Last post on Sep 30, 2013 at 4:14 PM
You are in the Subaru Legacy & Outback
What is this discussion about?
Subaru, Subaru Legacy, Subaru Outback, Sedan, Wagon
Your Community Leaders are ateixeira and rsholland.
#4142 of 10838 Re: Outback vs Forester dilema [needanewcar]
Sep 19, 2004 (7:14 am)
Both are great cars, and you should be able to decide based on the look and feel, and the way they drive (they are very different in all those regards). The Outback will be closer to your TL in style and feel, but the Forester is much more fun and nimble to drive.
To address your concern: the Forester's regular side airbags go up higher than typical and offer head protection. So while there are not curtains, I think you will be protected just as well in the Forester (perhaps better).
As far as technology, I don't think there is much of a gap between the two cars. First, the current Outback platform was released in mid 2003 outside the US. And the current Forester was released in mid 2002 worldwide. So that's really only a year.
When we bought our 03 Forester in August of 02, I noticed many new design features from Subaru, including the painted-metallic interior styling theme, new exterior and interior styling elements, and the use of aluminum body panels in the hood, roof, and liftgate. Guess what?? These all showed up on the new Legacy and Outback. From my standpoint, the Forester is one year ahead of the Legacy/Outback (or they are one year behind) but the technology is the same.
Like I said, I would choose based on which car you like better after some thorough test drives. You really can't go wring with either in my experience.
ps: we have an 05 Outback and an 04 Acura TSX now, previously had an 02 Outback and an 03 Forester.
#4143 of 10838 Re: 05 legacy paint [c_hunter]
Sep 19, 2004 (7:31 am)
Thanks for the info...is the claybar fairly easy to use. I looked up some info on the net or would I be better suited to let a professional do it. Also is this something Suabru should take care of and doesn anyone know will they.
#4144 of 10838 Re: Outback dilema [c_hunter]
Sep 19, 2004 (7:37 am)
Craig--interesting that you have the exact two cars that, if wishes were reality, would probably be in our garage. Could you comment on one thing for me--the driver's "comfort" in one vehicle vs. the other for road trips. When I drove the TSX, I was pretty impressed by the seat, leg room etc, and I've had no chance to experience the XT seat in the Outback, although I had mixed feelings about the one in the 2.5i. I know that this is pretty subjective due to body type, but I'd be interested in your thoughts even though in reality they are two different types of vehicles. Long term driving comfort is a big deal for us.
#4145 of 10838 Re: Negotiating 2005 lease [yul]
by kyfdx@Edmunds HOST
Sep 19, 2004 (8:26 am)
They can't reduce the cap cost, because that is what the leasing company pays the dealer for the car... The dealer doesn't care how many miles you drive it, he has to sell it for the same price, either way.
If the leasing company offered a 9K annual mileage allowance, then they could raise the residual, giving you less depreciation to pay, and lowering your payment.
The lowest mileage allowance I've seen is 10K/yr, and maybe your dealer could find an independent leasing company that offers that... But, if the rest of the terms aren't as good, it may not save you any money..
If you are only driving 9K/yr, then buying the car may save you money in the long run, even though your monthly payment will be higher.
#4146 of 10838 Re: Outback vs Forester dilema [c_hunter]
Sep 19, 2004 (9:02 am)
Thanks so much for your reply - how do you like your '05 Outback AND why did you choose it over an '05 Forester? Not to confuse things but were also considering an '05 TSX but would really like to have one auto that is awd!!! THANKS AGAIN!
(My son's car is collapsing and he is waiting for my hand me down, so I REALLY needanewcar!
#4148 of 10838 Re: Outback dilema [lumbar]
Sep 19, 2004 (4:55 pm)
Well, the TSX has great seats and the interior is pretty comfortable to spend time in. Compared to the Outback XT (and the Legacy GT), however, the TSX rides stiffer and has more road noise (especially from the tires). So I'd have to say the Outback/Legacy would probably be better on long drives -- they are definitely smoother all around.
We haven't taken any really long trips with either car yet, but did drive to DC with the TSX (2.5 hours away). The car was fine, no complaints at all.
I do find the TSX seats to be more sculpted than the OB XT / Legacy GT seats. If I was any bigger, it may be a problem. As it is, they are just perfect. Interestingly, the seats in my OB XT, while much flatter and wider, have also been real comfortable.
#4149 of 10838 Re: Outback vs Forester dilema [needanewcar]
Sep 19, 2004 (5:04 pm)
Rosanne, I really love my 05 Outback. It is the third Outback and 5th Subaru I have owned, and it is the best by far. I really feel like Subaru hit a homerun with this one (having an XT model is part of that -- the turbo engine is awesome).
I would have also considered a Forester XT, but have been partial to the Outback -- they have a big-car feel that you don't get in the Forester (of course that has plusses and minuses). In reality, the 05 Outback XT was replacing two cars -- my 03 WRX (mid life crisis car) and 02 LL Bean Outback. I am happy to say that it does a great job taking the place of those two very different cars.
Not to add more options, but you should also consider the Legacy GT wagon. It is closer to a TSX in handling and feel than the Outback. If you don't need the ground clearance of the Outback, the Legacy GT is actually a better choice in many cases.
#4150 of 10838 Transmissions?
Sep 19, 2004 (6:21 pm)
I test drove both an automatic and manual outback XT today. Amazing cars! It sure felt like the manual was much quicker. I know that automatics compromise performance, but I was surprised that the auto didn't seem to pull as hard as the manual. Have others also made this assessment when testing both? Also, is there a publication that compares acceleration times for the two?
Another question. I noticed that at 70 mph, the manual turned about 3000 RPM while the automatic was around 2600. Why then does the manual get better highway mileage?
#4151 of 10838 Re: Transmissions? [k2rm]
Sep 19, 2004 (7:07 pm)
I believe the 5MT is about 1 second quicker to 60mph, but can't remember where I saw the numbers.
For best performance, put the 5EAT in sport mode (slide the lever left into the +/- gate but do not shift manually). It will shift a heck of a lot better. After driving both 5MT and 5EAT, I felt the 5MT was average but the 5EAT was the most impressive auto trans I have driven. The way it snaps off shifts under hard acceleration is pretty amazing.
In general, any car I have driven feels faster with manual transmission, so I'm not surprised to hear what you felt -- it makes sense to me. Of course, the 5EAT will snap off shifts faster and better than most drivers can do with the 5MT, so that will offset some of the difference. generaly though, turbo lag is worse in autos.
Not sure why the auto is rated for lower mpg, other than the fact that there are more internal losses with an auto trans. Still, the overall gearing in 5th is a lot lower on the auto trans, so I would expect the lower RPM to translate into less fuel consumption. Curious...