Legacy vs. Mediocrity

[rhythmdevils]

I thought I'd had a few thoughts. I don't think people hate the 2010 model because it is a crappy car in and of itself. It seems like a great option for people who want a small SUV or a big sedan. But the fact is that it goes against everything that made Subaru what it was. The whole point of Subaru was practicality- to get all the benefits of an SUV without most of the usless negatives- in the wagon, you got great clearance equal or better than most/all SUV's, great traction equal or better than other SUV's, lots of space inside for hauling stuff and kids, and at the same time it is still a fairly small car so it got better fuel economy, and more importantly, it handled and drove like a car, not a truck or minivan.

 

So in this new model, it's bigger for no reason. It's just bigger like all other SUV's are just big for no apparent reason. Subaru now has 3 SUV's and a compact car, and not a single car that strikes the middle ground that all their cars used to, and which made them so popular. If I wanted a bigger legacy, then I would buy the Tribeca, or I probably wouldn't even want a Subaru to begin with. I don't understand why they think it's a good idea for all their cars to compete in the same market that their Tribeca failed in, probably the most crowded market in the auto industry, and leave not a single car in the market that made them successful- a market that they had almost complete dominance in- for those who want a small, practical all terrain wagon like the previous legacys.

 

It's great if they wanted to make some SUV's, I'm sure they will reach new customers now, but they should have introduced new models, and kept the Legacy a small, agile wagon so they don't loose old customers.

 

Subaru was the only car company to grow in market share in 2008/2009, I am really baffled as to why they decided it was a good idea to try to switch all of their cars to a new market and leave the old market that was working great for them behind. Ie the Impreza is going to be too small for a lot of fans of the old Impreza, and the Legacy/Outback and Tribeca too big for people who liked the older Legacys.

 

I personally would like to see them introduce a new model that brings back their old practicality and utilitarian strongholds. A wagon the size of the 95-99 models- big enough to sleep in, but still a small car. That would be the only car of it's kind, and Subaru would once again be the only option for a whole lot of customers, instead of competing in a very very crowded market.

[Penguin]

Ironic that a thread is posted about other sedans being mediocre, when the current Legacy is also pretty mediocre. Less power than a Honda Accord, worse fuel economy, not much better handling either.

 

Now out gunned even by a Hyundai Sonata for less money.

[Sydtron]

the money used for buying new Legacys is large and ugly too

[The B4]

Ironic that a thread is posted about other sedans being mediocre, when the current Legacy is also pretty mediocre. Less power than a Honda Accord, worse fuel economy, not much better handling either.

 

Now out gunned even by a Hyundai Sonata for less money.

 

Have you driven a Honda Accord? There is NO comparison to the Legacy GT in handling. Anything curvy and the Accord is completely out of its element.

[TheOneDoubleN]

Have you driven a Honda Accord? There is NO comparison to the Legacy GT in handling. Anything curvy and the Accord is completely out of its element.

 

Why do people keep comparing the honda accord to the LGT???? And to say the Accord has "more power" is really quite misleading. Does it have more peak hp? Yeah, all 6 of them (271 vs 265). And all the power (like most N/A V6's) is in the top end of the motor (254ft-lbs @ 5000RPM!). The LGT motor is definitely more "Powerful" than the accord, and it sure is faster in any test....

[TheOneDoubleN]

Almost forgot...258ft-lbs @ 2000rpm for the LGT. Yeah, I'd rather have that.

[Penguin]

Have you driven a Honda Accord? There is NO comparison to the Legacy GT in handling. Anything curvy and the Accord is completely out of its element.

 

Yes I have, and I've driven and used to own a Legacy GT you know the generation before Subaru turned it into a bloated overly soft Camry. Even then it wasn't all that special in the handling department even compared to an Accord. Stop kidding yourself about it being some great sport sedan.

[Penguin]

Why do people keep comparing the honda accord to the LGT???? And to say the Accord has "more power" is really quite misleading. Does it have more peak hp? Yeah, all 6 of them (271 vs 265). And all the power (like most N/A V6's) is in the top end of the motor (254ft-lbs @ 5000RPM!). The LGT motor is definitely more "Powerful" than the accord, and it sure is faster in any test....

 

Blah blah blah blah. An Accord V6 is more powerful since it is capable of doing more work in a given amount of time at peak power than the under developed H4 in the Subaru Camry. I don't make the rules for measuring power output, just quote the results to piss on your parade!

 

Oh by the way the Accord V6 makes more horsepower, and gets better fuel economy.

 

Or we could compare the craptastic Subaru H4 to the twin-turbo direct injected V6 in the Ford Taurus SHO which makes way more horsepower, has an even lower RPM delivery of way more torque, propels a much heavier vehicle (faster), and gets....... pretty much the same fuel economy.

 

Getting lousy fuel economy while making average power..... it's what makes a Subaru a Subaru! :lol:

[Sydtron]

If you're getting into a pissing match over family sedans, just remember the old TSX would, and has, run circles around the 4th gen Legacy GT. That and the 4th/5th are largely identical in terms of stock handling but with the added upside of the 5th gen having a rear suspension more appropriate to handling than the 4th gen's multilink which is a bit more at home on offroaders.

 

Also, you're not comparing apples to apples. Drivetrains matter when so much of the power is being pissed away to friction from sending the power to all corners all the time.

[fishbone]

way the Accord V6 makes more horsepower, and gets better fuel economy.

If we're comparing mechanics, then we need to keep in mind we are also comparing awd with fwd. FWD has the least amount of drivetrain loss which means the most possible power to the ground, while awd is at the opposite spectrum. The same goes for fuel economy. Given how close they are in this regard, I'd say Subaru gets pretty dang good mpg.

[Penguin]

Pretty good? No it doesn't get good fuel economy for what it makes power wise, AWD or not.

 

Consider the heavier, faster and more powerful Taurus SHO gets the same highway fuel economy.

 

The LGT is embarrassed by other AWD offerings like the Audi A4 (makes a bit less power but manages similar stock performance) which gets over 30 MPG highway.

 

Hell even the supercharged S4 beats the LGT at either 28 (dual clutch) or 27 MPG, is considerably faster, and is also notably underrated by Audi on its claimed output.

 

The BMW 335xi, also achieves better fuel economy numbers and is faster and more powerful.

 

In most cases AWD should only sap about 2-3MPG from a vehicle's efficiency, so even if we added that back to the LGT it would still be sub-par for its output.

 

That Honda V6 still manages 27 MPG or so in the AWD Crosstour, and 30 MPG in the Accord.

[Sydtron]

Consider the heavier, faster and more powerful Taurus SHO gets the same highway fuel economy.

 

Weight and power output have extremely little to do with fuel economy. Aerodynamics and engine efficiency matter far, far, far, far, far more.

 

The LGT is embarrassed by other AWD offerings like the Audi A4 (makes a bit less power but manages similar stock performance) which gets over 30 MPG highway.

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why.

 

Hell even the supercharged S4 beats the LGT at either 28 (dual clutch) or 27 MPG, is considerably faster, and is also notably underrated by Audi on its claimed output.

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why.

 

The BMW 335xi, also achieves better fuel economy numbers and is faster and more powerful.

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why.

 

In most cases AWD should only sap about 2-3MPG from a vehicle's efficiency, so even if we added that back to the LGT it would still be sub-par for its output.

Check the compression ratios of engine and you have your answer why.

 

That Honda V6 still manages 27 MPG or so in the AWD Crosstour, and 30 MPG in the Accord.

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why. Also, the AWD systems of the two cars aren't comparable.

[fishbone]

I'll start off by saying I do not think Subaru is perfect and yes, there is definitely room for improvement. In it's category, the Forester got best observed MPG in a Motor Trend test, which exceeded what SOA quotes. Maybe this classifies with other vehicles?

IIRC, SHO is not full-time AWD. I momentarily do not have time to check, but I did not thing the quattro A4 gets better mpg? It may play with the fact that it has a smaller engine. Is the Crosstour full-time awd?

I'll do some investigation and get back with a better response

[dr_sharp]

Weight and power output have extremely little to do with fuel economy. Aerodynamics and engine efficiency matter far, far, far, far, far more.

 

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why.

 

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why.

 

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why.

 

Check the compression ratios of engine and you have your answer why.

 

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why. Also, the AWD systems of the two cars aren't comparable.

If the answers to all of these complaints can be answered by simple one line responses, why didn't Subaru change things as you've described? That's the point of the complaints.

[Penguin]

Weight and power output have extremely little to do with fuel economy. Aerodynamics and engine efficiency matter far, far, far, far, far more.

 

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why.

 

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why.

 

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why.

 

Check the compression ratios of engine and you have your answer why.

 

Check the compression ratios of the two engines and you have your answer why. Also, the AWD systems of the two cars aren't comparable.

 

Why are you making excuses? I am well aware of all the factors you just listed. Maybe you are illiterate beats me, perhaps your reading comprehension skills are lacking (OK obviously lacking).

 

My post was pointing out the relative inefficiency of the Subaru turbocharged H4 compared to other powertrains of similar or greater power output in all wheel drive applications.

[Sydtron]

If the answers to all of these complaints can be answered by simple one line responses, why didn't Subaru change things as you've described? That's the point of the complaints.

 

It's not just something you can snap your fingers and be done with. Direct injection isn't easy and other than that, there's no real way to reliably up the compression on a road-going turbocharged car.

[Sydtron]

Why are you making excuses? I am well aware of all the factors you just listed. Maybe you are illiterate beats me, perhaps your reading comprehension skills are lacking (OK obviously lacking).

 

My post was pointing out the relative inefficiency of the Subaru turbocharged H4 compared to other powertrains of similar or greater power output in all wheel drive applications.

 

It's not an excuse, it's the reason. You didn't seem aware of it since you thought weight or power output were major factors in highway fuel mileage.

[bosco]

My Hyundai Sonata 2.0T makes more power with a smaller engine, runs on regular gas and gets much better mileage than the competition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Penguin]

Weight is a factor in fuel economy, don't believe me throw about 600lbs of rock salt in your car and drive 100 miles, then repeat the same trip without. I promise you will burn more fuel loaded down than you do empty at least if you drive the same speed. Is weight the only factor? Of course not, air resistance, road surface, and a host of other factors also have an affect. A rule of thumb is that any speeds over 55-60MPH air resistance is the largest consumer of energy (fuel) by proportion. Below that speed vehicle weight is the largest single factor in fuel economy.

 

What I was pointing out (that you apparently still can't understand) were some examples of other vehicles and their relative performance and fuel economy. Usually you would associate a higher output engine with burning more fuel, at least if thermal efficiencies were equal. What I was pointing out was the fact that the Subaru H4 is not as good at converting gasoline into usable power (as measured at a crankshaft or the wheels) as other competing designs that manage to churn out more power yet use less fuel to achieve it. Direct injection is part of it sure, as far as not being easy or cheap well both Ford and Hyundai have managed to bring it to consumers at a pretty reasonable price, so has VW.

 

Subaru just doesn't seem to have the money, desire, or ability to keep up.

[Sydtron]

They don't have the money -- Toyota sells more Corollas than Subaru's entire line up.

 

It's either move to direct injection, spend the money on R&D and then eat the warranty issues/consumer grief from dirty injectors or just squeeze blood from a rock and try to do it as cheap as possible.

[Penguin]

^ Which is why I won't be buying a Subaru any time soon.

[fishbone]

Great! You've made a decision that makes sense for you, while in the meantime other people make the decision that makes sense for them. Subaru is doing terrible these days in terms of sales, right?

Audi, BMW, Lexus, Acura, what other car was mentioned in this thread? You pay for that technology, do you not? You pay for direct injection, do you not? Yes, you do. To think Subaru doesn't have that kind of technology is silly at best. Do you really think the Forester comes with a 4-speed automatic because Subaru has nothing better to offer? They, in fact, do. What flies right out the window in the comparison with lux brands is the most important and the single deciding factor: price. If I offered you a Subaru at the price point of BMW with similar performance, don't lie that you would not balk at it. You want HOW much for a Subaru? Arguments comparing it to Ford etc are not apples to apples either because, as it has already mentioned, Subaru is extremely niche and their volume of sales is low. It's all about economics and has nothing to do about lack of will. Do you really envision project managers sitting in a room, having an engineer present an idea that makes sense and them lazily scratching their balls in their comfy big chairs and telling that guy "I don't feel like it. Your idea is too complicated. Get out"

With the exception of the Tribeca, they must be doing something right, it's that or people have gotten dumber overnight. The company has been under their nose all this time and they are now just starting to realize it. Pardon, they just now got dumb enough to drink the kool-aid.

The only two cars presently in their line-up that have any appeal to me are the STi hatch and the N/A Forester. And even as far as the Forester is concerned, I absolutely hate their decision to stick with a 4EAT. The STi I would buy tomorrow if it came with a good performing automatic.

[Penguin]

Audi, BMW, Lexus, Acura, what other car was mentioned in this thread? You pay for that technology, do you not?

 

Ford, VW, and Hyundai too.

 

You can try to cast the direct injection forced induction engines as "high priced" or luxury brand only and 3 years ago you would have been correct. Today they are mainstream equipment. Subaru used to have an innovative and unique powertrain option, now the competition has caught up and is leaving Subaru in the dust.

[fishbone]

I've already mentioned why it's not quite a good comparison with those brands. I don't think di is fancy, but it is an additional cost, especially upon initial implementation. And the powertrain is not even close to being matched, unless of course symmetrical awd etc etc don't mean anything to you.

[bosco]

Oh and did i mention DI, twin scroll inter-cooled turbo, 6 speed auto with paddle shifter, Moon roof, 18" wheels/tires, Bluetooth/Homelink/Nav, Infinity 480 watt sound system, iPod/USB hook-up, heated front and rear seats, 5/100k warranty, excellent fit/finish and $3000 less expensive than the competition?

 

Subaru really needs to get with the program.