I know there was a thread about Legacies a while ago - but does anyone have any info on real world difference between the 2.0 aqnd 2.5 engines - performance/economy wise.
Had a go in both today and have to admit that the difference in performance wasn't as much as I thought it would be. Wouldn't need to tow or anything.
Cheers.
|
My Subaru experience is of Foresters and a friend in an Outback 3.0.
The real world economy we both get is about 10% more than the Urban mpg figures and we each have totally different driving regimes. He does lots of fast motorway work and I am mainly suburban driving.
--
Espada III - well if you have a family and need a Lamborghini, what else do you drive?
|
|
I have a W plate 2 litre Legacy, now coming up to 100k and my wife gets around 30-32 mpg on mainly long journeys. I get significantly less! Sorry, no experience of the 2.5. Looks a fair bit more pokey on paper.
|
I've got a 2004 Outback 2.5 SE.
Test drove a demonstrator Tourer with the 2.0 engine and then test drove the Outback (which only comes with 2,5 or 3.0).
I am averaging 30mpg. This week on a trip to the Lakes I averaged 38 whereas round town it is more like 28.
Compared to the 2.0 I drove there is more grunt, the engine feels smoother and there does not seem to be a massive difference in economy (on paper at least).
Might be like the BMW 520 - 525 issue where the smaller engine has to lug round more weight.
I love my Outback and would recommend anything Subaru - great cars and easy, friendly dealers. None of this 'rip-off' feeling, no breakdowns - just a great car doing it's job without fuss.
jdc
|
I'll second the comments about the dealers. I've just had the cambelt changed. As the dealer is about 40 mins from my house I arranged for it to be first in the workshop and I'd kill the 2 hours it took for the job to be done wandering around Horncastle. When I booked it in, I offered the VIN but they said the parts were always kept in stock, so no need. However, when they came to fit the new belt, they didn't have the correct belt. Profuse apologies, admission that they should have checked the VIN, keys to a courtesy car and my car delivered to my house later in the afternoon. They had quoted me £210, bill was £205. So despite an initial minor cock-up, well done Chandlers of Horncastle.
I did ask about tensioner changing, they said they'd never had one fail but checked it anyway. All ok.
|
|
|
|
|
2002 Legacy Tourer 2.5 GX 36,000 trouble free miles. Feels like new, dealer great, try to get the top spec version with leather and auto box to enjoy the maximim feel good factor. Mine is dark gree and neighbours admire the car. Bought second hand at two years for less thn half new cost. 2 ltre - feel the difference on steep hills and when overtaking. Spare parts prices recently reduced by a significant amount. Planning to swop wifes Peugeot for an Imprezza (non turbo)
|
AKS
As well as my Outback, my wife has an Impreza 2.0 Sport. Cracking little car with fantastic handling, often overlooked because of the Turbo, but in my opinion (and being a former owner) it handles better than the Turbo. Amazing grip with reasonable power = lots of smiles :-)
I've had 7 different Subaru over the years and it seems as though we inhabit a different world to the majority of car owners. OK, so fuel ecomony is not brilliant, but then we don't have to put up with intransigent dealers, worrying breakdowns, engine failures, rattly trim and so on.
As an example (and I've posted this before), after we got my wifes car, the imobiliser and alarm started going haywire because of a new transmitter at the hospital where she works. Mentioned it to local Subaru garage who said "Bring it in and we'll change the transponder thingymijiggy on the alarm/immboliser". I'm starting to see Pounds signs everywhere but they said "Don't worry, you've just bought the car so we'll do it for free"
It might not have cost them a lot in Pounds but it certainly gave me the feeling of receiving good service. They could easily have charged.
I can report many other similar good things that made my switch to VW a couple of years all the more ludicrous. A Passat Tdi was a pain in the neck, it leaked, it broke down, the turbo went and the dealers couldn't give a stuff.
Strangely enough I went back to Subaru where a warm glow of contentment came over me ......... (steady now .....)
Without being smug, it makes funny-interesting reading when you read the horror stories on this site and others.
jdc
|
|
So if there's only mpg to bother anyone, why no diesel? I know the Subaru boxer engine is supposed to be great but 30 mpg is low nowadays, especially if you're a 15000+ miles a year person. All the other Japanese have finally cottoned onto diesels (and even Jaguar/Ford), when will Subaru?
|
|
Diesel coming...........but not till 2008 apparently!!
|
|
The trade/retail figures in Glasses guide seem to be far below what Dealers are asking, around £3-4'000 . It's very difficult to see what you should be paying and also to estimate future values.
|
|
|
|
So if there's only mpg to bother anyone, why no diesel? I know the Subaru boxer engine is supposed to be great but 30 mpg is low nowadays, especially if you're a 15000+ miles a year person. All the other Japanese have finally cottoned onto diesels (and even Jaguar/Ford), when will Subaru?
Part of the pleasure and uniqueness is the boxer engine. It isn't supposed to be great, it is. If you're worried about mpg, don't buy one. I hope Subaru don't ruin their cars in the pusuit of market share although I appreciate they have to sell cars not just keep happy those of us who have found the best fun for the money.
|
|
My dad has a 2001 outback h6 and it is very fast and has had minimal trouble in over 70k. The only minor thing is I think the 4 speed auto lets the engine down a bit, it takes too long to kick down when you wants to overtake etc. I've driven the new version with the 5 speed auto and I think it is better. We get over 30mpg on a run and seem to get late 20s the rest of the time which is good considering the performance on tap. I seem to remember when we were buying it that the dealer mentioned in practice the 3 litre is more economical than the 2.5. Can't comment on the 2 or 2.5 litres though but we test drove a 2 litre and it was no slouch, we've also found the dealers to be excellent.
|
"...in practice the 3 litre is more economical than the 2.5."
This is not correct. When I bought my Outback 2.5 SE, I had a run in a 3.0 Saloon just to see the difference in performance.
The performance certainly was better, but the average ecomony was showing at 21pmg. The rep running the 3.0 as a demo was very clear in saying that the 2.5 offers the best compromise in econony / performance.
I know I have mentioned in this thread that the 2.5 is probably not much more thirsty then the 2.0, but this does not seem to extrapolate to the 3.0.
Like Nick says, if you are overly concerned about mpg, then Subaru should be avoided. I like them because they drive well, are built well, the dealers are good and they are slightly different. That's why I like my Mac compared to my PC.
jdc
|
|
|
|
|
|
