Best worst review of the 2010 Outback

Post by **Legacy777** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 6:27 pm

As the title states, this probably the best (well written) bad review I've read.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/review ... u-outback/

asc_up · Post by **asc_up** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:17 pm

Wow. He definitely hit the nail on the head. I'm glad someone actually wrote an article about this (instead of people on boards just bitching about it).

Airgne · Post by **Airgne** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 3:44 am

so true!

magicmike · Post by **magicmike** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 3:00 pm

This was me at the dealer waiting to buy my first subaru...

asc_up · Post by **asc_up** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:06 pm

wut?

Lol.

SemperGuard · Post by **SemperGuard** » Sun Aug 02, 2009 8:04 am

How can you trust a reviewer that thinks the 4th gen had rear struts? Or one that thinks Toyota is pulling the strings? Or that an Outback getting more ground clearance and wider is a bad thing? The 4th gen wasn't the greatest thing in the world, it doesn't handle much better than my 1st gen OBS. Whenever a new model comes out everyone bitches, then a few years go by, and everyone says how great that model is, then another new model comes out, and it repeats. If you review a baseline car, of course you're not going to be impressed by it. If you review the top of the line you should be impressed, and if not then give it a bad review. This car is just as much a subaru as any other I've driven, and except for EA81 and older cars I've driven them all, multiple times. Maybe this guy should drive every gen of legacy back to back and then say it's not a subaru. What people need is a review written by someone who knows what the heck they're talking about. Not someone who is a jack of all trades, and master of none.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sun Aug 02, 2009 8:40 pm

I haven't liked a Legacy since the 2nd gen., though at least liked the looks and slight down-sizing of the 3rd gen. Unfortunately, as the reviewer pointed out, there seems to be little market for the original Subaru values of tough, cheap, go-anywhere, easily serviceable, and long-lived. Mercedes-Benz has found the same thing and abandoned their similar values (at least the tough and long-lived, and with added build quality) and gone with flash to appeal to a more common person at the expense of quality and longevity. I guess most people don't want what we do. I'm just glad I have the ability to keep the old ones going and, soon, to build from scratch what I want since, as with most things, I am practically my own market.

SemperGuard · Post by **SemperGuard** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:06 am

evolutionmovement wrote:I haven't liked a Legacy since the 2nd gen., though at least liked the looks and slight down-sizing of the 3rd gen. Unfortunately, as the reviewer pointed out, there seems to be little market for the original Subaru values of tough, cheap, go-anywhere, easily serviceable, and long-lived. Mercedes-Benz has found the same thing and abandoned their similar values (at least the tough and long-lived, and with added build quality) and gone with flash to appeal to a more common person at the expense of quality and longevity. I guess most people don't want what we do. I'm just glad I have the ability to keep the old ones going and, soon, to build from scratch what I want since, as with most things, I am practically my own market.

The newer engines are quite a bit more reliable than the older engines. The newer transmissions are way more reliable than the older ones. There has been no change in ease or difficulty of service in the past 20 years, because the general layot of things has not changed. I know I would much rather replace intake gaskets on a 05+ EZ30D or EZ36D than on any EA anything, or any EJ for that matter. The cars might not be $8000 anymore, but comparing like cars of each era not much has changed. I think you need to let go of your old ways.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Mon Aug 03, 2009 3:25 am

Nope. They're heavy, hideous, the interiors look awful, and the mileage sucks. Transmission reliability wouldn't be bad, but mine made 175k before J-turns killed it, so I don't think that's so bad. I've also read about all kinds of engine issues with recent WRXs and I don't like 2.5 liter 4 cylinders. The cars shouldn't be heavy enough to need it. I'll believe they're more reliable when they do over 250k of abuse and am shown pictures of them torn down to reveal beautiful internals with little wear. Not that it matters—they're still 1000 lbs. too heavy, too big, embarrassingly ugly, and most importantly, too devoid of road feel with the steering and don't come in stick shift with the GT wagon. If you like them great, apparently you're not alone as their sales are strong even in this economy, but I can't even find an excuse to write the pigs into any of my books. Was going to put a Forester in the fourth one, but with the redesign, such a feminine vehicle won't work. They don't make cars for me anymore, so I'll be building my own once this one's restored.

entirelyturbo · Post by **entirelyturbo** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:08 am

SemperGuard wrote:The newer engines are quite a bit more reliable than the older engines.

I can't believe you just said that.

I believe moosens over on the USMB encountered a 1.7 MILLION mile EA81 Subaru in his travels. Owned and driven by a college professor, the engine had never been torn down for any reason as I recall.

No EJ25 has ever done that, especially not the EJ25D.

If I had a dollar for every blown-up EJ205 that's come into the shop, I wouldn't be working there anymore.

The 255/257 block is better, but still not indestructible. There is that whole issue with the 09 WRXs blowing up, although I personally haven't seen any yet.

And I haven't gotten a chance to drive a 2010 Legacy/Outback yet because of the stop-sale issued on them because of that wiring harness issue behind the dash.

I guess it would be 100% proper to reserve judgment until I drive it, but the thing has a fucking electric parking brake, for Christ's sake.

I can't think of anything more useless on a car, and Subaru used to have more sense than that.

Besides, I tore the 08 Impreza a new one when I first saw it, and I've yet to be impressed with any 08+ Impreza I've driven.

gijonas · Post by **gijonas** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:47 am

The newer engines are quite a bit more reliable than the older engines. The newer transmissions are way more reliable than the older ones. There has been no change in ease or difficulty of service in the past 20 years, because the general layot of things has not changed. I know I would much rather replace intake gaskets on a 05+ EZ30D or EZ36D than on any EA anything, or any EJ for that matter.

Unbelievable!!! I cant even justify a response.

SemperGuard · Post by **SemperGuard** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:38 am

You enthusiasts, or purists, or whatever you call yourselves remind me why I only come here to buy and sell parts.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:58 am

And why we're no longer interested in the AWD Camrys Subaru builds now. I forgot door frames—those suck, too.

gijonas · Post by **gijonas** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:22 pm

You enthusiasts, or purists, or whatever you call yourselves remind me why I only come here to buy and sell parts.

Your a turd.Go buy a wrench then post.

PhyrraM · Post by **PhyrraM** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:32 pm

Everyone has an opinion, and is free to express it. The main problem with discussions such as this is that everyone naturally feels thier viewpoint somehow is more enlightned than others. That, and it's kinda fun to squabble back and forth.

I, personally, try to stop short of name calling.

In the grand scheme, "we" are wrong. What Subaru is doing is the "right" thing. Sales numbers prove it. Come to think of it, I can't think of any affordable, yet still distinguishing, cars (let alone manufactures) left.

Personally, I think the new cars are too big and complex. I'm not crying over framed doors and parking light switches, however. When they lose the boxer engine and the relative ease of service, that's likely when I'll be "done" with them.

gijonas · Post by **gijonas** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 1:18 am

I, personally, try to stop short of name calling.

You sally

AWD_addict · Post by **AWD_addict** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 8:17 am

The last line of that review put it best

However, punch-drunk on the elixir of newfound sales popularity, it’s unlikely Subaru will look back—save to fly the bird to its wide-eyed, once-loyal nerds.

93forestpearl · Post by **93forestpearl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:39 am

I don't blame Subaru for trying to sell cars. That is what they are here to do after all.

The 3 liter, and possibly the 3.6 is the 22E, according to the three dealer mechanics I know personally. As long as people change their oil, they are having almost no problems with the current 6 cylinder.

I wouldn't call myself a purist, although I'm not the biggest fan of framed doors but that is merely a personal preference. Would I liked to have swapped all my stuff into a newer shell? You bet your ass I would. Money was the issue though, and compatibility of my parts.

I have embraced some of the newer technology. Obviously the six speed is ab out 30-35 years more modern internally that all the of the five speeds to date, and the lightweight six speed, which is an old five speed with an extra gear stuffed in it.

Overall, I have no qualms with where Subaru has gone, and is trying to go. The CVT was a necessary move since fuel economy is being mandated more and more. I just wish they would finally come out with some direct injection. That would help fuel efficiency even more since they have the turbo part worked out already.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 1:55 am

That's all I want and I want them to sell a lot of DI engines, ugly and fat as the cars holding them might be, so that I can get it cheap from a wreck in a few years and fit it to the wagon and get 40 mpg or better.

The CVT might come in useful, being small and longitudinal, for one of my aircraft-inspired designs. If it could be modified for a manual control mode, it would emulate the effect of a variable pitch prop and could maybe get some serious mileage allowances and be able to anticipate traffic conditions for power like a traditional manual transmission instead of just reacting like do as automatics. Now if I could match it to a radial engine, that would be seriously badass (and expensive and impractical).

93forestpearl · Post by **93forestpearl** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 6:22 am

If you kept the power level near the original motor the cvt is attached to, it really comes down to software. Some people would find it easy to program. Not me, however. I hate programming, and I've taken many classes on the shit.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:18 pm

For the radial? That won't be a problem—the 7-cylinder in question is not as powerful as the Subaru engine—110hp/160lbs./ft. I don't know how the CVT is controlled, so it could be a simple signal hijack or a nightmare. I don't have the money for just the engine, so it's just a creative exercise for now.

Post by **Legacy777** » Fri Aug 07, 2009 6:32 pm

I read a blurb on the CVT. I however don't recall where. It may have been on Subaru's website.

I think I got the link from one of the threads on the USMB talking about the CVT.

legacycentral bbs

A forum for 89-94 BC-BF(BJ) Legacy Owners and Fans

Best worst review of the 2010 Outback

Best worst review of the 2010 Outback