 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Subaru Cars / May 2004Questions about Subaru Quality/New Outback Purchase
Hello, I'm posting to this group out of interest in the new 2005 Outback Wagon. I owned an 83 Wagon for about 6 years and put 100k miles on it. It was a pretty reliable car, but there were times that I cursed it for some quality issues. It was always splitting CV boots, the wheel studs stripped out in the hub making lugnut removable/tire changes impossible, the carburetor gave us some problems, and it began to rust along the lower edge of the rear hatch. The car had a lot of road noise, it didn't ride that great, and it was slow. It was great in snow,though we get little of that in TN. I bought a 91 Honda Accord Wagon to replace the Subie, and we have put 220k miles on it; unfortunately it was totaled by a 93 Lincoln Town Car. Thank God, nobody was hurt. Because of the accident, I've been researching cars by safety rating on NHTSA's website, and I've noticed that Subaru Wagons get classified as heavy passenger cars plus they get good front and side crash ratings. I've considered many vehicles such as Lincoln LS, Acura RL, Honda Accord, Toyota Camry Avalon and Highlander, but the new 05 Outback caught my eye as viable car. Has Subaru quality improved greatly since 1983? Are the newer cars easy to service by a home mechanic? What is "Ring-Shaped Reinforcement Frame body structure with hydroformed center-pillar construction"? What is known about these side curtain airbags and injuries, especially children?This sounds like good engineering for side impact crashs, though I suspect it's new and untested. What I'm looking for is a good heavy family car, some sporty looks, reliabilty, decent gas mileage, good engineering, and above all safety. I do not wish to resort to an SUV to protect my family from all the other monster vehicles on the road, though I do own a 92 Land Cruiser which I use off road some. Thanks, Gregg > mechanic? What is "Ring-Shaped Reinforcement Frame body structure with > hydroformed center-pillar construction"? What is known about these [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > some sporty looks, reliabilty, decent gas mileage, good engineering, > and above all safety. You could check out NHTSA and IIHS and see if they've tested the Outback. On the "Ring-Shaped Reinforcment" stuff, I don't know how well it works on the OB, but I can give a link for a WRX accident that will make your toes curl (the driver walked away with scratches and a black eye). Steve >>mechanic? What is "Ring-Shaped Reinforcement Frame body structure with >>hydroformed center-pillar construction"? What is known about these [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > toes curl (the driver walked away with scratches > and a black eye). Please post it for all. > > mechanic? What is "Ring-Shaped Reinforcement Frame body structure with > > hydroformed center-pillar construction"? What is known about these [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Steve Steve, Yes, I'd like to take a look at that link. NHTSA site says TBT (To Be Tested) for the 2005 Outback. A Subaru saleman showed me the metal out of (supposed) Toyota RAV4, Honda Pilot, and Subaru. The first two were basically thin metal sheet type material, while the Subaru was close to 5 time heavier in weight by my estimate and it was welded and reinforced two layers similar to the picture of the Ring-Shaped Reinforcement in 2005 Legacy brochure. He said there were three of these spanning the width of the roof. I've looked at a few other makes brochures and none give this kind of info. Gregg In article <6ff3fd27.0405192033.7947e0c0 @posting.google.com>, grahighlander@hotmail.com says... > Yes, I'd like to take a look at that link. NHTSA site says TBT (To Be > Tested) for the 2005 Outback. Looks like Allan set up a site... http://www.bongmonster.com/ Goofy nick; his pick, not mine... Steve "G.R. Aydelotte" writes : > What I'm looking for is a good heavy family car, > some sporty looks, reliabilty, decent gas mileage, good engineering, > and above all safety. I do not wish to resort to an SUV to protect my > family from all the other monster vehicles on the road, though I do > own a 92 Land Cruiser which I use off road some. The only way to protect yourself agains an SUV is to buy a truck. Take a look at side impact crash tests, the SUV comes right through the window. At the point of impact there is no steel at all to slow them down. One can only hope that gas prices will skyrocket to bring the population back down to some level of common sense. Prices in Quebec have just hit 1.00 a litre (3.80 $US/gal) and they will undoubtedly continue to rise... > "G.R. Aydelotte" writes : > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Prices in Quebec have just hit 1.00 a litre (3.80 $US/gal) > and they will undoubtedly continue to rise... Good point. I was hoping the side curtain airbags and roof would offer some protection. Gregg Gas is $2.10 a gallon now here. People whine about the price, but still they drive like maniacs............ > "G.R. Aydelotte" writes : > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Prices in Quebec have just hit 1.00 a litre (3.80 $US/gal) > and they will undoubtedly continue to rise... I assume you want all-wheel drive in a mid-size or larger vehicle. In a regular wagon format, the VW Passat and Audi A6 are available with AWD, but are less reliable and the Audi is higher $$$. The "raised car" alternatives to the Outback are the Audi Allroad and the Volvo Crosscountry. Both are more expensive and less reliable. The Volvo is probably "safer" given their reputation. Other choices would be the car-based "crossover" vehicles like the Lexus RX series, the Acura MDX, Toyota Highlander, Honda Pilot, Nissan Murano, Infiniti FX-35, etc. which are a bit heavier, sit higher, and are more pricy. Starting with the 1996 model, the Outback has included a lot of galvanized body panels to fight the rust problems. My 96 has been pretty solid and averages about 24 mpg with mostly highway driving. However, Outbacks with the regular 2.5 liter are generally acknowledged to have only adequate power. You might want to consider the new turbo 2.5 or the 6 for some extra power. No new cars are very easy to service by home mechanics beyond oil changes (and possibly other fluid changes), keeping the tire pressure up, and tire rotations. > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Thanks, > Gregg Forget the P:assat. Very poor reliability > In a >regular wagon format, the VW Passat and Audi A6 are available with AWD, but >are less reliable and the Audi is higher $$$. The "raised car" I test-drove the Passat Wagon on the same day as the Outback H6. It took me about 30 seconds to choose the Outback. Aside from price, the Outback felt like a better car. The Passat's interior had a sportier look, but it felt smaller. I'm a big guy and so was the salesman. We were nearly shoulder to shoulder in the Passat. The same salesman and I had much more room in the Outback. The Outback's ride also felt more solid to me. > I assume you want all-wheel drive in a mid-size or larger vehicle. In a > regular wagon format, the VW Passat and Audi A6 are available with AWD, but [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > > Thanks, > > Gregg > I'm posting to this group out of interest in the new 2005 Outback > Wagon. I owned an 83 Wagon for about 6 years and put 100k miles on it. [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > family from all the other monster vehicles on the road, though I do > own a 92 Land Cruiser which I use off road some. There is no way to compare an 83 Suby to the current models. They are very much modern, high tech cars. I've had and '80, and have a '90 and '02. Each model is more complex than the previous... the quality, by my opinion is better, as is the drivability... in fact I believe my H-6 VDC is near-luxury. I also agree with another poster that the days of a do-it-yourself mechanic are pretty much over. Certainly you could still do you own fluids/etc.... but much beyond that and I wouldn't even want to try. I do still love reading through the tech manuals to see how these things work... they really are a technological marvel. John > new and untested. What I'm looking for is a good heavy family car, > some sporty looks, reliabilty, decent gas mileage, good engineering, > and above all safety. I do not wish to resort to an SUV to protect my > family from all the other monster vehicles on the road, though I do > own a 92 Land Cruiser which I use off road some. You haven't really looked at the safety specs on SUVs have you? Four times more likely to kill a passenger inside them than a typical car in any accident. More than 6 times more likely to roll over in an accident. Almost ten times more likly to be involved in a single vehicle accident. The SUV builders petitioned and got a safety rating system which only compares them to other SUVs rather than passenger cars. Against a typical car they lose and badly every time. Top that off they are more likely to also kill people in the car they run into! An out of control ton and a half of steel on a rampage. Not at all what I would put MY family in. Just saw the Humvee today which pulled into a new lane without checking first to see it was clear. Hardly badly dented anywhere but rolled four times, killed two passengers which were my wife's co workers on their way home in that vehicle by stuff coming in through the front window as it rolled. everyone was in seatbelts. It came out of its lane and hit a Geo in its right front fender with the Humvee's left rear wheel. It did disable the Geo as it crushed the fender into the wheel, flattened the tire, and broke the rim. The Geo driver however is the one who called in the emergency services on his cell and he had not a scratch and his car was still on the road in an upright position.  Signature73 de N7PSV aka JW <n>< http://members.hscis.net/~jolson Take that and the fact that at least around here SUV drivers drive more aggressively than others. Maybe it is the 4x4 with ABS brakes giving them some sense of false invincibility......? A majority of accidents here this last winter involved SUVs. I witnessed a woman lose control and spin out before heading off the shoulder from trying to merge faster than the traffic flow in icy conditions. Thank heavens she didn't hit anyone when she did a 360 in the right hand lane. > > new and untested. What I'm looking for is a good heavy family car, > > some sporty looks, reliabilty, decent gas mileage, good engineering, [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > the emergency services on his cell and he had not a scratch and his car > was still on the road in an upright position. google "risk homeostasis" . couple that with the knowledge that teens' first cars are often the parents' old cars - SUVs these days. *shudder* Carl 1 Lucky Texan > Take that and the fact that at least around here SUV drivers drive more > aggressively than others. Maybe it is the 4x4 with ABS brakes giving them [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >>the emergency services on his cell and he had not a scratch and his car >>was still on the road in an upright position. Signatureto reply, change ( .not) to ( .net) > Take that and the fact that at least around here SUV drivers drive more > aggressively than others. Maybe it is the 4x4 with ABS brakes giving them [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > flow in icy conditions. Thank heavens she didn't hit anyone when she did a > 360 in the right hand lane. It may have to do with the fact that many SUV drivers are quite detached from their environment (not only in the ecological sense). SUV drivers are usually less than aware of traffic behind them. This may be due to the elevated position of the driver, the usually tinted rear windows or the three tons of steel separating the driver from oncoming vehicles. Florian > > new and untested. What I'm looking for is a good heavy family car, > > some sporty looks, reliabilty, decent gas mileage, good engineering, [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > the emergency services on his cell and he had not a scratch and his car > was still on the road in an upright position. Sorry about the loss of your wife's coworkers. No, I was not aware of all the statistics you gave, and I appreciate you providing them. What I was alluding to about an SUV was a now obvious misguided attempt to match them by weight class, since I have looked at statistics about sizes/weights. It is not easy to find a car that is above 3800 pounds; take a Buick Park Avenue for example. On the other hand SUV's are a good bit heavier like my Land Cruiser which is about 5400 pounds, I believe. I've had it for about 5 years and put 110k miles on it (has 233k miles total), and I intend to replace it some day soon. I did find a reference to every 200 pounds of weight increase adds 9% to the safety factor of a vehicle. My wife and I may both be driving Subarus one day, as the pictures of the WRX, some Australian crash test data for the 2005 Legacy at http://www.subdriven.com/artman/publish/article_166.shtml and other crash data at NHTSA's site show Subaru's Ring Reinforcement Safety features give good results. I have discouraged her from considering even a Toyota Highlander due to increased chance of rollover. If I remember right the 04 Outback Wagon gets a 4 star rating for rollover fron NHTSA. Now that the new Outbacks will be classified as trucks, won't that change how they are rated? I realize that a lot of this information you provided and other safety info is somewhere on the net, and I have read a good bit of info from IIHS and NHTSA sites on buying a safe car. Then, I have read a lot of posts, many by Daniel Stern, about the dangers of airbags, so I'm trying to sort all this out. With the exception of the Land Cruiser, I haven't shopped for cars since 1992. I have a lot of catching up to do. Gregg <snip> > I did find a reference to every 200 pounds of weight > increase adds 9% to the safety factor of a vehicle. So does that mean my car is 5% safer with me driving it than my wife? (I'm betting she'd disagree.) Maybe I should add a couple hundred pounds of ballast to my Forester. But seriously: Any safety advantage resulting from vehicle weight is only achieved from weight *differential*. Your 5400 lb Land Cruiser will be harmed a lot more in a collision with another 5400 lb Land Cruiser than with a 2500 lb Miata. And it will come out the loser in a collision with a 7000-lb Hummer. But then the Miata is probably better at dodging your Land Cruiser than your Land Cruiser is at dodging a Hummer. So which vehicle is really "safer?" And there are so many other factors involved in making a vehicle "safe" that the reference you cited above is almost certainly of the "out my a.s" variety. (The source, not you.) - Greg Reed Signature2001 Chevy Astro AWD (wife's) 2004 Subaru Forester Turbo 5-Speed >I realize that a lot of this information you provided and other safety >info is somewhere on the net, and I have read a good bit of info from [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >haven't shopped for cars since 1992. I have a lot of catching up to >do. Gregg: Re: airbags, specifically - one of the things that gives Subaru good crash ratings on front and offest crashes is that the airbags explode *upwards* towards the ceiling first, rather than *outward* towards the driver and passengers. My recollection is that the NHTSA pointed out that the style of airbags had a lot to do with child injuries due to airbags as well. Sandi > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Thanks, > Gregg I own an 02 OB wagon. My wife was sitting at a redlight waiting for the light to change when she was rear ended by a full sized Chevy pickup. The teenage driver of the truck told my wife he looked down and wasn't watching. He was able to swerve so that only the drivers side rear of the outback took the hit. $6500 damage. new tailgate needed. Due to delays ingetting new parts shipped in, and his insurance company's foot dragging, she drove the car like that for another 5 weeks. She wasn't injured significantly. The truck had to be towed away and looked like it was totalled with severly bent frame. We just got the car back from the body shop after four weeks and it looks really good considering. The Chevy Trailblazer we rented in its place was a total POS. 12 mpg got old real fast. Just crap compared to the Outback and really wasn't any roomier except for head room. SUV's are only considered safe due to the expert marketing of the automakers. These are their most profitable vehicles. Gas prices aren't going down IMO. Only up. Peak Oil. If you're so inclined google that term. i would seriously consider NOT buying and SUV. Not just for the safety reasons. Just my 2? > I'm posting to this group out of interest in the new 2005 Outback > Wagon. I owned an 83 Wagon for about 6 years and put 100k miles on it. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > greatly since 1983? Are the newer cars easy to service by a home > mechanic? Yes, they seem to be much better cars, starting in the mid-ish 90s. I had an '85 DL (actually my wife's) and it was a total POS. Rusted like a brillo pad...it was a race to see if we could pay it off before it fell apart. Parts/repairs a bit on the expensive side. Who was the genius who decided to stow the spare tire in the engine compartment? My father has a '98 wagon (not sure of the model...can't tell 'em apart anyway), and it's a much better car. While not the zippiest thing on the road, it's a dragster compared to the '85 (which could not maintain 65 mph in 5th gear on anything but a totally flat road). They finally seem to have discovered rustproofing too...while the '98 has started to rust around the wheel wells, it took MUCH longer to do so than on our '85. Doesn't look like it would be much fun to work on though, but that could be said about most anything made in the past 8-10 yrs. While not a big fan of Suburus, I'd take one over a Toyota any day. > Because of the accident, I've been researching cars by safety rating > on NHTSA's website, and I've noticed that Subaru Wagons get classified [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > like good engineering for side impact crashs, though I suspect it's > new and untested. http://subaru.com.au/news/?newsid=11969 Enough said. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.