You are here: Forums Wagons Subaru Crew Subaru Legacy & Outback All-New 2010 Legacy/Outback?

All-New 2010 Legacy/Outback?

692 messages,  Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 1:05 PM

You are in the Subaru Legacy & Outback Forum. Your Host is kcram

What is this discussion about? Subaru Legacy, Subaru Outback, Subaru Forester, Car Buying, Car Comparisons, Sedan, Wagon

Messages Page 11 of 70 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 70 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#96 of 692 Re: Subaru did it again [scottl] by saedave Jul 02, 2009 (1:25 pm)
Replying to: scottl (Jul 02, 2009 8:35 am) I'm looking for a great deal on an '09. If I can't find one, I won't be buying a new Subaru any time soon   Be sure to look at the Forester too. It has better back seat room than the 2009 Outback! And the styling is to my eye more pleasant.
#97 of 692 nice car by freeney Jul 02, 2009 (3:31 pm)
Just drove the 2010 Legacy and came away impressed. CVT is smooth and consistent. The cabin is quieter than prior Legacy models (though no mid-size car I've driven compares with the new, coffin-silent Malibu). The Legacy ride is reasonably firm but not harsh. The ergonomics suited my 6-foot frame to the extent it isn't hard to imagine driving a long distance and getting out feeling fresh. Shorter people will crane their necks to see out the back, though. Ingress and egress is probably best-in-class.
#98 of 692 Saw and sat in the '10 Outback today by kurtamaxxxguy Jul 02, 2009 (9:08 pm)
Royal Moore Subaru of Hillsboro OR was cordial as they let me take a closer look at the '10 Outback 2.5i Premium today.   The exterior suggested a melding of '09 Tribeca and '09 Forester but with its own uniqueness. The lower door cladding appears designed to keep snow off the interior trim.   There was a lot of room inside, far more than the '09 Outback. I didn't have to duck to get past the roof rail, and with the driver seat comfortably positioned, there was plenty of toe and leg room in the rear seat. There's soft trim on the upper door molding, and some brushed trim on upper console. The instruments and controls were easy to see and reach. The cargo area reminded me a lot of the Foresters, but there was more room, and a big HarmonKardon subwoof in the rear right corner.   By comparison, the '09 Outback, with front seat set the same, had virtually no toe room and very little leg room.   As I was not buying anything, I didn't ask to drive it. But I am very curious as to how that CVT improves the passing acceleration as well as fuel economy (some reports suggest 0-60 acceleration has improved to around 8 seconds).   Still, in all honesty, if the '10 Outback design had been around when I compared '09 Forester to Outback, I may have ended up with the Outback.
#99 of 692 Re: Driving the CVT vs. 6-speed manual [fendertweed] by colloquor Jul 03, 2009 (4:04 am)
Replying to: fendertweed (Jul 02, 2009 6:46 am) I wouldn't exactly call the CVT "new." One of the first applications of a CVT was in a motorcycle in 1910 in England. In 1923, the Brits offered a CVT in an automobile application. However, the first mass produced application was by DAF in The Netherlands in 1958 for their DAF automobiles.   In 1987, Subaru introduced the Justy in Japan with an ECVT (electronically-controlled continuously variable transmission). And, in 1989, the Justy became the first car offered with a CVT in the USA.   Thus, CVT is not new technology. Replies to this message: rsholland (Jul 03, 2009 5:27 am) colloquor (Jul 03, 2009 8:57 am) 204meca (Jul 03, 2009 11:55 am) gmginsfo (Jul 09, 2009 10:46 am) rsholland (Jul 09, 2009 11:31 am)
#100 of 692 Re: Driving the CVT vs. 6-speed manual [colloquor] by rsholland Jul 03, 2009 (5:27 am)
Replying to: colloquor (Jul 03, 2009 4:04 am) CVTs are actually older than you think—much older...   Leonardo da Vinci, in 1490, conceptualized a stepless continuously variable transmission.   http://auto.howstuffworks.com/cvt.htm   Bob Replies to this message: colloquor (Jul 03, 2009 8:57 am)
#101 of 692 Re: Driving the CVT vs. 6-speed manual [rsholland] by colloquor Jul 03, 2009 (8:57 am)
Replying to: rsholland (Jul 03, 2009 5:27 am) Yes, I was aware of Leonardo da Vinci's design, but I only wanted to refer to the "modern era" - if you will.
#102 of 692 Thoughts on how CVT fuel efficiency may have been achieved by seabrook7039 Jul 03, 2009 (9:52 am)
On the surface it's very surprising that the CVT could achieve significant fuel savings over a manual transmission. Usually automatics come at a lower savings, not higher, when compared to manuals. But one item in the specs listed on cars101 are the front/rear power distribution ratios. With the 6-speed manual "symmetrical viscous coupling 50/50 front/back power split" is listed. With the CVT "constantly varying front/back power split 90/10 front/back power split" is listed. I wonder if this difference in ratios allows the CVT-based engines to send less power thru the driveshaft and rear differential, a path which may offer inefficiencies over power that is directed to the front wheels? Replies to this message: rsholland (Jul 03, 2009 10:06 am)
#103 of 692 Re: Thoughts on how CVT fuel efficiency may have been achieved [seabrook703 by rsholland Jul 03, 2009 (10:06 am)
Replying to: seabrook7039 (Jul 03, 2009 9:52 am) The CVT uses the same AWD as did the older 4-speed automatic (4EAT), with the same front/rear power splits, and still gets better gas mileage.   Bob
#104 of 692 2010 Outback TV commercial by rsholland Jul 03, 2009 (10:07 am)
Saw it on TV last night. The theme was hand-me-downs, as in the younger child always getting stuff from older siblings and/or parents. Finally, towards the end the parents get a new Outback, and their old Outback gets handed down to this kid, suggesting that the kid will also get this 2010 Outback someday.   Bob
#105 of 692 Re: Driving the CVT vs. 6-speed manual [colloquor] by 204meca Jul 03, 2009 (11:55 am)
Replying to: colloquor (Jul 03, 2009 4:04 am) As has been said, the CVT is not new. I have had it in a Civic 97 HX and a 04 Audi A4. In terms of smoothness., power, & fuel efficiency the CVTit beats the snot out of any other transmission I have had. I love shifting a good manual (e.g. typical Honda, even Subaru) but fact is that the CVT is simply a better transmission. I never had any issues with mine & am not aware of problems with any manufacturers . Yes there are not millions & millions of them out there with 100,000 plus miles, but so far they appear to be very reliable.   Because of the fact that the CVT almost instantaneously takes a engine to its peak horsepower & torque & then stays there until one lets up on the gas, it sounds & feels odd.. But nothing does the job as well & it in 5 -10 years everyone will be used to it. I am still bemoaning the fact that the 2010 Forester does not have a CVT & may well buy a Outback instead solely for that reason. Replies to this message: gmginsfo (Jul 09, 2009 10:46 am) rsholland (Jul 09, 2009 11:31 am)

Messages Page 11 of 70 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 70 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Wagons Subaru Crew Subaru Legacy & Outback All-New 2010 Legacy/Outback?