T
Tim
I recently test drove a 2005 Subaru Outback 3.0R LL Bean. I was very
impressed by its response and handling. The interior felt quite
upscale with quality leather seats, dual A/C, CD changer, huge
moonroof. The exterior has pleasing lines and is eye-catching and
stylish. I like the big lights in the front and rear.
I find older Subaru styles blah or downright ugly; the new OBW is a
great improvement. I have had a pretty bad image of Subaru, far below
Honda, Toyota or even Nissan on the Japanese totem pole. But recently
when I entered the market for an AWD offroad vehicle that also would
be used for city driving I almost immediately zeroed in on the Outback
because I want to avoid getting an SUV.
I am not an SUV-hater and certainly appreciate the need for one on
certain terrain. I just find it hard to justify the amount of space
occupied and fuel consumed by an SUV transporting a single individual
on freeways and city streets. Also I own a BMW 330i and can give up
only so much driving enjoyment in normal conditions. Guiding a
lumbering tipsy goliath on pavement would turn into too much of a
chore.
The Outback is quick and stable. Its H6 was very smooth and responsive
as I took it over 100 mph on the freeway. In an empty parking lot I
tried some tight circles and corners and the wagon obliged every time.
The brakes felt soft but not disturbingly so. The noise level was no
worse than my BMW which purposely does not have the quietest cabin in
the world. The ride felt pretty smooth for me and the passengers but I
stuck to well-paved roads.
I was almost sold on the Outback after the test drive but for a few
misgivings. The biggest issue is rear legroom. I cannot understand how
anyone could design a car for camping and family activities involving
long drives but provide rear legroom that feels slightly tight. Subaru
needs to add 2 inches or more to the 33.9 inches provided. The second
issue is general brand image. I'm not sure I want to be seen in a
Subaru--I just hope other people will notice the same improvements in
styling that I have! The third issue is reliability. I have first hand
experience of top-class Japanese quality in Honda and Toyota. I also
have had no complaints of my BMW. So the prospect of anything less is
the source of some anxiety.
After trying out the OBW I felt obligated to look at the competition.
The only other AWD offroad wagons I found are the Volvo XC70 and the
Audi allroad.
The XC70 is a much nicer and more comfortable car. It is roomier in
every sense and I doubt my backbenchers would have anything to
complain about on long drives. But on the freeway the XC70 seemed to
need some coaxing to go faster and to stop. It is not nearly as
responsive as the Outback and I could really feel its length and
breadth on the road. I've never been a fan of Volvo's boxy style which
can be described as staid at best but the XC70 does have a number of
luxury options like rain-sensing wipers, seat memory etc. that simply
are not available for the Outback. The standard cassette player dates
the center console though. Its ground clearance is somewhat less than
the Outback's but not by much. Its colors were much more appealing
than the Outback selection. I remain convinced though Outback has a
better AWD system than Volvo's. And I don't have good impressions of
Volvo reliability though I do see a lot of old Volvo's running around.
The Audi A6 allroad was next. I admit I have been averse to Audi since
their 1980's debacle in the US and am pretty sure I would never
actually buy one. Their styles are sportier than Volvo but I find them
too rounded blob-like without character. The allroad is a great ride
though. I tried the 300hp V8 and it unquestionably was the most
powerful of the three cars. The cabin is definitely luxurious and may
be roomier than the Volvo. Again it has a bunch of luxury options not
available in the Outback. I was not able to put it through its paces
as much as the Outback but it handled as well as I could expect of any
non-BMW car. However a big negative is its SUVish 15/21 mpg
consumption. Also it has four levels of ground clearance ranging from
5.6 inches to 8.2 inches that I find needlessly complicated. I'm
afraid that only means more things can go wrong. What if I get
somewhere on 8.2 inches and then my ground clearance gets stuck at a
lower level? Also what's up with Europeans and cassette
players--standard on the allroad too!
Price is a factor but just on the merits of essential features--AWD,
offroad, handling, response, power, and comfort--I am leaning toward
the Outback. I'm hoping I can get one for a day or two to really test
its rear seating comfort.
Tim
impressed by its response and handling. The interior felt quite
upscale with quality leather seats, dual A/C, CD changer, huge
moonroof. The exterior has pleasing lines and is eye-catching and
stylish. I like the big lights in the front and rear.
I find older Subaru styles blah or downright ugly; the new OBW is a
great improvement. I have had a pretty bad image of Subaru, far below
Honda, Toyota or even Nissan on the Japanese totem pole. But recently
when I entered the market for an AWD offroad vehicle that also would
be used for city driving I almost immediately zeroed in on the Outback
because I want to avoid getting an SUV.
I am not an SUV-hater and certainly appreciate the need for one on
certain terrain. I just find it hard to justify the amount of space
occupied and fuel consumed by an SUV transporting a single individual
on freeways and city streets. Also I own a BMW 330i and can give up
only so much driving enjoyment in normal conditions. Guiding a
lumbering tipsy goliath on pavement would turn into too much of a
chore.
The Outback is quick and stable. Its H6 was very smooth and responsive
as I took it over 100 mph on the freeway. In an empty parking lot I
tried some tight circles and corners and the wagon obliged every time.
The brakes felt soft but not disturbingly so. The noise level was no
worse than my BMW which purposely does not have the quietest cabin in
the world. The ride felt pretty smooth for me and the passengers but I
stuck to well-paved roads.
I was almost sold on the Outback after the test drive but for a few
misgivings. The biggest issue is rear legroom. I cannot understand how
anyone could design a car for camping and family activities involving
long drives but provide rear legroom that feels slightly tight. Subaru
needs to add 2 inches or more to the 33.9 inches provided. The second
issue is general brand image. I'm not sure I want to be seen in a
Subaru--I just hope other people will notice the same improvements in
styling that I have! The third issue is reliability. I have first hand
experience of top-class Japanese quality in Honda and Toyota. I also
have had no complaints of my BMW. So the prospect of anything less is
the source of some anxiety.
After trying out the OBW I felt obligated to look at the competition.
The only other AWD offroad wagons I found are the Volvo XC70 and the
Audi allroad.
The XC70 is a much nicer and more comfortable car. It is roomier in
every sense and I doubt my backbenchers would have anything to
complain about on long drives. But on the freeway the XC70 seemed to
need some coaxing to go faster and to stop. It is not nearly as
responsive as the Outback and I could really feel its length and
breadth on the road. I've never been a fan of Volvo's boxy style which
can be described as staid at best but the XC70 does have a number of
luxury options like rain-sensing wipers, seat memory etc. that simply
are not available for the Outback. The standard cassette player dates
the center console though. Its ground clearance is somewhat less than
the Outback's but not by much. Its colors were much more appealing
than the Outback selection. I remain convinced though Outback has a
better AWD system than Volvo's. And I don't have good impressions of
Volvo reliability though I do see a lot of old Volvo's running around.
The Audi A6 allroad was next. I admit I have been averse to Audi since
their 1980's debacle in the US and am pretty sure I would never
actually buy one. Their styles are sportier than Volvo but I find them
too rounded blob-like without character. The allroad is a great ride
though. I tried the 300hp V8 and it unquestionably was the most
powerful of the three cars. The cabin is definitely luxurious and may
be roomier than the Volvo. Again it has a bunch of luxury options not
available in the Outback. I was not able to put it through its paces
as much as the Outback but it handled as well as I could expect of any
non-BMW car. However a big negative is its SUVish 15/21 mpg
consumption. Also it has four levels of ground clearance ranging from
5.6 inches to 8.2 inches that I find needlessly complicated. I'm
afraid that only means more things can go wrong. What if I get
somewhere on 8.2 inches and then my ground clearance gets stuck at a
lower level? Also what's up with Europeans and cassette
players--standard on the allroad too!
Price is a factor but just on the merits of essential features--AWD,
offroad, handling, response, power, and comfort--I am leaning toward
the Outback. I'm hoping I can get one for a day or two to really test
its rear seating comfort.
Tim
Meanwhile, the Subaru soldiered on, and at