incidentally gets better gas mileage than the PIG RICH factory map, anyway.

 

I SIMPLY SAID, again, to be CLEAR, that the option to optimize the car on the fly is an admirable goal, and a feature worth inclusion. If it was meaningless, then it should be better implemented to be effective.

 

The GT may not be set up to drive like "I" mode on the previous car. But it is being de-emphasized, in favor of the CVT-equipped 2.5i, and the automatic-equipped 3.6R, which are likely NOT tuned like the Sport, nor Sharp Turbo settings on the 2007-2009 GT and Spec B models, probably not even like the Sport Sharp setting on the 3.0R models that had SI-Drive.

 

Point 3:

I know of NO AFTERMARKET SYSTEM that is endemic to a car like SI-Drive, nor like STI's DCCD, or things that are embedded into the car's systems like that. AccessPort can change maps, but not on the fly like SI-Drive.

 

2009 Legacy was approaching something truly fantastic, with the Spec B actually coming in more than one color, and it had a better standard features list, BETTER AWD, AND BETTER STYLING inside and out. If the '10 Legacy had been a continuation of that improvement, I would be a huge fan! A 10 Legacy that was a handsome styling re-fresh with a little bit more interior room in the floor pan, and a couple of updates here or there... the new engine setup is fine...

 

But the new styling sucks, inside and out, and it got far bigger than it was necessary to grow.

 

The new 6-speed gearbox effort is pathetic. The Spec B HAD THE RIGHT GEARBOX, and along with STI, it was the best gearbox in the lineup. It still is. It has VTD AWD, and a torsen rear diff included. The drivetrain of the '10 GT is inferior to that, with no LSD at all, and standard symmetrical AWD in the same old 4->5->6 gear gearbox, now with limp-tastic cable shifting.

 

Do you actually think those are better selling points than SI-Drive was?

 

SI-Drive might not return big efficiency numbers to every driver. But how is giving the driver some options and more control a bad thing?

 

DON'T COMPARE PRICES WITH OTHER COUNTRIES, the exchange rate is not the only consideration. Compare the US car for 2006 with the same car for 2007. How did the addition of SI-drive, folding rear seats, and a new stereo with an input port, or 2008's new headlights and tail lights, and bumper covers... how did those affect Legacy's price. They barely made a blip. The GT Limited's price didn't change much. Even the Spec B's price from 2006 to 2007 didn't change that much, with the addition of the 6-speed gearbox, that the 2006 did not get.

 

NOW the US legacy's price, option for option went up, when the list of available options got drastically CUT.

 

I DON'T WANT A BMW. I don't like their styling, either, and their costs are far too high outside of warranty.

 

I may go over to Audi's new A4. But I would rather have new Subaru. I prefer the boxer engine layout, and the better value that SUBARU USED TO BE ABOUT. I am not big on spending a lot more money than I have to spend. Subaru used to be a better value for the $$$, and unless stepping up to the S4, it was more powerful, and quicker.

 

AGAIN, I already said, I bought Legacy for performance MUCH over fuel efficiency. and now I just said it for the 1,000,003rd time. That doesn't mean that I want to waste fuel if there is a way to have my cake and still be able to eat just a bit of it, too.

 

Call me stupid. Call all of us here that are completely dissatisfied with Legacy's new direction stupid, if it makes you feel better. It doesn't make it true. And it doesn't make the Ugly, under-equipped '10 Legacy any better.

 

Long live the BL Legacy. The last, and best of the legitimate line. They may as well give the new car a new name, as it is truly a different product. from now on, I consider it to be the Subaru Albatross. What once was good, until someone killed it, and now is a curse.

 

The 'Legacy' is dead, and I do mean that double-entendre.

[Verwilderd]

Bottom line is we get an inferior car with fewer features than they do in Europe and Japan. It's the little things - the cool features - that can make a difference in a purchase decision. There's very little about the new Legacy that would really make me want to buy one. It's now a plain, vanilla car that happens to have AWD.

 

It is not inferior. It is the same thing!!! SI-drive does not make one better than the other. Plus, if you really want it so badly, go pay the extra $$$ and buy a JDM/EDM. I'm willing to bet you will not want to pay the increase (not counting shipping) to get the vehicle.

[IwannaSportSedan]

It is illegal to import a non-federalized vehicle for road use. It is impossible to register it.

 

There is a WHOLE LOT MORE than just a currency exchange rate conversion, sometimes even just profit-taking, that makes the prices different between countries.

 

Otherwise the Canadian prices wouldn't be so high, either, and those are built in Indiana, with the same down-spec configuration as the US, NOT the higher JDM/ROW spec.

 

And yet you say the cars are the same.

 

Which is it, the same car at a different price. OR is it a different car at a different price?

 

A knob and software is not a huge cost per car. Probably less than 2$ per unit.

Folding mirrors with LEDs is not a huge cost.

EL gauges is not a huge cost.

A decent 6MT is not an untenable cost, nor is an automatic gearbox option for the GT.

Offering the 6MT and 5EAT choice on the H6 Legacy probably wouldn't cost that much per unit, either, especially if BTO, and not some crazy dealer stock allocation mess. That kind of bureaucracy is probably a higher cost to the company that all of those features or options put together.

 

And a car that has fewer features is inferior. Definition of the word.

 

Not only is the US car inferior to the JDM/ROW car, on features, options... IT IS ALSO INFERIOR TO THE MODEL IT REPLACES on features and options, as well as styling.

 

You can continue to refuse to accept the FACTS, and just prove that denial is not just a river in egypt.

[Verwilderd]

Iwannasportsedan: I used you're quote because it hit most topics in this thread. I failed to mention that the "you" in there was not directed at you, but rather MJ. So I apologize for my failure there. That being said, I have a couple things to respond to on your post above.

 

First, how do we track whether the SI-drive increased sales.....easy, look at the year before 2006 and then at 2007 when it was first introduced. You won't see much of an increase (if any...I don't have numbers in front of me). That is only one way to determine whether it was really a success...because in those two years the cars were pretty much the same.

 

Now as far as pricing...you need to understand that the price may not have been affected that much with those additions starting from 2005 till 2009, however, this year was a complete redesign, typically the first year will the least amount of "stuff" because of the costs associated with retooling and such for a redesign. Typically with Subaru, every year you will see more and more things added to a car (until a redesign). So in order to keep costs down, they don't include the small stuff. You will more than likely see stuff return once production costs drop on these new vehicles (this has always happened). Now with that being said, you are only complaining about the little "things" that were lost this year, but the gains have far outweighed those. If the gains weren't seen as important, the car wouldn't be selling as well as it is....kinda like the previous years.

[MJ in PA]

It is not inferior. It is the same thing!!!

 

Not having folding mirrors with turn signals is the same as having them? Not having SI drive is the same as having it? Sorry, but it is not the same thing - the US version is clearly cheaper and inferior to the JDM version. Still, I guess it doesn't matter, as I wouldn't buy the JDM version either. I think it's an ugly car, whereas the previous gen Legacy was a very nice looking vehicle!

[IwannaSportSedan]

RE-READ what I posted.

 

There was more changed than just SI-DRIVE between MY2006 and MY2007. The outward visual change didn't happen for the US until MY2008 anyway. How do you determine WHICH changes were ineffective?

 

Just because the feature didn't move 10,000 more units, doesn't mean it was a bad feature. Including that feature is something Subaru should do to make their cars more versatile. But a feature like that is not what would be considered a "killer app", or "killer feature" that instantly makes a difference in sales and competition.

 

Now I think YOU are ascribing failure where it isn't warranted. I don't think SI-drive was a gimmick, but I never said it was a big enough feature to catapult the car into the sales stratosphere. I just said it was a nice thing that got included in 2007, and it is stupid for it to get pulled, when it was an affordable little feature for a little extra value.

 

I have not seen that new cars ditch little features that previous models have had. I have never seen a model change that actually swam backwards like that.

 

Name one other car that was replaced by a direct successor, not a different nameplate, that retracted like that in recent years... Good luck with that one.

 

And it MUST be that the features are GONE, not just moved from standard equipment to variable option packages... but still on the list somewhere. I am talking about features that are GONE, as in NOT A POSSIBILITY to buy. I am not talking about fog lights going from standard to optional. I am talking about SI-Drive, folding signal mirrors, Limited Slip Diff, and those things that are NOT AVAILABLE on the '10, that were present on the '09. The de-contenting of the '10 Legacy took features and options off the table.

 

No company offers less than they previously did, if they can help it. especially when it impacts VALUE. Less equipment for the same or more money, is WORSE VALUE. And a damn stupid move, especially with people down sizing their "economic" footprint.

 

Subaru has been gaining sales based on their reputation for value, while other, more expensive, or otherwise damaged brands are losing sales. People are re-trenching, economically. Subaru could be poised to make bank on that downward trend from people who have been buying more expensive cars on easy credit, now that credit is not so easy.

 

But they won't maintain that reputation if they keep this up. They are hurting their own value quotient, and people will notice, especially if they are used to nicer cars, and then shop the $25-35k price segment, and Subaru doesn't offer rebates, where others in more of a hurt, do.

 

Above all differences in preference for this car or that car... American shoppers, now under economic stress, look for the best deal. You had better believe that I do.

 

Subaru used to be the best ~$30K performance sedan deal, and completely under-rated, and by their own fault, completely under-exposed. Nobody knew the 2007 Legacy... which is why the sales didn't move. 2005 had a few ads, very few. after that, NOTHING, until now, as the '10 Legacy re-design is out. THAT has more to do with the lack of sales increase in 2007-2009, than any estimation of SI-Drive, or the other changes applied to the BL Legacy/Outback.

 

The car is selling well now because it is being advertised, and people are breifly aware of it again, after not having been aware of it. And the GT model is not a big part of that, by SOA's design.

 

The marketing is making more difference than added features for 2007-2008, or lost features for 2010. When market awareness falls off again, Legacy sales will fall off again, and possibly fall worse, as new versions of Accord, Camry, Altima, and other mainstream sedans come out, and they will likely come with more value, either by lower prices, more features, or both.

[MJ in PA]

Even though I didn't purchase the GT, it was the GT model that made me really aware of the Legacy, and it was the premium features, and the sleek Euro styling that really made me want one! I still remember when I saw the first drawing of the '05 Legacy - I immediately loved the styling. The 2010, by contrast, immediately struck me as being ugly and poorly proportioned. The new Legacy lacks both the sleek styling and the upscale feel.

 

As it was, I almost didn't buy the Legacy - mainly due to the fact that I couldn't get the 5 speed auto, navigation, or stability control without getting the turbo. Other cars that I considered offered those features at a lower price point. I really didn't want the GT, not so much due to up-front cost, but mainly due to the increased fuel and maintenance costs. But I settled for the 4 speed auto and an aftermarket nav system, in order to get a car that was at least close to the GT I aspired to.

 

But I likely would have upgraded to the GT or 6 cyl, whereas now I'm not at all interested in the car. And the cost cutting that's apparent in the interior quality and features does not inspire confidence in the mechanical reliability either, as I'm left to wonder where else Subaru is cutting corners to save a buck.

[MJ in PA]

This conversation reminds me a lot of similar ones on the Saturn forums several years ago, when GM was cutting costs at Saturn as it gradually turned the independent subsidiary into a standard GM division. Granted, it was a different class of car, so we were arguing about more basic features, but it was a similar situation. My 1997 Saturn SL2 had a fully independent suspension and 4 wheel disc brakes, for example. In 2000, they started using rear drums on all trim levels. Then, when they replaced the S Series with the piece of crap ION, that also had rear drum brakes. It also had a torsion beam rear suspension instead of the independent setup. Numerous other small features, like a locking fuel filler door, were eliminated to save a buck. Reliability also began to fall. The modified Opel Vectra that became the L Series, built not in Spring Hill but rather Wilmington, DE was a huge disappointment. More recent Saturns have been straight rebadges of Opels, without even having the signature dent resistant plastic body panels. And Saturn never again recaptured the magic of the original Spring Hill built cars, with the division now being eliminated altogether.

[Viber]

. And Saturn never again recaptured the magic of the original Spring Hill built cars, with the division now being eliminated altogether.

 

 

Subaru is treading very close to being in the same situation.

 

Subaru of 2005 was a much more exciting, and innovative company than Subaru of 2010. The Legacy for example was a much more significant car when it dropped in 2005, compared to the current model

 

The present Subaru doesnt even sell a single solitary wagon, which in itself is insane

[MJ in PA]

Subaru is treading very close to being in the same situation.

 

 

I would agree, except that Subaru's cost cutting appears to be paying off. The inferior (imo) new Legacy is outselling the old, to my surprise!

[Syndicate]

...the sleek Euro styling that really made me want one!

 

...you keep repeating this, but I'm just not seeing it. I had a MKIV GLI for about 4-years (my wife, gf at the time had her MKIV Jetta GLS for a few years), totally into the VW/Audi scene while also following the BMW/Mini scene as well. Hitting the shops, shows, and etc...I for the life can't kind anything remotely European about the design of the Bl/BP Legacy. The BL/BP has a nice shape, but it can hardly be described as anything European or oven Euro-inspired...well unless you look at the interior dimensions

[The B4]

Up is down, and down is up for Subaru currently. They turned the Legacy from a Audi, BMW and Infiniti fighter, into a stale Camry alternative while Suzuki of all companies is daring people to compare their Kizashi mid-sizer to a TSX and A4

 

I drove this car today. On the nice side... It had memory seats, Folding mirrors, Push button start with keyless entry, rear air vents, 3 stage heated seats, and a great sound system.

 

The exterior looks like a caricature of a car. Oversized tail pipes, oversized duck tail in the trunk lid, Massive side marker turn signals on the front.

 

On the other hand... it in NO WAY AT ALL compares to an A4, TSX, BL, or BM Legacy. The fact they have the balls to put it out there as such is laughable. After sitting in the car without driving it... it was laughable. While the car has a lot of features... The interior is BEYOND cheap... I don't mean cheaper than the aforementioned cars... I mean hyundai of old cheap. Yes the dash is hard plastic and everything in the car is low rent plastic. Viber if you think the 2010 Legacy is cheap... I challenge you to challenge me on the Kizashi interior being bargain basement cheap.

 

For the drive, there was no special magic in this car. When I owned a 2005 LGT, my mom owned a 2.5i LTD MT5. This car was no where near as sporty as either of those cars nor the 2010 GT or 3.6R (haven't driven the 2010 2.5i). I was left with a big :confused::confused: at the insideline article. The CVT was whiny and there was a lot of road noise. The 4 Cylinder had good pick up and go. Turning radius felt really good. I drove it on the same road I drove the 2010 3.6R and 2.5GT. There was way too much play in the steering wheel. It had less roll than my old LGT but more so than both the 3.6R and 2010 GT. The car felt capable... but not fun. There was a lot more understeer than either Legacy. I was able to take the switchbacks in the Legacy while accelerating in both cars. The Kizashi had be backed down several times as it was getting unsettled and required a lot more steering input.

 

It was quite evident that Kizashi wasn't up to the Legacy in terms of class of car. unfortunately I can't find a build a car for the kizashi with prices. The FWD model I didn't drive was over $27k and the AWD that I did drive was $29k on the sticker.

 

The drive was definitely better than a camry... but it doesn't compare to the old or new Legacy or the old TSX (haven't driven the new one). There are some nice standard features... but it seems like they really jack the price up. Everywhere else the car just falls down.

[MJ in PA]

...you keep repeating this, but I'm just not seeing it. I had a MKIV GLI for about 4-years (my wife, gf at the time had her MKIV Jetta GLS for a few years), totally into the VW/Audi scene while also following the BMW/Mini scene as well. Hitting the shops, shows, and etc...I for the life can't kind anything remotely European about the design of the Bl/BP Legacy. The BL/BP has a nice shape, but it can hardly be described as anything European or oven Euro-inspired...well unless you look at the interior dimensions

 

It has been described by auto publications as Audi A4 inspired, and I tend to agree with that. In any case, whether you think it looks Euro or not, it had a nice, sleek wedge shape, and a sporty, aggressive stance. I love the clean lines of the 4th gen Legacy. The new one looks neither sleek nor sporty to me. And some of the proportions just look awkward and wrong.

[Syndicate]

It has been described by auto publications as Audi A4 inspired, and I tend to agree with that. In any case, whether you think it looks Euro or not, it had a nice, sleek wedge shape, and a sporty, aggressive stance. I love the clean lines of the 4th gen Legacy. The new one looks neither sleek nor sporty to me. And some of the proportions just look awkward and wrong.

 

...Audi inspired? Why b/c it has AWD and a turbo four? It looks nothing like the B5, B6, or B7 A4s...it simply isn't a Euro shape. I'll concede the BL has a nice shape, but outside of the GT and Spec B models I wouldn't use the aggressive to describe the Legacy. I feel the same generally holds true for the BM, save some awkward proportions.

[MJ in PA]

I'll concede the BL has a nice shape, but outside of the GT and Spec B models I wouldn't use the aggressive to describe the Legacy.

 

Really, how does the GT look different aside from the hood scoop? Anyway, I think it's the sleek profile, the nice 5 spoke alloys...the car somehow just has a sportier appearance than most sedans (and even in wagon form). But that's just my opinion - looks are subjective.

 

Also, I hate chrome on cars. I like the black outline of the windows on the 4th gen Legacy, and dislike the chrome outline on the 2010 model. Overall, I just think the 4th gen was classier and more understated, while the new one is a little gaudy and just not well proportioned.

 

I miss the fixed C pillar window that was part of every previous generation Legacy sedan. The new Legacy profile looks like my parents' Honda Accord, except somehow even less sleek (I think it's the tall, bulbous roofline).