would you pay...

LaureltheQueen · Post by **LaureltheQueen** » Sat May 01, 2004 6:30 am

if the rear shocks are blown, as on so many wagons, then the car does half the work for you!

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Sat May 01, 2004 6:34 am

blah, I didnt say I wanted more understeer, nor did i say I want less.

theres always going to be easier ways to do something.

What was this topic about?

TurboLegacy · Post by **TurboLegacy** » Sun May 02, 2004 5:32 am

i had a 92 loyale 4 wheel drive before my legacy. that thing was awesome for camping out in and beating the hell out of off road, but it was just too damn slow and ugly for me. i raced my friends dirtbike with it through the mud and slid into a tree, i have the pics somewhere.

LegacyT · Post by **LegacyT** » Sun May 02, 2004 12:55 pm

Honestly you guys glorify the wagon for apparently having more "oversteer" but in reality the wagon handles the same as the sedan. Hence I and many others prefer a sedan because it looks better, and has better visibilty for daily driving.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Sun May 02, 2004 5:59 pm

How does the sedan have smaller blindspots with the bigger C-pillar? I've driven both wagon and sedan and found the wagon holds a line better and pulls around a turn more on the gas (like a front electronic LSD effect) rather than understeering through.

I'll give you that they must be stiffer, though.

Steve

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Sun May 02, 2004 8:37 pm

I stand by my original statement. If I need a wagon to fit a girl in the back, then something is very wrong.

I've got one word for you Touring Wagon addicts. 5MT. Unless you do a swap, a sedan will be better for the duration (no TC to overheat) and do exactly what the driver wants through the turns. 4EAT might be better for the straight line, but when it comes to the twisties, there is no replacement for a skilled clutch foot.

Plus, the 5MT Sedan has better highway manners (in terms of acceleration). For a wagon to hit boost, you've gotta floor it and wait for the downshift. A 5MT can cruise a gear low and just open her up.

vrg3 · Post by **vrg3** » Sun May 02, 2004 9:15 pm

Dude, do not turn this into anotehr 5MT vs. 4EAT thread.

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Sun May 02, 2004 9:22 pm

You should know by now that I like to stirr the waters every once in a while.

I do stand by the cushion pushin in the back thing though. If a girl didn't fit in the back of my sedan, could you imagine how disproportionate of a couple we would be? Goddamn.

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Mon May 03, 2004 1:46 am

hehe, I so want to continue this arguement and turn the thread into a 5mt v 4eat thing. bleh, I so disagree with you on everything you said (cept the fat bitch thing

), but meh, this topic has gone too far off track.

LaureltheQueen · Post by **LaureltheQueen** » Mon May 03, 2004 4:00 am

This whole hoopla about looks is very subjective. Me, I dont like the look of the sedans, they look like SO many other early 90's japanese sedans, the wagons were a little more clearly "legacy" than the sedans were, I personally dont like cars with trunks, for me, it's either a wagon, hatch, or fastback that I find attractive, but that's just me.

BAC5.2 · Post by **BAC5.2** » Mon May 03, 2004 4:28 am

Hardy - Another thing you'll find out about me is that I play the devils advocate a LOT. I'll argue just to ruffle the feathers.

In reality, I would love to have a touring wagon as my second "run to the store" car instead of the truck.

legacy92ej22t · Post by **legacy92ej22t** » Mon May 03, 2004 4:41 pm

Sedans rule, Wagons drool.
a 5mt's cool, a 4eat? Fool.

I sure could have used a wagon last night. I brought down a tv stand and tv to MD and tore the back of my front seat getting the crap into the back seat.

I agree with Vikash though, lets not turn this into a 5mt, 4eat shit flingin' contest again cause we all know the 5mt's better so why even waste the effort to type otherwise, right? Hehehe....

LaureltheQueen · Post by **LaureltheQueen** » Mon May 03, 2004 4:42 pm

especially because subaru manual transmissions are so high quality and last SO long.

legacy92ej22t · Post by **legacy92ej22t** » Fri May 07, 2004 3:02 am

LaureltheQueen wrote:especially because subaru manual transmissions are so high quality and last SO long.

HAHAHAHA

=)

boostjunkie · Post by **boostjunkie** » Fri May 07, 2004 3:16 am

LaureltheQueen wrote:especially because subaru manual transmissions are so high quality and last SO long.

I'll SAY!! I had 213,000 miles on my original tranny AND clutch!! And you all know how I drove that thing!!

Those people that have failed trannies must REALLY not know how to drive.

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Fri May 07, 2004 3:17 am

yep, there was a guy here with 225k on his stock tranny and clutch aswell.

boostjunkie · Post by **boostjunkie** » Fri May 07, 2004 3:19 am

Damn, he beat me!! I guess the mods to the car didn't help with clutch longevity

THAWA · Post by **THAWA** » Fri May 07, 2004 3:22 am

yeah his was stock i believe but still, 10k miles that's barely any difference.

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Fri May 07, 2004 5:04 am

Mine died at somewhere around 180K after a lot of J-turns and general hard driving. That's a Subaru problem component - it only lasts over 150k! Ford transmission problems have them dying within warranty or just outside it.

Steve

123c · Post by **123c** » Tue May 11, 2004 6:29 pm

My friend paid $6500 for a 1993 LS with 60k miles in 2002, and it looked to be in prefect condition, but he has had to put some money into the things, so no, you should be able to get the car for no more than $5000 tops...

evolutionmovement · Post by **evolutionmovement** » Tue May 11, 2004 10:16 pm

My sister has had similar recurrent issues with her '91 Maxima. Too few miles are worse than too many - cars are made to be driven.

Steve

legacycentral bbs

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

would you pay...