neelnug Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Edmunds car reviews are usually useless but this comparo is just a joke. Review Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iuksob03 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 "Less than three-tenths separated the two in the 0-to-60 dash (the Subie posted a 7.08-second time) and it was the same in the quarter, where the Legacy ran a 15.29-second effort." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTCanada Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Actually, I think they did a good job of summarizing the strengths and weaknesses of each. People choose cars based on their priorities and the Edmunds folks disclosed their biases. I would not even consider a Magnum since my requirements point me to the LGT. Wagons in North America are still viewed as cargo haulers which the Magnum does well. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigmoe860 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 it sounds like his opinion but i dont care what this person has to say sound like they got some money for the comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melayout Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Edmunds: Fair and Biased. The comparo was fair but biased, cause as they bluntly stated they prefer hauling ability, comfort and engine smoothness instead of handling, out-right speed. I keed I keeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VXCL Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 i love how they bitch about space but the leggy has more headroom and more leg room up front. its smaller in the back but thats where the kids go. also the mpg is worse in the magnum. MAYHEM #122/22 STS NNJR SCCA AUTOX4U.COM XENON RETRO GUIDE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunderkind Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 well they tested an autobox GT wagon. I bet Edmunds wouldn't want to upset the general American Iron masses by pitting the Hemi V8 Magnum against a 5spd GT wagon that does 0-50 in 5.9. That's more than 1 second than the mighty Hemi V8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iuksob03 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 I've driven a 5EAT wagon for a weekend and I have a hard time believing it took 7 seconds to get there. They must have had the camera crew in the back or left it in the regular shift mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallispec Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 The Magnum isnt available in a Stick, is it? (i'm assuming thats why they compared it against the auto GT) anyone know what the stats are on the AWD Magnum.. even though i'm sure its a bit more expensive, it'd be interesting to see how it effects the performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shiggins Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 I absolutely see no bias or favoratism in the article. They quite clearly stated early in the article what their criteria was.........to make the vehicles be nearly the same price/options and to pick the winner based on basically general average family station wagon usefulness. That involves automatic transmission (what most people buy), cargo room, and stoplight to stoplight torque/driveability being the main points. I don't see where they complain about anything we all don't, or highlight anything we all love about the subie. Matter of fact, I think they quite clearly highlighted the good points. Face it, we're enthusiasts who shop for something far, far different than the majority.......otherwise there'd be all kinds of hot performing sedans and wagons from every manufacturer for us to choose from. Ever really think about the sheer number and variety of SUVs sold versus "sport/performance" sedans and wagons? We all factor perfomance (stock and potential), handling, looks, and sheer fun to drive factor far greater in our decisions than the vast majority of American consumers. There's nothing wrong with either way. But of course we suffer because the manufacturers generally appeal to the masses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ih8vtec13 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 The Magnum is definatly fast, my friends dad got one and i have rode in it, played some follow the leader on some twisty road (leading and folowing), and raced off a roll from 45 on a few occasions. The Magnum RT did take me off a roll, but it took him till 100mph to start gaining, so it has some balls under the hood. Ok in follow the leader I followed and had no trouble keeping up and could have pushed harder. When i took the lead possition I lost him on a street corner turn from a stop sign and lost him in that turn. I slowed down and let him gain because he did fishtail badly and i gave him a shot to hang, but he stil kept falling behind. The ride in the Magnum is comfy and it handles good for something that heavy, but the visability out of the back window is piss poor at best. If i got one it would be black and I would have to make it look like a herse on steroids. BTW I drive an LGT sedan in the 5EAT, and there is no way I would go for a magunm over it. A 3000C if it wasn't the latets in bling with AWD wound be a thought but thats as far as it would go. So all I have left to say is: Straight road LGT 0 Magnum 1 Twists and Turns LGT 1 Magnum PWN3D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
w_country14 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 I absolutely see no bias or favoratism in the article. They quite clearly stated early in the article what their criteria was.........to make the vehicles be nearly the same price/options and to pick the winner based on basically general average family station wagon usefulness. That involves automatic transmission (what most people buy), cargo room, and stoplight to stoplight torque/driveability being the main points. I don't see where they complain about anything we all don't, or highlight anything we all love about the subie. Matter of fact, I think they quite clearly highlighted the good points. Face it, we're enthusiasts who shop for something far, far different than the majority.......otherwise there'd be all kinds of hot performing sedans and wagons from every manufacturer for us to choose from. Ever really think about the sheer number and variety of SUVs sold versus "sport/performance" sedans and wagons? We all factor perfomance (stock and potential), handling, looks, and sheer fun to drive factor far greater in our decisions than the vast majority of American consumers. There's nothing wrong with either way. But of course we suffer because the manufacturers generally appeal to the masses. Well put Shiggins. Let's face it. We're all kinda quirky. You have to be in order to be a Subbie person. I looked at the Magnum before I bought my LGT (sedan). The Magnum has a lot of positive points, but it also has one big drawback. It's a Dodge. I've known a few people with Dodges and they always seem to have major issues right about the time the factory warrant expires. Not to mention the fact that every day I drive to work in LA I see a couple of Magnums on the 405. I've had my LGT for over two months and I've seen maybe 3 LGT's on my commute. There's something to be said for individuality. And last, but not least, an AWD Magnum's gonna cost somewhere around $33000. And that's without all the other little goodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkaresh Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 This comparison did make me wonder how the prices really stack up. I hate it when magazines simply compare base or "as-tested" prices. So I actually created a website that accounts as fully as possible for equipment differences (www.truedelta.com). End result, Magnum RT AWD vs. LGT: the Subaru is about $2400 less, even after including $1000 in Chrysler financial bonus cash for the Dodge (which might no longer be available--I haven't gotten June info for Chrysler yet). Some people do cross-shop these cars. I accompanied a friend of mine while he test drove two Outbacks (2.5T and 3.0) and the Magnum. He owned a 2002 Outback at the time, so you can't say he was biased against the new ones. But the car he came very close to buying was the Magnum, He could care less about handling, really wanted effortless torque, and the Magnum provides that. Ended up in a used 540i he bought for a song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuzaxeman Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 a dodge is a dodge. problems in the end. subbies are more refined. those 0-60 and 1/4 mile time on the automatics seem very far off from a manual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBY Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Edmunds car reviews are usually useless but this comparo is just a joke. Review +1 Very odd comparo, I would have thought that someone in the market for one of these vehicles would have been choosing between a Durango "hemi" and a Magnum "hemi" Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBY Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Moving this thread to Other Cars v's the Legacy. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycl Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 What the?! http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/d...04/pageId=64003 Looks like someone got paid out ... And what's with the 0-60mph time?! I never know if these guys use brake torque launching or not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S4 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 b0rked link... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycl Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 sorry... ripped it off nasioc ! Here it is: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=105804/pageId=64003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTCanada Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 There is another thread on this already. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycl Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 doh... didnt see it.... sorry for the repeat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallispec Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 340hp and 390tq, i'm really disapointed at the numbers the magnum is putting down at the track. Even with an auto, i would have figured it to be a mid 14 second car. I guess all that weight really does limit it's ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UPSGuy Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 A. Dodge vs. Subaru B. Mods for the hemi? Minimal. Mods for the LGT? Priceless. That's my "non-biased" review! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBY Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 doh... didnt see it.... sorry for the repeat Merged the two threads and added to the subject line. Cheers Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wukindada Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 These were the 2 vehicles at the top of my list for replacing my 03 s4 avant, bottom line Subie is a much better performing vehicle period! Now that I am at stage II it will be very interesting to see how quick the srt8 magnum really is! At that point it may be time for a larger turbo & intercooler:) ...By the way both of those times are slow for these vehicles:(, obviously dealing with green engines! Both vehicles will be .3-.5 sec quicker after a break in period Toyota 6EATS .........SUCK!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.