Questions about Subaru Quality/New Outback Purchase

[G.R. Aydelotte]

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

 

[CompUser]

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.

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

 

[Paul Pedersen]

:

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...

 

[Jim Stewart]

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).

Please post it for all.

 

[tcassette]

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.

 

[John M.]

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.

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

 

[Jkpoulos7]

Forget the P:assat. Very poor reliability

 

[G.R. Aydelotte]

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

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

 

[G.R. Aydelotte]

:


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...

Good point. I was hoping the side curtain airbags and roof would offer
some protection.

Gregg

 

[oothlagre]

Gas is $2.10 a gallon now here. People whine about the price, but still they
drive like maniacs............

 

[oothlagre]

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.

 

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

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
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.

 

[CompUser]

@posting.google.com>, (e-mail address removed)
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

 

[JW]

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.

 

[nfisherman]

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.

 

[Florian Feuser /FFF/]

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.

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

 

[Roy Shroyer]

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

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¢

 

[Bobby The D]

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'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?

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.

 

[G.R. Aydelotte]

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.

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

 

[Losiho]

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. 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.

http://subaru.com.au/news/?newsid=11969


Enough said.