Last post on Dec 06, 2011 at 12:51 PM
You are in the Subaru Legacy & Outback
What is this discussion about?
Subaru Legacy, Subaru Outback, Wagon
#10350 of 11746 Re: Performance figures for 2.5i Legacy Wagon [liv4today]
Nov 27, 2004 (11:16 am)
I've owned my 2004 2.5i Outback since 08/26, and now have 4500 miles on it. So far I haven't been able to get documented acceleration figures on it. However, I have noticed several things. I have the 5MT transmission, and it has gotten smoother as the mileage piled up. The throttle was VERY non-linear during the first 2000 miles. A large throttle opening (especially in the lower gears) produced no effect, followed by uneven acceleration and slowing before the shift point. I have seen other posts to this effect here on line, but the Subaru dealer says it's "normal" and they can't find anything wrong. So, after 4500 miles, this effect has mitigated, and the throttle operation has become "More normal" or like other small engined, manual transmission cars I have driven. I would say that my 0-60 time NOW feels like it's in the "sub 10 second range", where before, it felt slower. I have read that the computer takes a while to "learn" your driving habits......but I think 4000 miles is rediculous, and I believe 04s have manual throttle, unlike the 05 which has "drive-by-wire" throttle, and so might have a learning curve. I would appreciate anyone else's opinion on this matter, as well as posting of some hard documented facts on Subaru OB performance.
#10351 of 11746 Re: Who needs 4 wheel drive? [mark_wny]
Nov 28, 2004 (3:47 pm)
No, AWD does not replace stability control (and vice-versa) but it can keep one out of situations that would require electronic assistance.
Stability control systems basically are designed to assist in under and oversteer conditions. AWD that is close to 50:50 all the time or proactive (vs. the other types of AWD that only kick in after 2WD wheelspin is induced) can help keep a car handling more neutral to begin with. What AWD can not do is sense and correct a specifc under/oversteer situation.
However, not all stability control systems are created equal and one can not defy the laws of physics. Some stability control systems are known to be very intrusive and immediately clamp down on spirited driving. Also, stability control systems operate by braking (vs. sending power with AWD) so the net effect is to slow down the vehicle. Lastly, because they rely on brakes and traction, even the best stability control program will not be able to correct a situation with no grip or well beyond what can be accomplished with the tires.
Subaru's philosophy has been to create cars that handle well on the virtues of their design: stiff chassis, symmetric drivetrain layout, suspension tuning and AWD. Other manufacturers rely on stability control to act as an electronic band-aid to poor vehicle design.
Having said that, stability control is no longer a luxury car feature. Subaru will need to start adding some form of stability control in it's lineup to remain competitive.
#10352 of 11746 Re: Who needs 4 wheel drive? [kens]
Nov 28, 2004 (4:02 pm)
"Other manufacturers rely on stability control to act as an electronic band-aid to poor vehicle design."
I think that may be a bit of a strong statement there Ken. I wouldn't consider the stability control on my Corvette to be a band aid for poor vehicle design. More like a band aid for a stupid driver. I do agree with your last paragraph however. When it comes time to replace my 98 Outback I will not be buying a $30K plus car if I still have my Corvette. That would be way too much money tied up in vehicles. If Subaru does not extend stability control down to lower end models it will be a huge strike against them for my decision making criteria.
#10354 of 11746 Re: Who needs 4 wheel drive? [zman3]
Nov 28, 2004 (5:04 pm)
Welcome aboard Karl,
I too have a Corvette and an Outback (2004). I ski:-)
#10355 of 11746 Re: Who needs 4 wheel drive? [63corvette]
Nov 28, 2004 (8:27 pm)
Thanks. I've mostly lurked for quite awhile now but occasionally I will interject. My Outback is a 98 but fortunately my Vette is a 2004!!
Nov 29, 2004 (10:29 am)
Permanent AWD is very nice, but most AWD systems are only part-time. Those systems don't offer the advantages of more neutral handling and less understeer, so CR's comments might be in that context.
Stability control can only make the best of what traction is availble. AWD actually increases available traction.
Ideally you'd have both. But I'd pick AWD over VSC any day.
#10357 of 11746 snow tire recommendation
Dec 02, 2004 (10:48 pm)
I have a 2003 Legacy SE with about 44,000km on it. I live in a big city and have had the car for not quite 2 years. I recently was told I needed to have the rotors and discs replaced ($1000.00! and that it was normal for this to be done at 46,000. (Is this true?)
I am now told that my tires which came with the car have about 25% tread left and aren't really good for the winter. I didn't think they'd wear out after only 50K, but again, they say that's normal.
I'll be doing a lot of winter driving and they offer Blizzak W50 on aftermarket rims for 1100.00. Is this a good tire for this car for winter? What about the Michelin Arctic Alpin? And does that sound like a fair price or should I go to a tire store?
I don't know if I can trust this dealer or is he just trying to sell some tires.
I welcome your experience/advice. We get some good wet snow and ice here, and I'll be going to ski resorts a lot this winter for work.
#10358 of 11746 Replacing disks at 46000Kms
Dec 03, 2004 (5:36 am)
That is total BS, you should never have to replace disks unless you let the brake pads go down to the metal.
I have never replaced disks on any car and I've gone as high as 200,000Kms on one of them
If Subaru thinks this is normal, then I say it is pathetic.
#10359 of 11746 Re: snow tire recommendation [cdndriver]
Dec 03, 2004 (9:54 am)
stuford is right, rotor replacement at that mileage shouldn't be considered "normal". It could be necessary for your situation, but certainly not normal. Did the shop tell you why they want to replace the pads and rotors? I don't replace mine until they are either below minimum thickness and in need of machining, or rust is encroaching on the friction surface.
Your tires should probably not be too bad at that mileage either, although I can't say how they would do in the snow. My wife has ~54K miles on her OEM Bridgestone Potenza's so far, and there's quite a lot of tread remaining. I'm usually happy if I get at least 40-50K miles out of OEM tires.
I've never had Arctic Alpins, but I researched them this week after failing to order the Michelin X-Ice tires I wanted for my Mazda6 wagon from tirerack.com before they sold out. Seems the general consensus is that they trade off a bit of snow/ice traction for better handling in dry/wet conditions. Most reviews I've seen on Blizzaks suggest that they're one of the best for deep snow and ice traction. You can see a comparison test between the two tires at tirerack.com:
If you decide on Blizzaks, you may be able to get them cheaper online. I don't know if Tirerack ships to Canada, but last week I looked up a set of new steel rims (16") with Blizzak WS-50 (225/60QR16), mounted and balanced, for my wife's Outback, and the total came ~$650 US, ~$720 with shipping. That would be ~$850 Canadian.