Outback

[SimonM]

I'm thinking of buying an 04 Legacy Outback, but wondering whether
anyone has any thoughts about the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder version?
It'll be mostly used for in-town family travel, with maybe a couple of
major trips up-and-down the East Coast per year. Just wondering
whether anyone has found the 4 cylinder version lacking in power?
Thanks.

 

[Edward Arata]

My parents have a '98 Legacy Outback, I'm not sure if it has the same power
as the new 4 cyl.
It is an automatic and it works fine for hauling a family of four around.
It has a good amount of space and power is ok.
Granted it is a four cylinder with an auto so don't expect to pass people on
two lane roads without a LOT of space. They use it mainly in the foot hills
of northern California and the Sacramento valley. It works great in the
valley and ok in the foot hills. I have taken it to the snow (Lake Tahoe)
and it works hard to get up hill with 4 people and a load. It does it but
don't expect to do over 40 or maybe 50 with it, up a good grade.

I say this being 24 and driving a '02 Impreza WRX turbo wagon with a manual
so I'm used to a little more power.

Other than that, Subaru's are good cars and the AWD gets you out of
hazardous situations you don't expect or ones you put yourself into
intentionally. All the best in your decision.

Ed Arata

 

[Roy Shroyer]

I'm thinking of buying an 04 Legacy Outback, but wondering whether
anyone has any thoughts about the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder version?
It'll be mostly used for in-town family travel, with maybe a couple of
major trips up-and-down the East Coast per year. Just wondering
whether anyone has found the 4 cylinder version lacking in power?
Thanks

Hi,

I can't speak for the 04 Outbacks, but I can speak for the '02. I have an
OBW Limited, 2.5L, 5 speed. In my opinion the only real design flaw with
the car is that its underpowered. 165 hp and 165 tq isn't adequate, again
in my opinion, for a 3500 lb car. It does pretty good at highway speeds
though. The engine seems to pull hardest above 3500 rpm. The car will
accelerate quickly between 75 -100 mph without downshifting, which I like.
However around town I feel like I'm beating on it to keep up with traffic.

Great car but it could use about 200 hp. A slightly detuned WRX engine
setup (power at lower rpms) would be a great upgrade for this car. Great
quality, handles well, drives nice, good stereo, well built etc.

Had the H6 been offered with a manaul trans that's what I would've bought.

On late model Subes, the MT versions have limited slip rear diffs, and a
50/50 torque split f/r at all times, as opposed to a computer controlled
center diff, 90/10 f/r split, and a dog leg rear end on the auto.

Cheers.

 

[Jim Stewart]

I'm thinking of buying an 04 Legacy Outback, but wondering whether
anyone has any thoughts about the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder version?
It'll be mostly used for in-town family travel, with maybe a couple of
major trips up-and-down the East Coast per year. Just wondering
whether anyone has found the 4 cylinder version lacking in power?
Thanks.

I have a '99 with a 2.5 L engine and manual trans.
In 5th gear, it's quite happy to haul 4 adults at
75mph on the freeway. Downshifting to 4th, it's
also happy to haul the same 4 up and down mountain
passes at the speed limit or better. I'd enjoy
test-driving the 6cyl, but I think that in the end
I'd keep the 4.

 

[C. Brunner]

I'm thinking of buying an 04 Legacy Outback, but wondering whether
anyone has any thoughts about the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder version?

I bought a 4-cyl, auto trans Legacy Outback (OBW) new in 1998. I
thought it was a great car until I traded it this past summer for a
2003 H6-3.0 (auto trans) OBW. Compared to the '98 4-cyl, the '03
6-cyl is ZIPPY. The transmission shifts much more smoothly, the
cruise control accelerates almost imperceptibly (no surges), and it
feels like it has way more power than the older 4-cyl had.

'Course, there are other variables at work. The newer 4-cyl may be
better than my '98 was. And, whereas the 4-cyl consumed "regular"
fuel (87 octane), the new 6-cyl is supposed to get the rich stuff
(minimum 91 octane, according to the manual). My only options above
87 octane around here are 89 and 93, so I use the mid-grade and it
seems to work fine. My mileage is typically 24-25 mpg for a mix of
street and highway driving. YMMV of course!

C. Brunner

 

[David & Caroline]

I think it really depends on your driving style - I have driven my friends
older Legacy Outback wagon with the 4, and though you can tool around just
fine in it, it feels like a serious dog compared to my WRX wagon (which you
would expect, as the WRX has much more power, and is quite a bit lighter) -
but then I like a bit of spirited driving. If you tend to be a pretty
sedate driver, the 4 will be fine - if you like to get on it every now and
then, you may find yourself disappointed unless you get the H6... If you
ever tow with the car, I would say get the 6 without question. The 6 is
going to have more low end grunt, and a higher top end than the 4 - so it
will feel stronger pretty much in every aspect of driving.

 

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

get the 6

Carl
1 Lucky Texan

I'm thinking of buying an 04 Legacy Outback, but wondering whether
anyone has any thoughts about the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder version?
It'll be mostly used for in-town family travel, with maybe a couple of
major trips up-and-down the East Coast per year. Just wondering
whether anyone has found the 4 cylinder version lacking in power?
Thanks.

 

[Jeff]

Having purchased a 2004 H-6 35th Anniversary Edition this fall I vote for
the 6. It is smooth and seems to have an abundance of power.

 

[Edward Hayes]

My Forester 2.5L does just fine towing a 1600 pound boat/2 guys and all the
fishing gear on 400+ mile trips and all on regular gas. eddie

Having purchased a 2004 H-6 35th Anniversary Edition this fall I vote for
the 6. It is smooth and seems to have an abundance of power.

 

[GTT]

I'm thinking of buying an 04 Legacy Outback, but wondering whether
anyone has any thoughts about the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder version?
It'll be mostly used for in-town family travel, with maybe a couple of
major trips up-and-down the East Coast per year. Just wondering
whether anyone has found the 4 cylinder version lacking in power?
Thanks.

My 2.5L 04 Forester has all the pep I ever expect to need. Gets pretty
fair gas mileage, too. 25 in town, 28 on the road, as of this point 6K
miles.

Would vote for the 4 because of the cost of operation. But I'm no longer
a young guy who likes to drag race, out for max performance. "Good" is
good enough for me.

 

[M. Butkus]

Nope.. like my 4 better then the 6. The trans on the 6 seem to think the
"enging could". My 4 just downshifted and went... the 6 trans you had to
press the throttle 3/4 dow to downshift.

 

[Diva]

Just goes to show you how different people have a different take on things. I also have an '02 Ltd, 2.5L, but mine is automatic. I think it is quite powerful. When I step on the gas to get it moving it jumps into action. I drive on flat surfaces in the midwest. I can't imagine why I would need a 6 cylinder, except to pay more money for gas maybe. On the highway I could easily cruise at 90 if I wanted to -- but you mentioned that yours is okay on the highway too. On regular roads, however, I just don't feel it is underpowered. I drive on 2 lane highways out in the country a lot, and occasionally I have to pass by crossing over the double yellow line. I have never felt a lack of power in this or any other situation.

June

I'm thinking of buying an 04 Legacy Outback, but wondering whether
anyone has any thoughts about the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder version?
It'll be mostly used for in-town family travel, with maybe a couple of
major trips up-and-down the East Coast per year. Just wondering
whether anyone has found the 4 cylinder version lacking in power?
Thanks

Hi,

I can't speak for the 04 Outbacks, but I can speak for the '02. I have an
OBW Limited, 2.5L, 5 speed. In my opinion the only real design flaw with
the car is that its underpowered. 165 hp and 165 tq isn't adequate, again
in my opinion, for a 3500 lb car. It does pretty good at highway speeds
though. The engine seems to pull hardest above 3500 rpm. The car will
accelerate quickly between 75 -100 mph without downshifting, which I like.
However around town I feel like I'm beating on it to keep up with traffic.

Great car but it could use about 200 hp. A slightly detuned WRX engine
setup (power at lower rpms) would be a great upgrade for this car. Great
quality, handles well, drives nice, good stereo, well built etc.

Had the H6 been offered with a manaul trans that's what I would've bought.

On late model Subes, the MT versions have limited slip rear diffs, and a
50/50 torque split f/r at all times, as opposed to a computer controlled
center diff, 90/10 f/r split, and a dog leg rear end on the auto.

Cheers.

 

[LeBernadin]

Just goes to show you how different people have a different take on
things. I also have an '02 Ltd, 2.5L, but mine is automatic. I think
it is quite powerful. When I step on the gas to get it moving it jumps
into action. I drive on flat surfaces in the midwest. I can't imagine
why I would need a 6 cylinder, except to pay more money for gas maybe.
On the highway I could easily cruise at 90 if I wanted to -- but you
mentioned that yours is okay on the highway too. On regular roads,
however, I just don't feel it is underpowered. I drive on 2 lane
highways out in the country a lot, and occasionally I have to pass by
crossing over the double yellow line. I have never felt a lack of
power in this or any other situation.

June




Hi,

I can't speak for the 04 Outbacks, but I can speak for the '02. I
have an OBW Limited, 2.5L, 5 speed. In my opinion the only real
design flaw with the car is that its underpowered. 165 hp and 165 tq
isn't adequate, again in my opinion, for a 3500 lb car. It does
pretty good at highway speeds though. The engine seems to pull
hardest above 3500 rpm. The car will accelerate quickly between 75
-100 mph without downshifting, which I like. However around town I
feel like I'm beating on it to keep up with traffic.

Great car but it could use about 200 hp. A slightly detuned WRX
engine setup (power at lower rpms) would be a great upgrade for this
car. Great quality, handles well, drives nice, good stereo, well
built etc.

Had the H6 been offered with a manaul trans that's what I would've
bought.

On late model Subes, the MT versions have limited slip rear diffs, and
a 50/50 torque split f/r at all times, as opposed to a computer
controlled center diff, 90/10 f/r split, and a dog leg rear end on the
auto.

Cheers.

I have the '03 2.5L Baja and live in MA. Driving around eastern MA, and
I95, the power is fine. The few trips i've made to BurlingtonVT and
Killington though, on those highways as well as steep sideroads, you
wish for somemore pep, especially with 4 people and gear in the bed and
bikes on the roofrack.

I think its all in what you'll be doing with the vehicle. Most good
dealerships have a time period of complete refund or trade down/up. In
my case, Planet Subaru on the south shore(which was excellent btw) had a
30 day. I drove it in as many varying circumstances(not off-road since i
never anyways) as i could to make sure it was the car for us, for the
next chunk of years.

 

[tonyrama]

Just goes to show you how different people have a different take on things.
I also have an '02 Ltd, 2.5L, but mine is automatic. I think it is quite
powerful. When I step on the gas to get it moving it jumps into action. I
drive on flat surfaces in the midwest. I can't imagine why I would need a 6
cylinder, except to pay more money for gas maybe. On the highway I could
easily cruise at 90 if I wanted to -- but you mentioned that yours is okay
on the highway too. On regular roads, however, I just don't feel it is
underpowered. I drive on 2 lane highways out in the country a lot, and
occasionally I have to pass by crossing over the double yellow line. I have
never felt a lack of power in this or any other situation.

June


Well, yeah, on flat ground even my '95 2.2 manual is adaquate (barely). Put
any kind of weight in it, and/or introduce a grade of any kind, and it is a
total dog. I tested mine for top speed once, and I got 92 MPH on a down
grade on an empty interstate. Passing? Yeah, I can't do passing, not without
a quarter-mile straight, or under 30 MPH.
Tonyrama
'95 Outback

I'm thinking of buying an 04 Legacy Outback, but wondering whether
anyone has any thoughts about the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder version?
It'll be mostly used for in-town family travel, with maybe a couple of
major trips up-and-down the East Coast per year. Just wondering
whether anyone has found the 4 cylinder version lacking in power?
Thanks

Hi,

I can't speak for the 04 Outbacks, but I can speak for the '02. I have an
OBW Limited, 2.5L, 5 speed. In my opinion the only real design flaw with
the car is that its underpowered. 165 hp and 165 tq isn't adequate, again
in my opinion, for a 3500 lb car. It does pretty good at highway speeds
though. The engine seems to pull hardest above 3500 rpm. The car will
accelerate quickly between 75 -100 mph without downshifting, which I like.
However around town I feel like I'm beating on it to keep up with traffic.

Great car but it could use about 200 hp. A slightly detuned WRX engine
setup (power at lower rpms) would be a great upgrade for this car. Great
quality, handles well, drives nice, good stereo, well built etc.

Had the H6 been offered with a manaul trans that's what I would've bought.

On late model Subes, the MT versions have limited slip rear diffs, and a
50/50 torque split f/r at all times, as opposed to a computer controlled
center diff, 90/10 f/r split, and a dog leg rear end on the auto.

Cheers.

 

[Diva]

Well, and that's precisely WHY I made that point, and why I would never waste my money on a 6 cylinder. Around here, it's not necessary. I'm too far away from any steep grades to care whether it has necessary power there or not. My car is quite peppy and does exceedingly well here. For me the 6 is a waste of money and gas.

June


Just goes to show you how different people have a different take on things.
I also have an '02 Ltd, 2.5L, but mine is automatic. I think it is quite
powerful. When I step on the gas to get it moving it jumps into action. I
drive on flat surfaces in the midwest. I can't imagine why I would need a 6
cylinder, except to pay more money for gas maybe. On the highway I could
easily cruise at 90 if I wanted to -- but you mentioned that yours is okay
on the highway too. On regular roads, however, I just don't feel it is
underpowered. I drive on 2 lane highways out in the country a lot, and
occasionally I have to pass by crossing over the double yellow line. I have
never felt a lack of power in this or any other situation.

June


Well, yeah, on flat ground even my '95 2.2 manual is adaquate (barely). Put
any kind of weight in it, and/or introduce a grade of any kind, and it is a
total dog. I tested mine for top speed once, and I got 92 MPH on a down
grade on an empty interstate. Passing? Yeah, I can't do passing, not without
a quarter-mile straight, or under 30 MPH.
Tonyrama
'95 Outback

I'm thinking of buying an 04 Legacy Outback, but wondering whether
anyone has any thoughts about the 4 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder version?
It'll be mostly used for in-town family travel, with maybe a couple of
major trips up-and-down the East Coast per year. Just wondering
whether anyone has found the 4 cylinder version lacking in power?
Thanks

Hi,

I can't speak for the 04 Outbacks, but I can speak for the '02. I have an
OBW Limited, 2.5L, 5 speed. In my opinion the only real design flaw with
the car is that its underpowered. 165 hp and 165 tq isn't adequate, again
in my opinion, for a 3500 lb car. It does pretty good at highway speeds
though. The engine seems to pull hardest above 3500 rpm. The car will
accelerate quickly between 75 -100 mph without downshifting, which I like.
However around town I feel like I'm beating on it to keep up with traffic.

Great car but it could use about 200 hp. A slightly detuned WRX engine
setup (power at lower rpms) would be a great upgrade for this car. Great
quality, handles well, drives nice, good stereo, well built etc.

Had the H6 been offered with a manaul trans that's what I would've bought.

On late model Subes, the MT versions have limited slip rear diffs, and a
50/50 torque split f/r at all times, as opposed to a computer controlled
center diff, 90/10 f/r split, and a dog leg rear end on the auto.

Cheers.

 

[Dominic Richens]

Well, yeah, on flat ground even my '95 2.2 manual is adaquate
(barely). Put any kind of weight in it, and/or introduce a grade of
any kind, and it is a total dog. I tested mine for top speed once,
and I got 92 MPH on a down grade on an empty interstate. Passing?
Yeah, I can't do passing, not without a quarter-mile straight, or
under 30 MPH.

Hmmm, are you down-shifting to 4th? I have a 95 2.2 MT wagon too and all I
can say is that 5th gear is there for fuel economy. To hit that max power
band around 5000 rpm, you have to be in 4th.