Subaru of America Announces Record Breaking Sales Year

[SneakyFast]

Is everyone who works at SOA as big a moron as you?

 

Uh... Those "morons" at SOA just had a record breaking year of sales in one of the worst years for car sales in the history of the automotive industry. Perhaps your unaware that these "morons" are not only in the car business but in the business of making money. Seems there doing a decent job of it. Kind of kills your argument...

 

Subaru made exactly the car you were looking for and would have gladly sold it to you. All you had to do was know how to buy it. The dealer wasn't ecstatic and jizzing all over themselves at the opportunity to make a sale? Who cares? Make them order it anyway...

 

I don't think you have made a single valid point in this thread...

[IwannaSportSedan]

Most of that was Forester. Some of that was the novelty of the new Outback, which has a much higher market awareness than Legacy.

 

What happens when Camry, Accord, Altima, and others occupy the automotive press on the "new for this year" lists, and Subaru Legacy is just another model year...

 

What happens when Subaru cuts back the ad campaign... wait... I haven't seen a Subaru Legacy ad in a few months, advertizing how cool little kids in batman costumes think the hoodscoop is.

 

Are they going to KEEP their gain from 1% marketshare to 1.5%?

 

A record sales year. In context, Toyota still sells more Camrys in the US, than subaru sells cars total, even though toyota lost big numbers, along with the rest.

 

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. And it is always the standby to take growth figures out of the context of real numbers. Percentages are designed to do that. Percentage of what base number, though?

 

Ford gained back marketshare this year numerically higher than Subaru did, simply by not being GM. Subaru numbers look big, because percentages of relatively small numbers look disproportionately big.

 

Growth is growth. That is fine...

 

But 5000 units for Subaru is a MUCH higher percentage, than 5000 units up or down for any mainstream player, and Subaru is no mainstream player.

 

And ONE MORE TIME.... A Legacy that had been an incremental improvement from the BL would be no less saleable to a non-enthusiast as the '10 Legacy is, if it did keep enthusiasts' attention, and pushed the envelope a bit more, and looked better. It might actually sell better to both enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts alike, if it looked better, and had more amenities, both standard and optional.

[The B4]

No waffling. I was ready to deal, after TWO YEARS of preparation. I simply knew what I wanted, and NO ONE HAD IT.

 

They are slower than the hard to find GT, not the 3.6R, and they are more expensive than the 2.5i. You cherry pick your stats.

 

They are slower than the 3.6... look at the times in the rags for those that have tested the 3.6 vs the Accord and Camry V6's they tested. The rags are posting times similar are better than the previous LGT Auto with with 3.6.

 

I would have wanted an orange 350z... i've i'd have waited two years I'd have been SOL on that too.

 

 

There were no incentives. There weren't any in 2007. They were selling around invoice price, with no rebates, if you could find one.

 

Maybe SUBARU should have actually made an effort to sell the car

 

IF YOUR PRODUCT ISN'T SELLING, WHAT NIMROD THINKS IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO MAKE IT LESS APPEALING, AND MORE RESTRICTED????????

 

Is everyone who works at SOA as big a moron as you?

 

2007's were incentivized within 2 months of being released. LGT's weren't selling because they weren't what the market wanted. You could get a Mazdaspeed6 with all the trimmings and whatever you wanted and that car died a very quick death. LGT went through a cutting of the fat. Have you ever looked at buying a Honda product? it comes the way it comes. They are way more restrictive than Subaru is on packaging.

 

 

SAYS YOU. Yet Subaru still sells a 35-40K IMPREZA variant, but not their more premium car variant.

 

If history shows anything... the STI is a very slow seller at $35k-40k... When SOA knocked the price back down to $30k with last year's incentives, they flew out the door. I'm sorry but the LGT with it's current brand cache is not a $40k-$50k car.

 

 

 

It would NOT have cost Subaru that much more to CONTINUE to offer an interior color choice.

 

you don't know that... we don't know that.

 

Or more than one color on the Spec B, and NAV optional, which would have cut 2000$ off that car's price.

 

The spec B did open up the color pallet... and if you aren't aware... OEM Navigation systems are a way to pad profit into cars. I'm sure the goal was to make so many of them as a boost to profit for a carline not brining home the $$$$>

 

I bought a USED car because SUBARU wouldn't SELL ME A NEW ONE.

 

I spent THOUSANDS of dollars traveling to get that car. I would have spent that on a new car, if SUBARU WOULD HAVE SOLD ME ONE, YOU MORON.

 

you sat here for two years griping about this and that. No one thought you were serious. You nitpicked everything. You snooze you lose. Frankly I don't believe all of your story seeing as how you have a flare for the dramatic. If I'd have been treated that badly I wouldn't buy that companies product and atleast would have filed a complaint.

 

Are you a complete tool? Would you take your car back to a dealership that left your car WORSE off than they found it, when they hacked up wiring, and still didn't fix what they were there to fix?

 

ARE YOU INSANE???? Why would I ever take my car back there?

 

How many dealers are in your area?

 

No, but they sure can sell out, now can't they. IF they had even tried to please entusiasts like those of us here on the LEGACY forum, they might please more people than they currently are.

 

enthusiats are one of the toughest crowds to please. We always want more. If it's not paying the bills, it's not paying the bills.

 

 

There is no reason for the '10 Legacy to be less than BETTER in every way than the BL Legacy. It isn't even on PAR in more aspects than not.

 

Opinion.. I dumped my GT because I fell out of love with it. I wouldn't be considering a new one if it would be a similar situation.

 

Going back to it's roots. Subaru has never been a mainstream car company. They may not have been premium, but they weren't Toyota clones, either. Get a clue.

 

Please talk to me about a 2004 Legacy... what was special about it? How was it different from mainstream? you don't get anymore vanilla than that. Subaru has always been behind the gadget curve even though it pioneers other technologies. I had a 1990 Subaru Legacy... That car had so much content is was amazing. Guess what they did in 1991? decontented it. Subaru is still different from everyone else. The new Legacy may be as big as a Camry, but it drives NOTHING like one. Every car Subaru makes still offers a different experience than you'll get in virtually every competing vehicle in the same segement.

 

 

 

 

Going after the masses with a Toyota/Honda/Nissan clone is going after the low hanging fruit, whether you like the analogy or not, whether I like the car or not.

Subaru is still marching to its own drum. Toyota/Honda/Nissan are not low hanging fruit. Subaru tried that in the early 90's and failed. There's something different about this go around... and it's because they are building cars that are right for the segments they compete. That will bring larger appeal.

 

 

Yup. I saw it too. When I watched Subaru cancel the interior color choice for 2006. When they cancelled the wagon and exterior paint colors for 2007. When they refused to paint the Spec B more than gray until 2009.

 

Despite this... Subaru has record sales? lowest incentive spending in the industry? Dealers didn't stock wagons because that sat for forever because no one wanted them. How's the wagon market doing right now? more and more wagons keep going away and the ones that remain are losing more and more options.

 

when they released an UGLY Tribeca at first. When they released an UGLY Impreza in 2008. Do you remember the negative feedback on that. I do.

 

When they refused to continue building coupes, buy not renewing the SVX nor the Impreza coupe body style.

 

That UGLY Impreza hit sales record after sales record. That UGLY Tribeca was ugly but was still copied inside and out by other brands. Seriously on the SVX? It was late the party in a segment of cars that was dying out. Apparently Subaru thinks it's time for a coupe again as it's bringing one back.

When they didn't equip the Baja with Outback's H6, or enough capacity to tow even basic things like a motorcycle or jetskis, or whatever else that wouldn't fit in the tiny bed, and fulfill more of it's potential. Not even class 3. A turbo engine is good in a Legacy or WRX... it is the wrong choice in a vehicle that needs torque right from idle, like, say, an H6, which the OUTBACK had... and the BAJA WAS EVEN BASED O.

 

A $30,000+ Baja on premium fuel? Seriously? The Baja was poorly executed, marketed, and directed from beginning to end. I know some history on that car in how it didn't make production with some of the initial aspirations. The car was a flop before it began. I remember seeing a commercial for it on TV before they were really out and was thinking WTF Subaru.

 

Subaru has a track record of not learning from the marks that they miss, even when they don't usually miss by much. They still QUIT, instead of getting BETTER. THAT is the infuriating bit. So damn close, yet so obliviously far away.

 

They didn't quit on the Legacy, they merely quit on it's potential, over and over again.

 

Today's Subaru is a much different company than I've seen from Subaru before. I would call the company successful inspite of itself until the push for premium branding. That was the wakeup call that set in motion what we see today. A proactive strategy instead of putting cars out and hoping they sell. Even Mori who's been with Subaru probably longer than I am old stated that Subaru built things and threw them out there without paying attention to what the markets wanted. So now they listen but it's not what YOU want. So what. CRY SOME MOAR!

[IwannaSportSedan]

I would have wanted an orange 350z... i've i'd have waited two years I'd have been SOL on that too.

 

I am not talking about one color. I am talking about several, and the entire premise of being able to choose between just two interior color choices.

 

That is pretty basic stuff.

 

And if they offered the CHOICE, they might get more buyers. Restrictions don't sell more cars. Restrictions are what limit sales, and are knee jerk reactions that don't have positive results.

 

2007's were incentivized within 2 months of being released. LGT's weren't selling because they weren't what the market wanted. You could get a Mazdaspeed6 with all the trimmings and whatever you wanted and that car died a very quick death. LGT went through a cutting of the fat. Have you ever looked at buying a Honda product? it comes the way it comes. They are way more restrictive than Subaru is on packaging.

 

Mazda and Honda, Ford, GM bigtime, and a lot of these other companies are missing the point. Just because everyone is making the wrong move, doesn't make it the right move.

 

Might I add, quite some time before the economy fall out in late 2008... Credit was still flowing freely, and interest rates were at the bottom. they were pulling back then. It is even more important to offer value NOW than it was then.

 

And value is not telling people they can't get what they want. Like a Forester XT with a manual gearbox. Or a '10 Legacy GT with an automatic.

 

Telling people "No" doesn't make them want to hand over tens of thousands of dollars. Not even BTO, if dealers would be willing to help people with that.

 

If history shows anything... the STI is a very slow seller at $35k-40k... When SOA knocked the price back down to $30k with last year's incentives, they flew out the door. I'm sorry but the LGT with it's current brand cache is not a $40k-$50k car.

 

Maybe the STI also suffers from the fact that it offers not a lot more equipment than it used to... at a much higher price than it used to.

 

And the premise of an expensive Legacy that you guys decry, and I KEEP SAYING THAT I AM NOT ASKING FOR... keeps growing.

 

A few posts ago, it was high 30s, now you are saying almost $50K... exaggerate much?

 

And BTW... not completely uglifying the body, doesn't add price to the car. And folding signal mirrors, EL Gauges, and a gearbox, interior and exterior color choice don't make a $29K car into a $50K car.

 

Give the talking point a rest.

 

The spec B did open up the color pallet... and if you aren't aware... OEM Navigation systems are a way to pad profit into cars. I'm sure the goal was to make so many of them as a boost to profit for a carline not brining home the $$$$>

 

They did, for the last gasp year! It shouldn't have been limited from the beginning... CERTAINLY not after the 500 2006 numbered cars.

 

The Legacy should have gotten the 3.0R engine choice from day one in 2005MY, as well. "better late than never" is a crappy excuse.

 

And if YOU aren't aware... a lost sale is NO REVENUE, let alone profit. If the NAV system cost pushes people away, toward other cars that are more affordable, Subaru loses the SALE. You were just complaining about the cars not selling enough.

 

I saw a left-over Spec B when I was looking. it was still $33K, with no mark down. The dealer in Omaha that had it treated it as if it were sacrosanct, and to even negotiate on a limited number car was not acceptable.

 

I also heard of a 2007 Spec B in Minnesota, just as they were starting to arrive at dealerships... If it had not had NAV, and had more than just grey paint, and 2000$ cheaper, I would have stretched to afford it. But the GT Limited was more in my prepared budget. Spec B was not.

 

BTW, Ruby Red Pearl isn't quite as nice as Garnet Red pearl was... and they STILL didn't offer Blue for 2009 Spec Bs... it would have been the first blue/black leather USDM Legacy since the 2005 model year... When blue is Subaru's signature color, and WR Blue JDM Legacys look utterly fantastic. Other than Ruby Red, there still was only white, black, and two shades of gray.... 5 choices, only one of which is a color.

 

But it would have been a new car sale for Subaru, that they just couldn't seem to make happen.

 

you sat here for two years griping about this and that. No one thought you were serious. You nitpicked everything. You snooze you lose. Frankly I don't believe all of your story seeing as how you have a flare for the dramatic. If I'd have been treated that badly I wouldn't buy that companies product and atleast would have filed a complaint.

 

If I didn't care about the product I wouldn't be here to nit-pick. IF the car wasn't worth it, I MOST CERTAINLY would not have put up with what I have.

 

I didn't snooze. I put my financial house in order. I have three cars in the driveway, and I haven't made a car payment in years. How's your debt level, after ordering two new subarus? You still paying the payments?

 

I did send letters to SOA, both about the buying experience, AND the warranty service issue. It did nothing. I got a canned response. The damage to my gauges was chalked up to them being aftermarket, and not covered under warranty. I paid the labor bill, instead of causing trouble, and the matter is closed according to them. It was a long time ago now. But I still remember not to go to the dealership for work. I do most of my own work, anyway, as I said.

 

How many dealers are in your area?

 

There is one dealer, about 45 miles away, the one I took the car to. Ramsey in Des Moines.

 

Then the rest of them are beyond 75 miles away. I mentioned them earlier. In cities that I usually have no business in otherwise.

 

enthusiats are one of the toughest crowds to please. We always want more. If it's not paying the bills, it's not paying the bills.

 

AND AGAIN.... I am getting tired of this...

 

A Legacy that had been an incremental improvement from the BL would be no less saleable to a non-enthusiast as the '10 Legacy is, if it did keep enthusiasts' attention, and looked better. It might actually sell better to both enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts alike, if it looked better, and had more amenities, both standard and optional.

 

Opinion.. I dumped my GT because I fell out of love with it. I wouldn't be considering a new one if it would be a similar situation.

 

I am not "out of love" with my Legacy... despite my frustration with the company, and slight finish aspects. I love the car.

 

I WANTED THAT TO CONTINUE WITH ANOTHER GENERATION. That is the damn point.

 

You are making it easier and easier for me to look for an Audi next time, despite me WANTING to stick with Subaru's engineering. Or maybe a really, really used Porsche.

 

Please talk to me about a 2004 Legacy... what was special about it? How was it different from mainstream? you don't get anymore vanilla than that. Subaru has always been behind the gadget curve even though it pioneers other technologies. I had a 1990 Subaru Legacy... That car had so much content is was amazing. Guess what they did in 1991? decontented it. Subaru is still different from everyone else. The new Legacy may be as big as a Camry, but it drives NOTHING like one. Every car Subaru makes still offers a different experience than you'll get in virtually every competing vehicle in the same segment.

 

The 2000-2004 Legacy was a wallflower. But it wasn't a copy of some other company's design. It also wasn't wilfully ugly, even if it was bland. JDM Legacys of that era even looked decently sporty, although not as good as the BL cars.

 

Personally, I consider the 1996-1999 Legacy better than the 2000-2004, even though none of them were turbocharged. 2005-2009 were a shot in the arm, and the best of the nameplate. And again, Subaru has taken a step backwards, just like they did a decade before.

 

Are they trying to repeat history? They could skip the backwards step, and repeat history by releasing a fantastic GT Coupe for the 20th Anniversary of the SVX's release... 2012MY is coming up.

 

SVX, for it's day, has more features and is actually screwed together better than my 2005 Legacy.

 

Subaru is still marching to its own drum. Toyota/Honda/Nissan are not low hanging fruit. Subaru tried that in the early 90's and failed. There's something different about this go around... and it's because they are building cars that are right for the segments they compete. That will bring larger appeal.

 

I didn't say that those brands were, I said the appliance buyers were the low hanging fruit that is easy to pick.

 

Again... We'll see how the appeal holds up when Legacy is not new, but Camry or Accord, or Altima are.

 

Despite this... Subaru has record sales? lowest incentive spending in the industry? Dealers didn't stock wagons because that sat for forever because no one wanted them. How's the wagon market doing right now? more and more wagons keep going away and the ones that remain are losing more and more options.

 

Nobody wanted wagons... YEAH RIGHT. OUTBACK OUTSOLD LEGACY 5 TO ONE!!!!!!! OUTBACKS ARE WAGONS!!!!!!

 

I thought you just said Subaru was incentivizing Legacy... now they are not spending incentive money? which is it...

 

That UGLY Impreza hit sales record after sales record. That UGLY Tribeca was ugly but was still copied inside and out by other brands. Seriously on the SVX? It was late the party in a segment of cars that was dying out. Apparently Subaru thinks it's time for a coupe again as it's bringing one back.

 

Sure. Now BMW has 1 and 3 series. Infiniti has G37, Hyundai has Genesis Coupe, and just today Autoblog mentioned a new Jetta-based VW coupe being alluded to.

 

But is the new Subaru coupe going to be RIGHT (like BL Legacy was), or is it going to be mainstream, and look like a chunky behemoth?

 

Or is it going to look like the blunt-nose, hunch back Impreza that is almost CONSTANTLY panned on it's looks. Even if people still buy it because it is one of two turbo AWD Sport Compact nameplates on the market... it isn't a looker.

 

WHO is copying Tribeca? Subaru isn't. Subaru could have used that LCD 3-dial climate control in their other vehicles... and the smooth design language of the 2008-current Tribeca would look better on the Legacy/Outback than their new chunky bodywork.

 

A $30,000+ Baja on premium fuel? Seriously? The Baja was poorly executed, marketed, and directed from beginning to end. I know some history on that car in how it didn't make production with some of the initial aspirations. The car was a flop before it began. I remember seeing a commercial for it on TV before they were really out and was thinking WTF Subaru.

 

Ummm... turbo bajas use premium fuel... EZ30R is not the only Subaru engine that drinks premium. And the 250hp EZ30R probably pulls better off idle than the older 230hp lower-power turbo engine off boost. Trucks don't really match the usage pattern of a turbo 4 cylinder, unless it might be a diesel. WRX, Legacy GT, yes. Truck for utility use, not so much.

 

The concept was Supercharged, and had some potential.

 

But instead of learning where Baja failed... yet Baja owners LAUGH at offers to buy... good luck finding one used...

 

If they had revised it, improved it... given an engine with torque, a proper towing setup, and a more truck-like front end... like say 2009 Forester... it could have been BETTER the second time. Not everyone wants a full size truck, nor a Jeep Wrangler.

 

I am trying to make the point that good product is DEVELOPED, not just quit when it misses the bullseye on the first shot.

[BigT]

Uh... Those "morons" at SOA just had a record breaking year of sales in one of the worst years for car sales in the history of the automotive industry. Perhaps your unaware that these "morons" are not only in the car business but in the business of making money. Seems there doing a decent job of it. Kind of kills your argument...

 

Subaru made exactly the car you were looking for and would have gladly sold it to you. All you had to do was know how to buy it. The dealer wasn't ecstatic and jizzing all over themselves at the opportunity to make a sale? Who cares? Make them order it anyway...

 

I don't think you have made a single valid point in this thread...

 

+1

 

IWSS - If you are as big a pain in the butt in person as you are on this forum, then it is not suprising that dealerships didn't want to do business with you.

 

You do nothing but complain and point out alleged 'faults' with SOA and the LGT. Even worse, the majority of the things you point out as faults are merely your opinion.

 

Let's check the facts:

1. You bought a used LGT after you trashed it on this forum for years

2. You've never given a dime to SOA and yet you continue to class yourself as a customer

3. You spend the majority of your posts on this site fighting with other members and bashing the car and company the site is dedicated to

 

After a quick review I would draw the conclusion that you are the real 'poser' and that you are not a member of the 'true enthusiast' group you claim to represent.

[The B4]

I am not talking about one color. I am talking about several, and the entire premise of being able to choose between just two interior color choices.

 

That is pretty basic stuff.

 

And if they offered the CHOICE, they might get more buyers. Restrictions don't sell more cars. Restrictions are what limit sales, and are knee jerk reactions that don't have positive results.

 

 

 

Mazda and Honda, Ford, GM bigtime, and a lot of these other companies are missing the point. Just because everyone is making the wrong move, doesn't make it the right move.

 

GM and Ford had the OPPOSITE strategy from the Japanese... and guess what... as part of their restructuring they are pulling back and are locking in options.

 

Might I add, quite some time before the economy fall out in late 2008... Credit was still flowing freely, and interest rates were at the bottom. they were pulling back then. It is even more important to offer value NOW than it was then.

 

And value is not telling people they can't get what they want. Like a Forester XT with a manual gearbox. Or a '10 Legacy GT with an automatic.

Subaru pulled back because they over extended themselves. They were sinking fast while all the other Japanese brands with locked in options were laughing at the domestics.

 

Honestly and truthfully. I think we're lucky Subaru still offers the GT and XT. They are super low volume sellers and no one else even offers similar cars for the $. You have to step up into RDX's or G37's to even begin your search.

 

Maybe the STI also suffers from the fact that it offers not a lot more equipment than it used to... at a much higher price than it used to.

STI starts $1,000 more than 2007 MY and is $2,000 more with BBS wheels with a lot more tech than the previous generation. The market says the STI is a low $30k car and not the high $30k car FHI wanted it to be.

 

A few posts ago, it was high 30s, now you are saying almost $50K... exaggerate much?

encompassing the much haloed STI variant everyone keeps crying for. That car would probably start at $40k and go up. add in all the options and I'm sure it'd $50k

 

And BTW... not completely uglifying the body, doesn't add price to the car. And folding signal mirrors, EL Gauges, and a gearbox, interior and exterior color choice don't make a $29K car into a $50K car.

Folding mirrors are coming back. The gearbox is fine. Get a STS if you don't like the stock throws. It's a 6 speed unlike the previous GT. BTW... all that harping on the soft touch dash in the BL... That dash is not soft to the touch even though it's soft touch plastic. It's hard if you press on it... you have to push a fingernail into it to feel that it's soft. Stupid argument is stupid. The soft touch plastic on the 2010 where it is used is much nicer and softer than what's on the BL. And I am talking about all the stuff available JDM that everyone keeps crying for. If Subaru were priced as close to BMW (or in some cases more because of standard equipment) in the US, there would be another SAAB/Volvo situation except worse.

 

 

The Legacy should have gotten the 3.0R engine choice from day one in 2005MY, as well. "better late than never" is a crappy excuse.

3.0r would have been just as slow selling as when it was introduced. Slower, less HP and torque, Worse power curve, and more lag than the turbo.

 

And if YOU aren't aware... a lost sale is NO REVENUE, let alone profit. If the NAV system cost pushes people away, toward other cars that are more affordable, Subaru loses the SALE. You were just complaining about the cars not selling enough.

You seem to forget that dealers have to pay for cars and pay interest on cars. A car that doesn't sell in a month or two ends losing profit potential. A car that sits for 6 months ends up costing the dealer money. If FHI produces cars that dealers don't want to buy, they lose money in a similar situation. Then SOA has to incentivize the cars... thus losing more money, and the dealers end up taking slim or losing deals after that. So cutting out the slow sellers makes a lot more sense as dealers can stock those cars that they can actually sell and make money on instead of taking up their space with cars that are losing money.

 

I saw a left-over Spec B when I was looking. it was still $33K, with no mark down. The dealer in Omaha that had it treated it as if it were sacrosanct, and to even negotiate on a limited number car was not acceptable.

was this a 2006? do you blame them with it being a limited edition car?

 

I also heard of a 2007 Spec B in Minnesota, just as they were starting to arrive at dealerships... If it had not had NAV, and had more than just grey paint, and 2000$ cheaper, I would have stretched to afford it. But the GT Limited was more in my prepared budget. Spec B was not.

So you really wanted a Legacy GT:confused:

 

BTW, Ruby Red Pearl isn't quite as nice as Garnet Red pearl was... and they STILL didn't offer Blue for 2009 Spec Bs... it would have been the first blue/black leather USDM Legacy since the 2005 model year... When blue is Subaru's signature color, and WR Blue JDM Legacys look utterly fantastic. Other than Ruby Red, there still was only white, black, and two shades of gray.... 5 choices, only one of which is a color.

The people want grays, silvers, black, and whites these days. And red is one of Subaru's slowest selling colors.

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2009/12/20/459399.1-lg.jpg

It would have been... maybe... one day might have owned a blue car.

 

But it would have been a new car sale for Subaru, that they just couldn't seem to make happen.

I'm sure someone else bought what you didn't.

 

If I didn't care about the product I wouldn't be here to nit-pick. IF the car wasn't worth it, I MOST CERTAINLY would not have put up with what I have.

 

I didn't snooze. I put my financial house in order. I have three cars in the driveway, and I haven't made a car payment in years. How's your debt level, after ordering two new subarus? You still paying the payments?

:lol:... 3 new subaru's. Lease, Purchase, Purchase. Over 50% down... I'm comfortable thank you:wub:. I can already sell the STI for more than I owe. and what does my debt level have to do with anything?

 

I did send letters to SOA, both about the buying experience, AND the warranty service issue. It did nothing. I got a canned response. The damage to my gauges was chalked up to them being aftermarket, and not covered under warranty. I paid the labor bill, instead of causing trouble, and the matter is closed according to them. It was a long time ago now. But I still remember not to go to the dealership for work. I do most of my own work, anyway, as I said.

The SOA Customer Service Rep nervously handled the hefty envelope. "6 first class stamps?" It was very thick in the middle. "Was this a mistake? Could it be money? Some old geezer must have sent their payment in cash directly to Subaru. God Bless Dementia!" The Rep looked around to see if anyone was watching. Slowly she began to open the letter. "I can buy a new washing machine!" As she worked the paper from the envelope she realized in disappointment that it was an encyclopedia of drivel spanning 20 pages front and back. The CSR sat back in her chair, exhausted at the thought of reading the wall of text she held in her hand.

 

http://blogpaulaenis.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/fuuuu_by_ku127-png.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Legacy that had been an incremental improvement from the BL would be no less saleable to a non-enthusiast as the '10 Legacy is, if it did keep enthusiasts' attention, and looked better. It might actually sell better to both enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts alike, if it looked better, and had more amenities, both standard and optional.

you don't listen at all. the BL flopped... especially the LGT. The 2010 Legacy outsold the Mazda6 by over 1,000 units last month. That was unheard of in the BL's time. As an enthusiast I'm not as happy with the bigger car, but it's a hell of a lot better dynamically in the driving aspect that makes it more enthusiast oriented where it counts. You toliet CEO way too much. I'm not sure why you're not running a car company with your wealth of knowledge:confused:

 

 

 

You are making it easier and easier for me to look for an Audi next time, despite me WANTING to stick with Subaru's engineering. Or maybe a really, really used Porsche.

Do it! no one is stopping you. Spend two year griping about Audi before you buy a used car and then gripe about what's wrong then. You seem to honestly think that what YOU want is what everyone wants and should be the way things are.

 

 

 

The 2000-2004 Legacy was a wallflower. But it wasn't a copy of some other company's design. It also wasn't wilfully ugly, even if it was bland. JDM Legacys of that era even looked decently sporty, although not as good as the BL cars.

 

Personally, I consider the 1996-1999 Legacy better than the 2000-2004, even though none of them were turbocharged. 2005-2009 were a shot in the arm, and the best of the nameplate. And again, Subaru has taken a step backwards, just like they did a decade before.

opinion again...

 

Are they trying to repeat history? They could skip the backwards step, and repeat history by releasing a fantastic GT Coupe for the 20th Anniversary of the SVX's release... 2012MY is coming up.

 

SVX, for it's day, has more features and is actually screwed together better than my 2005 Legacy.

So sick of hearing about the SVX from you.. Good grief Charlie Brown.

 

 

 

I didn't say that those brands were, I said the appliance buyers were the low hanging fruit that is easy to pick.

 

Again... We'll see how the appeal holds up when Legacy is not new, but Camry or Accord, or Altima are.

Appliance buyers don't buy Subaru. They buy Accords and Camry's because that's what everyone else buys.

 

 

Nobody wanted wagons... YEAH RIGHT. OUTBACK OUTSOLD LEGACY 5 TO ONE!!!!!!! OUTBACKS ARE WAGONS!!!!!!

 

I thought you just said Subaru was incentivizing Legacy... now they are not spending incentive money? which is it...

clarification... TRADITIONAL wagons. Do you pay attention? 2007 legacy = incentivized. 2010 Legacy /= not incentivized.

 

 

Sure. Now BMW has 1 and 3 series. Infiniti has G37, Hyundai has Genesis Coupe, and just today Autoblog mentioned a new Jetta-based VW coupe being alluded to.

I don't see any of those as competitors for this car... maybe the Genesis.

 

 

But is the new Subaru coupe going to be RIGHT (like BL Legacy was), or is it going to be mainstream, and look like a chunky behemoth?

 

Or is it going to look like the blunt-nose, hunch back Impreza that is almost CONSTANTLY panned on it's looks. Even if people still buy it because it is one of two turbo AWD Sport Compact nameplates on the market... it isn't a looker.

More of your toliet seat conjecture and CEO'ing Every Subaru but the BL legacy has been panned on its looks since the beginning of time.

 

 

WHO is copying Tribeca? Subaru isn't. Subaru could have used that LCD 3-dial climate control in their other vehicles... and the smooth design language of the 2008-current Tribeca would look better on the Legacy/Outback than their new chunky bodywork.

 

The interior has been ripped by several companies, including Acura. and the New Murano and EX35 both take styling cues from the Tribeca. The Ex35 is a dead ringer for the original from the rear.

 

 

 

Ummm... turbo bajas use premium fuel... EZ30R is not the only Subaru engine that drinks premium. And the 250hp EZ30R probably pulls better off idle than the older 230hp lower-power turbo engine off boost. Trucks don't really match the usage pattern of a turbo 4 cylinder, unless it might be a diesel. WRX, Legacy GT, yes. Truck for utility use, not so much.

A $30,000+ Baja on premium fuel? Seriously? No market for that sorry.

That small truck market has been dying for some time. Subaru had no business in it in the first place.

 

 

I am trying to make the point that good product is DEVELOPED, not just quit when it misses the bullseye on the first shot.

Looks like the product developed to me:confused:

[IwannaSportSedan]

+1

 

IWSS - If you are as big a pain in the butt in person as you are on this forum, then it is not suprising that dealerships didn't want to do business with you.

 

I simply went to dealerships, looked around, and asked the salesmen that I came across if it was possible to find a red or blue Legacy GT Limited, with manual transmission, and black leather.

 

They either shut down immediately, or did a cursory check, and then said essentially "tough luck chuck."

 

I only get my hackles up around here when all the sudden my credibility is challenged on the basis of whether I bought new or used, when Subaru left me only one option.

 

You do nothing but complain and point out alleged 'faults' with SOA and the LGT. Even worse, the majority of the things you point out as faults are merely your opinion.

 

You need to learn to read. I blast what I think is done wrong, and I say why I think it is wrong.

 

I also defend the Legacy, especially the BL Legacy most of the time. I am having to defend it from SOA sycophant B4 pretty much every time I interact with him.

 

To listen to him, you would think that the 2005-2009 Legacy was the worst car Subaru ever built, which is FAR from the case.

 

You people don't have to agree with me. I am not making you.

 

B4 keeps harping about opinions. So freakin' what... why is this forum here, other than for people to talk and offer opinion.

 

If you want a lack of opinion, and just the SOA party line... then just read Subaru's US Press Releases, and be done with it. No pesky commentary there...

 

Let's check the facts:

1. You bought a used LGT after you trashed it on this forum for years

 

I did NOT trash that car for years. I have defended that car for years. I have probably told dozens of people about my car who wouldn't recognize it from a gremlin if left to Subaru's ad campaigns.

 

But I don't abide poor decision making... and I don't just automatically defer to the higher power of SOA's decision makers. They are fallable people, just like anyone else. They don't have special decision powers.

 

2. You've never given a dime to SOA and yet you continue to class yourself as a customer

 

I own, maintain and drive TWO subaru vehicles. I don't post here while I own a garage full of Chevys. I own SUBARUS. I bought SUBARU products. Second hand is pretty much irrelevant, other than YOU and B4 making a false issue of it to try to disparage my opinions somehow.

 

SOA lost my money. I tried to give them money for three months. They wouldn't/couldn't put a car in my driveway. They had their chance.

 

Did every last member here have to buy a NEW subaru in order to join the forum? Is there a security code for only people who buy cars new?

 

3. You spend the majority of your posts on this site fighting with other members and bashing the car and company the site is dedicated to

 

After a quick review I would draw the conclusion that you are the real 'poser' and that you are not a member of the 'true enthusiast' group you claim to represent.

 

I do not spend the majority of my posts fighting. Most of my 5000+ post count is not negative. I do clash with B4's corporate sycophant mentality, because I don't agree, and I don't abide his mis-characterizations of me or my opinions, and I don't tolerate him or you discounting me because I bought USED instead of NEW.

 

I bought my cars becuase of the specifications and capabilities of the car.

 

if you LOOK at my posts.. you will see that I don't usually complain about that. What I do challenge is the decisions to limit that product's potential.

 

A poseur would be someone who tows the corporate line, and buys a badge because of the badge, not because of what is underneath.

 

I bought what was underneath, regardless of the difficulty to get it. and I USE the hardware as it was intended.

 

And one last thing that I don't do... is call people like you out and make character generalizations.

 

I challenge opinions, and I have an unfortunate habit of letting the word "moron" slip out perhaps a bit too often when I think an opinion is under-developed.

 

But I don't call you a poser. I don't make any value judgements about *who you are* whatsoever, even if I challenge your opinions on their points.

 

So maybe you can keep your value judgements to yourself, and remember... YOU DON'T KNOW ME.

[The B4]

LOL @ IWSS

 

http://www.neogaf.com/~kurai/umad.jpg

 

It's painful enough listening to your misguided drivel. It's funny to watch SOA and FHI do what they have planned and hit records and make $$$$ as you speak to the contrary all the while. No company is perfect. Being in the process of car shopping I have to say that Subaru still makes a very compelling argument against it's competition. we've looked upmarket from Subaru and downmarket. She has never had a Subaru and will becoming from an actual premium brand. Guess what... her favorite car so far has been a Subaru.

[IwannaSportSedan]

Good for Subaru to make money. That isn't my problem.

 

The fact that they are leaving enthusiasts with barely an option is what I don't like.

 

Selling doesn't require selling out. Making money should be even more reason for subaru to be diversifying their product line, at least making the nameplates they have more configurable, and hopefully less ugly.

 

I am not mad... I'm tired of this.

 

I've made my points, over and over again, to anyone who cares to read and think about it, and nothing has been rebutted enough to convince me that fewer options, less product diversity, and worse aesthetics are a good business plan in the long run, regardless of current stats.

 

We'll see how this trend holds up when Subaru, and Legacy/Outback particularly, are not on the new cars list, when their competitors are.

 

IF the products are as strong as you say... they'll continue to be. I hope Subaru does continue to succeed... and with that success, offer what people like me want also, instead of just offering only what you want.

 

I have never called for Subaru to exclude a segment of their existing customer base. I have long said that people who are less particular about their cars will still buy cars that appeal to people who ARE particular about their cars.

 

Most of my suggestions on product planning for subaru have been much more encompassing than Subaru's current lineup, without loading up on features that they don't already offer in some other combination, or have offered in recent years.

 

All I am doing is suggesting that Subaru give more people the option to get what they want. 30 THOUSAND dollars is a lot of money not to get what you want, but rather take what is half-heartedly given.

 

Color choices, engine and gearbox choices, and a few little niceties that are not uncommon in the market segment, is not too much to ask. Nor is an aesthetically pleasing design.

[Guest]

BR/BM is ugly, period. Ugly apparently sells, but I'd venture to say good looking would sell better. And it is not any more expensive to design or make.

 

Bottom line is if they made the car look good, and even kept the size the same, and did not do few boneheaded decisions like: fixed mirrors, cable shifter, electronic brake, deletion of electroluminescent gauges, deletion of coolant temp gauge, lazyboy chair looking seats - I think mainstream sales would be just as good if not better, and the enthusiasts would not be alienated. That would be a smart product design, with no to negligible increase in cost.

 

B4 - you make some valid points as far as Subaru's business case. IWSS is clamoring for more enthusiast friendly package. Why these need to be contradictory?

[The B4]

Good for Subaru to make money. That isn't my problem.

 

The fact that they are leaving enthusiasts with barely an option is what I don't like.

 

Selling doesn't require selling out. Making money should be even more reason for subaru to be diversifying their product line, at least making the nameplates they have more configurable, and hopefully less ugly.

 

I am not mad... I'm tired of this.

 

I've made my points, over and over again, to anyone who cares to read and think about it, and nothing has been rebutted enough to convince me that fewer options, less product diversity, and worse aesthetics are a good business plan in the long run, regardless of current stats.

 

We'll see how this trend holds up when Subaru, and Legacy/Outback particularly, are not on the new cars list, when their competitors are.

 

IF the products are as strong as you say... they'll continue to be. I hope Subaru does continue to succeed... and with that success, offer what people like me want also, instead of just offering only what you want.

 

I have never called for Subaru to exclude a segment of their existing customer base. I have long said that people who are less particular about their cars will still buy cars that appeal to people who ARE particular about their cars.

 

Most of my suggestions on product planning for subaru have been much more encompassing than Subaru's current lineup, without loading up on features that they don't already offer in some other combination, or have offered in recent years.

 

All I am doing is suggesting that Subaru give more people the option to get what they want. 30 THOUSAND dollars is a lot of money not to get what you want, but rather take what is half-heartedly given.

 

Color choices, engine and gearbox choices, and a few little niceties that are not uncommon in the market segment, is not too much to ask. Nor is an aesthetically pleasing design.

 

It's obvious you don't understand. If anything the direction Subaru went in 2005 excluded its existing customer base.

 

You say fewer options, but the car lost and gained, a lot like other cars out there. You don't think it's aesthetically pleasing... I do. That SVX you love is loathed by many in the design department. And Subaru has always been swing and a miss on styling.

 

People want value, safety, reliability, etc. I've seen many people across all brands buy cars that weren't exactly the color/feature combination they wanted. Hell I have a friend that just bought a GT Mustang in a color he didn't want and is completely happy with his car. You are not the automotive industry. You do not have your finger on the pulse or on the red button. What you want is irrelevant. What the industry wants as a collective dictates direction.

 

What you ask for is being provided by brands that are going the way of the dodo. I'm sure you can snap up a leftover SAAB somewhere or possibly snag a pre chinese Volvo.

[The B4]

BR/BM is ugly, period. Ugly apparently sells, but I'd venture to say good looking would sell better. And it is not any more expensive to design or make.

 

Bottom line is if they made the car look good, and even kept the size the same, and did not do few boneheaded decisions like: fixed mirrors, cable shifter, electronic brake, deletion of electroluminescent gauges, deletion of coolant temp gauge, lazyboy chair looking seats - I think mainstream sales would be just as good if not better, and the enthusiasts would not be alienated. That would be a smart product design, with no to negligible increase in cost.

 

B4 - you make some valid points as far as Subaru's business case. IWSS is clamoring for more enthusiast friendly package. Why these need to be contradictory?

 

 

Your opinion. I had so many people comment on the 3.6R in my garage it wasn't funny. There was no keeping the size the same. It was the smallest car in the segment. If the BL hadn't flopped there would have been a larger sedan in Subaru's lineup. Everything of the Legacy's size has grown or will grow. Fixed mirrors will be fixed... they are FHI's screw up and not SOA's, Cable shifter isn't the end of the world and it's six speed finally, electronic parking brake is a tired argument that is dumb, the electroluminescent guages were nice but the new guages are handsome when lit at night, coolant temp gauge is a lie that does the same exact thing as the light does, those lazy boy chair seats are the most comfortable seats Subaru has ever made. Yes they can use a lot more bolstering but so can every other seat Subaru has ever made. I have to brace myself in my STI which is the most bolstered design Subaru has.

 

My biggest problem with the electronic brake will be going for the pull handle that's not there.

 

I see your gripes Unclemat, but I disagree wholeheartedly that the 2010 as a package is worse than the previous generation. If the things you value make it so to you, that's your gig. Subaru has made a lot of product missteps in the past. The 2010 Legacy is not one of them.

[Guest]

You misunderstood, I meant BR/BM could be as big as it is, just could look good. The size is not #1 complaint. The looks is.

 

There were only two missteps of BL/BP in the U.S. market: size and lack of (good) marketing. The BL/BP's size was fine for me, but I guess mainstream wants bigger (frankly BL is bit small, the wagon compensates with the extra rear head room and cargo space, but then sedans... LOL).

 

The car is ugly, I am not alone who thinks that. Also I am not alone in thinking that from the enthusiast point of view the package is worse.

[IwannaSportSedan]

Good luck, Unclemat...

 

He thinks that opinions don't count, so he'll never change his own.

 

You, me, and others continue to make the same points over and over, without real refutability, and it doesn't matter.

 

B4 doesn't say "I like the '10 Legacy." He says "the 10 Legacy is better, and the BL series wasn't as good."

 

Those are his opinions that he tires to state as facts, when they are just as subjective.

 

As many of us have said... a bit more room here or there did not require the car to look like a hulking, chunky behemoth. Other designs prove it... most notably, the Audi A4, which doesn't *look* nearly as huge, even though the dimensions show it to be pretty close.

 

But instead, the Legacy chooses to ape the styling of Camry and Accord, which sell to people who always buy camrys and accords, and don't really win any beauty contests, themselves. Subaru could have REALLY had a marketing edge over them if the Legacy LOOKED better than other mainstream sedans, as well as having the good Subaru drivetrain underneath.

 

And the cable 6-speed based on the old 4/5 speed... was a cop out. There is no reason for that. If they were going to do that, they should have just left the 5-speed in there, with properly spaced gearing, and the linkage shifter.

 

"It's a six speed!" is not enough of a justification. The point is the quality of the gearbox, not the quantity of forward ratios.

[Guest]

Current Accord looks way better than the BM Legacy to me. Big, but clean lines and decently proportioned.

 

STI based 6MT would better, but it's very expensive, so I am not surprised they did not put it there. Plus it's overkill at the stock power level. Like the old 5MT, the new 6MT is probably ok at stock power levels, the cable shifter is what kills it.

[The B4]

And the cable 6-speed based on the old 4/5 speed... was a cop out. There is no reason for that. If they were going to do that, they should have just left the 5-speed in there, with properly spaced gearing, and the linkage shifter.

 

"It's a six speed!" is not enough of a justification. The point is the quality of the gearbox, not the quantity of forward ratios.

 

wat? how many people are blowing up their current 5MT's post 02-03 Impreza? the STI's 6 speed is overkill. Cable operated isn't the end of the world. all the beautiful shifting honda's and acuras over the years have been cable operated. the Subaru's 5 speed has been updated many many times over the years. Adding an extra gear on it for better cruising and economy is a travesty how? the real world mpg reports are showing that it was well worth adding the extra gear...

[The B4]

 

The car is ugly, I am not alone who thinks that. Also I am not alone in thinking that from the enthusiast point of view the package is worse.

 

Similar results were shown on the BMW forums after the E90 debuted. real world experience with the car tells me otherwise. I'd like to here what Verwildered has heard regarding the looks of the 2010.

[katalyst]

this thread probably has one of the most interesting back and forth discussions i've ever read on this site.

 

i'd have to agree with unclemat on the looks department for the 2010 legacy and IWSS on his opinion about a more enthusiast oriented package though. but at the same time, who knows, maybe subaru will sell a few cars in this period and then reward us later down the line?? (i'm being hopeful)

[IwannaSportSedan]

Current Accord looks way better than the BM Legacy to me. Big, but clean lines and decently proportioned.

 

STI based 6MT would better, but it's very expensive, so I am not surprised they did not put it there. Plus it's overkill at the stock power level. Like the old 5MT, the new 6MT is probably ok at stock power levels, the cable shifter is what kills it.

 

 

I can understand the cost thing... but then why mess with the 5MT. The GT is a rarer fraction of the legacy pie... it isn't as if they would have to put the better 6MT in every car. Plus, removing the front limited slip... It was obviously affordable enough for three model years of Spec B production... along with all of the other details that the Spec B had that '10 no longer does...

 

But anyway... sticking with the less expensive gearbox, why did they add a gear? A bit better gear ratio spacing of 5 ratios, mostly a 1:1 4th, and a slightly taller 5th, and maybe a 3.90:1 final drive, and a better stock clutch, and it would have been fine keeping 5 ratios.

 

People may not have been breaking late-model 5MTs... but any clamoring for the 6MT was because the 6MT unit is more robust, not just another lever pull. The 6MT was BETTER, not just more. Better stock clutch grip and feel, better AWD system with VTD... even a rear-standard bias. The extra ratio is not the only reason that the WRX STI/Spec B gearbox is better than the WRX/LGT 5MT. Heavy and more cost can be acceptable for better quality all around. That is about the only reason for heavier and more expensive to be acceptable.

 

Adding a gear for marketing sake is kinda pointless on the dark corner of the Legacy line... when Subaru is pushing 2.5i and 3.6R, and even more when they are cutting costs so much... why bother adding the 6th ratio to an older mechanism.

 

Tweaked ratios, and a better clutch is all the 5MT really needed. It certainly didn't need a cable shifter to numb the shifter.

[SoldonSubie]

I can understand the cost thing... but then why mess with the 5MT?

 

A bit better gear ratio spacing, and a better stock clutch, and it would have been fine keeping 5 ratios.

 

Adding a gear for marketing sake is kinda pointless on the dark corner of the Legacy line... when Subaru is pushing 2.5i and 3.6R, and even more when they are cutting costs so much... why bother adding the 6th ratio to an older mechanism.

 

Tweaked ratios, and a better clutch is all the 5MT really needed. It certainly didn't need a cable shifter to numb the shifter.

 

I have to disagree with you there. I came from an 05 OBXT/5MT. 1 thru 5 the 10 LGT has identical ratios as that unit. I gained an extra overdrive gear which drops rpms about 400 at cruising speed which has translated, for me, into 3 MPG gains across the board. Some tanks are 2, some are 4 but 3 is pretty much average. I rent A LOT of cars (about 60 a year) and I get many 2.5i Subaru (Forester, Legacy and Outback) and I am at a point where with my driving habits I get better MPG out of the 10 LGT than I do out of any of the 4eat 2.5i’s. That shouldn’t surprise anyone here.

 

As far as the cable shifter? At first it felt dead compared to the 05 OBXT but then again so did the 328xi, 335xi and the a4. The 05 was just a beast. The 10 is just so much easier to drive. After about 1,000 miles with the 10 I started liking it so much I now cringe whenever I see the 05-09 models. YMMV.

[Guest]

I think 6 gears are good too have. I like my STI 6MT (with SpecB like ratios) not only for its stretgh and precision of shifting, but also because of ratios. Hard to fault Subaru for adding the extra gear - as long as the stretch of the box has not been compromised (which we don't have data about). The cable shifter indeed is sheer frigging idiocy (an unnecessary expense). The direct linkage with stock rubbery bushings wasnt transmitting any appreciable amount of noise, but at least offered decent feedback that could have been vastly improved with short shifter and/or upgraded bushings.

[BigT]

+1

3. You spend the majority of your posts on this site fighting with other members and bashing the car and company the site is dedicated to

 

Good job proving me wrong on this thread :lol:

 

YOU DON'T KNOW ME.

 

http://10.media.tumblr.com/zWT8EGZhvoi7wn04iaYhIPZYo1_400.jpg

[GEE-OTTO]

Awesome! Looks like the new '10 Legacy/OB and killing the leggy wagon has really paid off!

 

Dont forget the Legacy they killed that too And oddly the Imprezas dropped off hmmmm Ill chalk that up to the new design as well it just doest do it for me

[The B4]

Dont forget the Legacy they killed that too And oddly the Imprezas dropped off hmmmm Ill chalk that up to the new design as well it just doest do it for me

 

 

Impreza was down from 2 consecutive sales records with the new design. Someone posted on NASIOC that the Impreza was down the 2nd least (with everyone following down in the double digits) in a segment down 20%

 

 

*edit... found it posts 47 and on.

[wpgspecb]

I wanted to buy a new Subaru.

 

SUBARU WOULDN'T SELL ME ONE. So I had to buy used. THEY lost the sale. I spent months looking for a manual gearbox Limited Legacy GT with black leather interior, instead of tan. There were only 4 cars that I came across, and all were either tan leather, or automatic, or both. None of the dealers were interested in ordering me anything, and several were downright rude.

 

They didn't have any in the upper midwest. The SNOW BELT. Good geography for Subaru sales. I went to VERMONT to get a *used* one from a now-former-member here on this forum. I would have gone to Minneapolis, Kansas City, Chicago... any number of cities to get a new one, if they HAD ANY.

 

 

I special ordered my 2008 Spec b, no questions asked.

 

The BL Legacy and it's Outback cousin were Subaru's biggest failures to date. They were a departure from Subaru's formula that made them cash rich through the late 90's early 2000's. Based on sales goals, they are a bigger flop than the SVX, Tribeca, or the Baja.

 

I'm not saying the previous generation Legacy and Outback were bad cars by any means... but they were not what enough car buyers wanted to pay Subaru's bills. Subaru was struggling with these cars at a time when all of the Japanese auto makers were growing by leaps and bounds and were untouchable.

 

 

The SVX, Tribeca and Baja are 3 of my more favorite Subarus (before I even was interested in cars)