or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 2010 Subaru Outback Pics and details...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2010 Subaru Outback Pics and details... - Page 2

post #31 of 73

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ctskierguy View Post

 


Before holdbacks and advertising monies. That usually puts somewhere between $600-1200 to the dealership depending on their plan.
 

 

 


Of course.  I think holdback is 3% on Subarus -- that leaves a bit of wiggle room below the invoice.

post #32 of 73

 

I'm a fan of the 05-09 line as well but my kids have definitely outgrown the back seat of our 06 OBXT and it's time to trade.  I had my eye on the 09 Forester and am generally averse to new model years but this is intriguing.  When can we expect these at the dealers? How do they compare in size / weight etc. to the 09 Forester?

 

 

 

post #33 of 73
Thread Starter 

These will be a couple of hunnerd pounds more than the Forester. I think to keep the two models different, that is why the Forester gets the XT and not the 3.6 and vice versa  on the Outback.  

 

I have an 09 Forester with no issues at all. The only thing "new" in the 10 OD is the CVT transmission, the test of the mechanics are evolutionary. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ts01 View Post

 

I'm a fan of the 05-09 line as well but my kids have definitely outgrown the back seat of our 06 OBXT and it's time to trade.  I had my eye on the 09 Forester and am generally averse to new model years but this is intriguing.  When can we expect these at the dealers? How do they compare in size / weight etc. to the 09 Forester?

 

 

 

 

post #34 of 73

My problem is I don't get a newer one until I have worn the current one out.  I bought my first one in 1985 and I am just on my third one.   I drove the first one 240,000 miles.   Actually the second one was still in good shape at 140,000 when I got the 2003.  I figure I will be looking at the 2015 models for my next one.   I wonder  if they will still be using gas.

 

I like the 2010 style.   A little more room would be nice.

post #35 of 73

My 1978 was the best car I ever had.  My 2001 used more gas than the Toyota Sienna, which had room for an entire Outback and a Justy in the back, and still had room for a big dog and some powder skis.

 

Does this one burn more gas than a Hummer?

post #36 of 73

Tough crowd to please.

 

We bought a 98 Forester, automatic (not for the looks, I have to say), but that car has been flawless. It is really my wife's car, and it is still running strong. Compared to my car (Acura CL Type S, 6 speed manual), the Forester is superior on snow. But the Acura pulls better milage on the highway even with its 3.2L, 260HP engine.

 

Either way, we love Subarus and when the Forester dies, we'll probably get another Subaru.

 

 

post #37 of 73
Thread Starter 

Subarus never claimed to get the best mileage but I will sacrifice a few MPG's for the security of their AWD system in snow and also on dry and wet roads. 

post #38 of 73

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomB View Post

Tough crowd to please.

 

Either way, we love Subarus and when the Forester dies, we'll probably get another Subaru.

 

 


Yeah, they are the car for skiers out here.   More friends have a Subaru than all other cars combined.  I've been to parties where there are 6-7 Subarus, and nothing else.
 

 

I don't love then as much as I used to though.  My last one, a 2001 had shoddy brakes and clutch.  I had them look at the clutch every single time it was in for service, and it died as soon as the warrenty was up.  Then I learned there was a recall on them, and they knew all along.  I sold my 1998 still running with 160,000 mi, having done no clutch or brake work.  By 60,000 the 2001 had seen both.

post #39 of 73

The clutch on my 2006 felt a lot better than the 2003.

So far as I understand, the 2009 is the same as the 06, but it feels a tiny bit different. 

 

I'm not just an automatic opponent of the new.  My current Outback (2009) and the previous one (essentially the same) are my favorite body styles -- I like them better than the older ones or the 2010.

post #40 of 73

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi View Post

 

You'd really rather have a turbo than a high output V6?

It would make sense to offer a manual or, at least, paddle shifters on the V6...sure wish my RAV4 had one of those options.

 


Where is this V6 you are talking about?

post #41 of 73

I'm on my second Outback.  I drive about 30,000 miles a year.  First was a 1997, currently have a 2004 with over 150K on it.  I've had no problems with either - however the new one has now had the dreaded Catalytic Convertor code turning the Check Engine light on for a while.  I had the o2 sensors replaced and it didn't fix it.  My model has two of them and the last time I checked there were no aftermarket ones made so it cost over $3,500 to replace them both.

 

No way Jose.  Still get over 25mpg on it, was up to about 29 with my last tires when they were getting old.  New Nokian WR G2's and the mileage went down to 25 (I guess bald tires get better mileage.)

 

I bought an OBD2 reader to clear the code out so I can use my cruise control.  I really doubt the car is polluting, I wish our state did tailpipe emissions tests, but all they do is plug into the computer.  So next year I don't know if I'll be able to get by inspection.  Hopefully aftermarket convertors will come out soon.

 

Any-the-ways - great cars.  I'd like to get another 2 years out of this one before getting a new one.  Hopefully vehicle stability systems will be standard by then.

 

As to me I can't see wanting a 6 cylinder, my 4 has plenty of power - and the mileage is so much better.

post #42 of 73

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

LOL, I have been in Subaru retail for 20 years off and on...I have owned about 15 or so of them myself.  We go through this EVERY model change...when we went from the 81-84 series to the Loyale, I heard "Oh my god..Subaru ruined it, I am never going to buy another one...." Sales went up. When the Legacy was changed from 90-94 to the new the second generation...I heard...  "Oh my god..Subaru ruined it, I am never going to buy another one...." Sales went up. When the 00-04 series and 05-09 seres came..same thing..every time? Sales went up. I see nothing less with this one. It looks like they were able to go more mainstream  w/o loosing (too much of) the Subaruness. 

 

I am as big of a fan of the 05-09 series as anyone, but in its segment it was too small to go up against the Accords and Camrys of the world and as good as the Lecacy was, it was loosing sales. 

 

Like you said,  the "subaru fans" stopped liking them as they became more and more mainstream. If I wanted a lexus, bmw, honda, toyota etc. I would have bought one of those,

post #43 of 73
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by karpiel View Post

 

 

Like you said,  the "subaru fans" stopped liking them as they became more and more mainstream. If I wanted a lexus, bmw, honda, toyota etc. I would have bought one of those,


What I have found (and should have added) is that the Subaru fans complain, yet they still come back, 

post #44 of 73

I have an 1998 Audi Avant with 138,000 miles on it.  I'd want this Outback, EXCEPT, I want a 6 cylinder engine and manual transmission like I've got on the Audi.  Why would I want to go down in performance?  I get 26 MPG or better, almost 30 on long trips.  Apparently Subaru thinks that manny tranny lovers are cheapskates and don't want the bigger engine.....

post #45 of 73
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

I have an 1998 Audi Avant with 138,000 miles on it.  I'd want this Outback, EXCEPT, I want a 6 cylinder engine and manual transmission like I've got on the Audi.  Why would I want to go down in performance?  I get 26 MPG or better, almost 30 on long trips.  Apparently Subaru thinks that manny tranny lovers are cheapskates and don't want the bigger engine.....


It is more than just that Subaru thinks that manual transmission owners are cheapskates. 1A. the 3.0 or new 3.6 H6 has never had a manual option offered in any configuration because they don't have a manual tranny to mate to it. B. The cost to federalize a transmission/engine combination is also cost prohibitive. 2. The base 4 cyl produces 175hp which is 3 hp more than the 6 that you have in your 98 A4. 3. We had an 01 A4 Avant 6 cyl Quattro with a stick, in all of my driving, it was very well the worst stick/clutch combo we ever owned. 4. Give the 4 cyl Subaru OB a try, with the 6 speed, I imagine it will be damn nice and give you the mileage along with more comfort and space over the A4. You will only be going down in cylinders but you will be going up in performance. 

 

At least Subaru still offers a manual transmission or a stick, Audi doesn't offer am manual with their (magnificent) 2.0T and they don't even offer a 6 cyl at all in an A4 Avant. Off the top of my head, the Volvo V50T5 is the only other wagon that is available with AWd and a manual transmission. 


Edited by Philpug - 4/12/2009 at 02:41 am GMT


Edited by Philpug - 4/12/2009 at 02:43 am GMT
post #46 of 73

I have to say, We bought a Subaru outback sport in April 08, and have loved it.  In one year we have put on 18,000 miles.  We use it to go skiing in PA and take long trips.  I am amazed as to how much stuff we can pack in the car.  I was able to put a double ski bag, two large suitcases, small overnight bag and there still was room.  This model worked very well for us in the snowy weather traveling to go skiing

post #47 of 73

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 


What I have found (and should have added) is that the Subaru fans complain, yet they still come back, 


I know I have, as much as I hate the "mainstreaminess" of the new ones, if they offer something with a small engine and a 5 speed with good AWD, I will buy it. Cloth seats, manual windows etc. would be nice.

post #48 of 73

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 


What I have found (and should have added) is that the Subaru fans complain, yet they still come back, 


Huh, so people who control a product with a fervent, loyal following can make big changes that increase that product's mass appeal while alienating it's devotees and not only increase market share but retain a lot of the original fans?



Who knew?

post #49 of 73

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bumpfreaq View Post

 


Huh, so people who control a product with a fervent, loyal following can make big changes that increase that product's mass appeal while alienating it's devotees and not only increase market share but retain a lot of the original fans?



Who knew?


Sounds like Apple's recipe for success in recent years.

post #50 of 73

My old car has 190 HP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 


It is more than just that Subaru thinks that manual transmission owners are cheapskates. 1A. the 3.0 or new 3.6 H6 has never had a manual option offered in any configuration because they don't have a manual tranny to mate to it. B. The cost to federalize a transmission/engine combination is also cost prohibitive. 2. The base 4 cyl produces 175hp which is 3 hp more than the 6 that you have in your 98 A4. 3. We had an 01 A4 Avant 6 cyl Quattro with a stick, in all of my driving, it was very well the worst stick/clutch combo we ever owned. 4. Give the 4 cyl Subaru OB a try, with the 6 speed, I imagine it will be damn nice and give you the mileage along with more comfort and space over the A4. You will only be going down in cylinders but you will be going up in performance. 

 

At least Subaru still offers a manual transmission or a stick, Audi doesn't offer am manual with their (magnificent) 2.0T and they don't even offer a 6 cyl at all in an A4 Avant. Off the top of my head, the Volvo V50T5 is the only other wagon that is available with AWd and a manual transmission. 


Edited by Philpug - 4/12/2009 at 02:41 am GMT


Edited by Philpug - 4/12/2009 at 02:43 am GMT

 

post #51 of 73

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

My old car has 190 HP.

 


 

Not fugly like the scoobydoo, with a 6 speed tiptronic and not a huge price difference. Granola crunchers don't always have to settle for second best; http://www.audiusa.com/audi/us/en2/new_cars/Audi_A4/A4_Avant.html

 

post #52 of 73

Tiptronic is NOT a manual transmission.  It's a pretend manual.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post

 


 

Not fugly like the scoobydoo, with a 6 speed tiptronic and not a huge price difference. Granola crunchers don't always have to settle for second best; http://www.audiusa.com/audi/us/en2/new_cars/Audi_A4/A4_Avant.html

 

 

post #53 of 73

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

Tiptronic is NOT a manual transmission.  It's a pretend manual.  

 



 

Yes I know, but like you say, it's a pretend manual, versus not available at all, and the Audi tiptronic is pretty good at pretending. And if you go for the sedan instead of the wagon, there's a 6 speed manual  to unpretend with. And it's still not fugly.

post #54 of 73
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

My old car has 190 HP.

 

I stand corrected on the HP number, I will stand by the other comments in the post. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

Tiptronic is NOT a manual transmission.  It's a pretend manual.  

 


VW/Audi does offer a true manual with an auto mode, where Subaru along with many manufacturers offer  automatics with a manual mode, as useful as picture in picture on a television and used about as often.

 

Having owned +/- 15 Subarus and the same in VW/Audi's...I cannot see my self getting another one from der fatherland.  

post #55 of 73

Well, whenever this dies (pray that it's not for another 10 years..) I won't be getting an Audi because I hate the dealer with a passion.  What a crook.  I found another garage, but I could have afforded a replacement if I'd found it four years sooner.

post #56 of 73

Does anyone else wish they offered each model with a dogbox?

post #57 of 73
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

Well, whenever this dies (pray that it's not for another 10 years..) I won't be getting an Audi because I hate the dealer with a passion.  What a crook.  I found another garage, but I could have afforded a replacement if I'd found it four years sooner.


That is the problem with dealers..95% of them ruin it for the rest of them ...and sadly even the good dealerships (yes there are...err were some) are getting fewer and farther between. 

post #58 of 73

I loved my dealer in NJ and didn't mind paying premium rates.  But, this guy was incompetent and a crook.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 


That is the problem with dealers..95% of them ruin it for the rest of them ...and sadly even the good dealerships (yes there are...err were some) are getting fewer and farther between. 

 

post #59 of 73

I am not liking that new look at all. It seems like they're moving all their cars closer to the look of the Tribeca, which honestly might be one of the ugliest vehicles on the road; like, Pontiac Aztec ugly. Definitely not liking the new direction.

 

And no manual transmission? What is the world coming to?

post #60 of 73

How is everyone missing that it has a 6-spd manual in the base model?  That's one more gear than last year's manual tranmission. 

 

Quote:

The efficient Outback 2.5i models offer a new standard 6-speed manual transmission, or the available Lineartronic™ CVT. Both transmissions help to improve acceleration, response and fuel economy. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 2010 Subaru Outback Pics and details...