The OFFICIAL 2012 Legacy Info Thread

[MikeNH]

I love that 4 stage seat heaters keeps being mentioned. Really? Do you guys have an ass that is that sensitive? I think I've used mine on low maybe twice, both times after several hours of being out in the cold. High will turn the rivets on your jeans into branding irons.

[moncur_6]

My only complaint about the 2010 is the headlights, really. I could make the rest look good with a little cash...the ’08 got a little facelift with a slightly different front and rear end so maybe they will make the long headlights look good for ‘12?

[ssbtech]

I love that 4 stage seat heaters keeps being mentioned. Really? Do you guys have an ass that is that sensitive? I think I've used mine on low maybe twice, both times after several hours of being out in the cold. High will turn the rivets on your jeans into branding irons.

 

I usually set mine to sear then I gradually turn it down to simmer as I warm up.

[Ozzy]

I've got an 06 but I'd much rather take the new one. I'm 5'11 and I think the car is a little too small as far as width goes and rear leg room. While I do like the way mine looks, I think the new one is an upgrade in pretty much every way possible. I don't understand people being weirded out and hating a push parking brake. It's there to be used when you park, that's it.

[98LGTLover]

I'd like to see all the CVT's replaced with a 6 speed dual clutch automatic and keep the 6 speed manual they are coming with right now.

[GEE-OTTO]

I think the new gen Legacy isn't terrible or slightly terrible. A more robust power-band and roomy interior. But I love my BL and I don't think ill buy a BM however I would buy a new IMpreza :huh:

[GEE-OTTO]

i'd like to see all the cvt's replaced with a 6 speed dual clutch automatic and keep the 6 speed manual they are coming with right now.

 

 

yes!

[Sydtron]

CVTs are more efficient, no reason to replace them. They'd be dominant (again) in racing if they weren't banned/outlawed via rule in pretty much every series. You don't get to shift your gears but you get to keep your car in the perfect RPM range at all times.

[thefultonhow]

I don't like CVTs any more than I like other autos, but they're one of the reasons for the fuel economy improvement between the 4th gen and the 5th gen.

[Sydtron]

Yeah, just sayin' keep them optional.

[thefultonhow]

Especially when the 6MT is such a smooth-shifting transmission...

[Sydtron]

Subaru: masters of manual transmissions

[98LGTLover]

And a 6 speed dual clutch auto wouldn't get good fuel mileage? It would still drop the RPM's down further than what the 4th gens were running at highway speeds. I see it as a "win-win" for both fuel economy and performace, especially on the NA 2.5.

[Sydtron]

It wouldn't come close to a CVT. It would get mileage like a 6 speed manual (rated at 19/27 in the 2.5i) if the ratios were similar since they're both mechanical connection between engine and driven wheels.

[thefultonhow]

You still have fixed gear ratios. A CVT is inherently more efficient than anything with fixed ratios, both in terms of power output and fuel economy, if it is designed correctly (and from what I've seen, the Subaru one is). And frankly, a six-speed auto would maybe be up to par with the CVT, but why spend all that money to design and build it when the CVT is brand-new?

[LegGTLT]

Or we could talk about what features are realistic to happen on the 2012.

 

 

 

 

 

[TrueWhiteBoy]

Meh, the Impreza got bigger and so the Legacy gets bigger, otherwise there's no point if having 2 cars if they're practically the same thing.

 

The Legacy is now going up directly against the Camry and Accord in all trims. It sucks that we no longer have our 3 series/A4 competition, but it's been over two years already. It's time to move on.

 

What changes did they make for the 2007 Legacy vs the 2006 model?

[moncur_6]

2008 was a larger difference, but the interior trim got revamped slightly...'08 got a facelift...seats are comfier, different cluster, nothing huge.

[98LGTLover]

It wouldn't come close to a CVT. It would get mileage like a 6 speed manual (rated at 19/27 in the 2.5i) if the ratios were similar since they're both mechanical connection between engine and driven wheels.

 

I'm more performance oriented so I would still like the dual clutch tranny. I'm not that concerned about gas mileage but I understand that Subaru did go with the CVT because they want everyone to realize they can have AWD and still get just as good of gas mileage as they could in the Camry or Accord.

 

But yeah, I guess it is time to get back to realistic changes that will be happening.

[Sydtron]

Oh, well, the CVT will remain and dual clutch is an inevitability. You'll get it.

[TheOneDoubleN]

Meh, the Impreza got bigger and so the Legacy gets bigger, otherwise there's no point if having 2 cars if they're practically the same thing.

 

The Legacy is now going up directly against the Camry and Accord in all trims. It sucks that we no longer have our 3 series/A4 competition, but it's been over two years already. It's time to move on.

 

What changes did they make for the 2007 Legacy vs the 2006 model?

 

Really? Because while I've seen this comparo in a few magazines, I've seen many more that pit the LGT against the 3 series and A4, among others....Do I sense some 5th gen resentment?

[ehsnils]

Oh, well, the CVT will remain and dual clutch is an inevitability. You'll get it.

 

Maybe you should explain how that is.

 

OK, maybe the diesel will get a dual clutch auto, but it may still be better to improve the CVT instead so it can take a greater torque.

[Sydtron]

Manuals get a take rate of <10%, dual clutches are all over the place but generally well above 10%. So, you get the option of having a "sporty" transmission without hanging the people who won't/can't drive manuals out to dry.

 

Now for diesels, yeah, dual clutch you're right of course. CVTs are sensitive to torque, especially the kind Subaru is using. Straight up gasser, fuel miser model (2.5i now) a CVT is going to be set in stone. 3.6R or 2.5GT, sure, since that car isn't meant for fuel efficiency.

[ehsnils]

Manuals get a take rate of <10%, dual clutches are all over the place but generally well above 10%.

...

 

I assume you refer to the US. In Europe the manual gearboxes has a higher percentage. This since AT gearboxes still lacks the fuel efficiency you are able to get with a manual even though the auto gearboxes are better today. Only a few auto gearboxes do in reality come up to the efficiency of a manual gearbox.

 

And with a fuel price of around $9/gallon it counts... And a car with an auto gearbox is often more expensive.

[MikeNH]

I assume you refer to the US. In Europe the manual gearboxes has a higher percentage. This since AT gearboxes still lacks the fuel efficiency you are able to get with a manual even though the auto gearboxes are better today. Only a few auto gearboxes do in reality come up to the efficiency of a manual gearbox.

 

And with a fuel price of around $9/gallon it counts... And a car with an auto gearbox is often more expensive.

Sadly he is right- manual transmissions are a dieing breed in the US. People are lazy/stupid, nothing more. I couldn't begin to tell you how many people reacted to my car having a manual trans the same way they would if I told them it didn't come with seats. The rarity does have it's perks- at my old place the neighbors son was totally baffled by "that third pedal".