2018 Subaru Outback

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: JTK
A cold start is an ugly sounding adventure, but doesn't prove to be detrimental based on history of how long these drivetrains can go.


A few people at work have FB25 foresters and they all have the 1 second knock on startup. Mine included.

 

[JTK]

Just experienced the other Subaru issue this AM. Subaru's terribly undersized toy battery.

My 2016 Forester had sat for about 2 days in 10-20degF temps and was covered under about a foot of snow. It almost didn't start!! The engine barely cranked and I tried long enough on the first attempt that the cranking basically slowed to a halt! I thought I was going to have to jump it, but on attempt #2, I cranked JUST enough to fire up. I've had real slow cranking in cold temps on my 2012 and 2014 Subarus as well with the factory battery, but this time it scared me.

I guess that's the price you pay for a reasonably priced, no frills AWD. Cheapo factory tires and battery. Problem is, if I paid $6K more for a "limited" with all the options, I'd be pi$$ed off for sure.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted By: JTK
Just experienced the other Subaru issue this AM. Subaru's terribly undersized toy battery.


Not sure which year they changed it, but, at least here in Canada, the new Foresters come with a larger battery for better cold-weather starting. Our 2015's battery failed last year and they gave us the new one under the warranty: AFAIR it has about 2x the CCA of the old one.

For that matter, our 2009 Civic's battery only lasted about four years here, too.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted By: 2dogs
It seems like the dealers are just interested in quick, unskilled maintenance things like oil changes, and over priced air and cabin filter changes.


Well, the CVT procedure seems to be pretty much drain it, fill it, do what the computer says for a few minutes, then charge $500 (mostly for the cost of the fluid). So there's probably not that much skilled work involved.

But the only Subaru CVT failures I've heard of so far were either due to factory defects or using the wrong fluid. And since Subaru just gave us a free five-year warranty extension on the CVT, I'm sure they'd be pushing dealers to change the fluid if they thought it was a good idea.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted By: mclasser
And do these cars still eat head gaskets?


FB25 no longer has coolant running through the head gaskets, so they can't fail the same way they used to. They could still leak between the cylinders, but I haven't heard of that happening.

 

[miden851]

Ah those 18 Outbacks are extremely nice; I may look into it when is time to replace my Mazda or we pay off our CRV

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: Balrog006
Simply because a system is simpler or less stressful on certain parts, or if it is somehow mechanically superior does not mean it PERFORMS better than other systems...
Actually, your Stability Control System (anti-skid) gets most of the credit for keeping cars from sliding off the road in slick conditions, not AWD performance. AWD is best at keeping you from getting stuck. The small performance benefit you get from AWD, in slick conditions, during power-on curves is where a distinction can be made in AWD systems. I wouldn't count out the GKN-brand systems in the Focus RS and Chevy Equinox, as it can torque-vector very quickly and effectively at speed.

Is Subaru as quick as GKN systems at optimizing traction around curves and up hills in AWD? Subaru hasn't innovated their systems enough in recent years, so I suspect they may have fallen slightly behind.

And running an AWD system full time, even in Summer on dry pavement? Idiocy. Wastes gas. Thats why its best to turn the AWD driveshaft off when not needed.

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Fuelly isn't that great for getting real world mileage for specific drivetrains in vehicles like the equinox because you can't filter by fwd or awd models. So you are comparing the average of fwd and awd Equinox to awd Outbacks.

Almost true; not quite. Remember the Equinox results on Fuelly for the 2018 models are for the GKN AWD which essentially makes ALL the Fuell.com results "FWD" since most people keep the AWD turned off! The point is, Subaru won't let you turn their AWD off & idle the driveshaft. So the results for Equinox are much more consistent than what you say. Also, EPA MPG on the FTP for the Equinox require the AWD to be "on" during the tests, not the way most people will run it, so the EPA doesn't show the gains for idling the driveshaft.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Subaru won't let you turn their AWD off


Buying a Subaru and turning off the AWD would be insane. You could buy an FWD Honda instead, and get a better interior, more gadgets, better reliability, lower maintenance cost and better fuel economy, all for the same price.

AWD is what makes Subaru's market. If you don't want it on all the time, you're looking at the wrong vehicle.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: emg
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Subaru won't let you turn their AWD off

AWD is what makes Subaru's market. If you don't want it on all the time, you're looking at the wrong vehicle.

You don't need AWD on dry roads. Bottom line.
If you always run on very wet and icy, snowy roads, then yes, permanent AWD makes sense.
I could just pour gasoline on the ground, just as wasteful as churning AWD systems when not needed.
And you're right, an AWD system that won't turn off means the vehicle is wrong.

 

[gofast182]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Subaru is a great car and as a AWD vehicle superior to others except some Audi to which it is equal. Honda isn't in the same class in any regard, Toyota at least has build quality, Honda couldn't build a high quality AWD golf cart IMO.

Let's not be dumb here. I don't have anything against Subaru except their interiors tend to be low-rent and occasional false delusions of grandeur from fans re: their AWD system (that's not to say it isn't very good, because it is).

-First, I'd put Acura's SH-AWD up against any system in terms of real-world benefit and all-around performance (including dry weather). SH-AWD has also trickled down to Honda models like the Pilot and Ridgeline under a different name. It has true torque vectoring and there was a period of time when it was more advanced than what Audi was doing.
-Backward from there, there was nothing wrong with the VTM-4 system which could send 70% of power to the rear and let you lock the rear diff. up to 25mph.
-Back from that, Real-Time AWD is now a proactive always-on system instead of the old vacuum actuated slip-to-grip (pre-2012).

We used to have a '10 CR-V with the old vacuum-actuated system and I took it out after a 30" blizzard (almost exactly 7 years ago) that I had no business being out in, when most roads were still closed and all manner of vehicles were stuck and abandoned. Now, some of you might think that I immediately got stuck and had to be towed out by some super friendly guy in a flannel shirt driving a 1992 Legacy handed down to him from his father, but I didn't!

And those weren't the worst of the conditions, they're the ones I could take the time to photograph. And remember, that was 2010 with an 'inferior' system. All systems are better now (yes we do have Subaru to thank for that in some cases). So in 2017/2018 I don't think anyone NEEDS a Subaru for AWD, particularly if other manufacturers can offer you similar performance and reliability but with a better interior, for example.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: gofast182
Now, some of you might think that I immediately got stuck and had to be towed out by some super friendly guy in a flannel shirt driving a 1992 Legacy handed down to him from his father, but I didn't!
Stereotyped Subaru owners. I understand. They don't ALL wear flannel. ... There for a while, Martina Navratilova (famous for tennis and her girlfriends) did Subaru commercials and wooed women of a certain orientation to gravitate to Subarus, allegedly..... So they say. I dunno.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads14/forester1228150044.jpg

Originally Posted By: gofast182
So in 2017/2018 I don't think anyone NEEDS a Subaru for AWD, particularly if other manufacturers can offer you similar performance and reliability but with a better interior, for example.
Subaru's aren't bad, but the choices have expanded, its true. They no longer are the 'best' in most categories. They used to be.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: gofast182



-Back from that, Real-Time AWD is now a proactive always-on system instead of the old vacuum actuated slip-to-grip (pre-2012).

We used to have a '10 CR-V with the old vacuum-actuated system

Honda's RT4WD system isn't vacuum-operated, it's a hydromechanical system that doesn't use electronics(like most FWD-based AWD systems, VTM-4 is electromechanical). It's mechanically complex when you learn about it - but it's simple in how it operates. VTM uses electronics to engage the rear diff, SH-AWD builds on that with torque vectoring - something that was only found in high-end AWD systems and the new Range Rover.

Subaru's AWD system is probably the best system when it comes to integration and efficiency - the only other system that can match it is non-Haldex based Audi Quattro based on a longitudinally-oriented ZF tranny. Subaru designs their drivetrains in-house, while traditional Audi Quattro was closely designed with ZF.

Toyota and Land Rover have good 4WD systems, the latter did design all sorts of electronic helpers into their latest iteration.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: gofast182
Now, some of you might think that I immediately got stuck and had to be towed out by some super friendly guy in a flannel shirt driving a 1992 Legacy handed down to him from his father, but I didn't!
Stereotyped Subaru owners. I understand. They don't ALL wear flannel. ... There for a while, Martina Navratilova (famous for tennis and her girlfriends) did Subaru commercials and wooed women of a certain orientation to gravitate to Subarus, allegedly..... So they say. I dunno.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads14/forester1228150044.jpg

Originally Posted By: gofast182
So in 2017/2018 I don't think anyone NEEDS a Subaru for AWD, particularly if other manufacturers can offer you similar performance and reliability but with a better interior, for example.
Subaru's aren't bad, but the choices have expanded, its true. They no longer are the 'best' in most categories. They used to be.


Subaru was able to capitalize on a certain demographic - they wanted something "outdoorsy" that wasn't a truck. Ski bums and snowboarders love them too, go to a ski report and you'll see clapped out Loyales and Legacies parked next to Range Rovers and Escalades that only see mall or soccer duty.

Saab was able to target their audience as well, but the Prius if it wasn't for cabbies and Uber is the new Saab.

Subaru's gotten better - but their dealer experience sucks, granted you're not buying a Lexus where the dealer staff bows to every need but my friend hates his dealer. They still have some quality/F&F issues, Subaru for a while was equal to Nissan but not on the same level as Toyota or Honda.

 

[gofast182]

Originally Posted By: nthach
Originally Posted By: gofast182



-Back from that, Real-Time AWD is now a proactive always-on system instead of the old vacuum actuated slip-to-grip (pre-2012).

We used to have a '10 CR-V with the old vacuum-actuated system

Honda's RT4WD system isn't vacuum-operated, it's a hydromechanical system that doesn't use electronics(like most FWD-based AWD systems, VTM-4 is electromechanical). It's mechanically complex when you learn about it - but it's simple in how it operates. VTM uses electronics to engage the rear diff, SH-AWD builds on that with torque vectoring - something that was only found in high-end AWD systems and the new Range Rover.

Subaru's AWD system is probably the best system when it comes to integration and efficiency - the only other system that can match it is non-Haldex based Audi Quattro based on a longitudinally-oriented ZF tranny. Subaru designs their drivetrains in-house, while traditional Audi Quattro was closely designed with ZF.

Toyota and Land Rover have good 4WD systems, the latter did design all sorts of electronic helpers into their latest iteration.

I didn't say vacuum operated I said vacuum actuated, dual vacuum actuated hydraulic pumps to be more specific. Its simplicity was one of its greatest virtues but it's a moot point because Real-Time AWD is currently a more modern electronically controlled system, still not quite as robust as VTM-4 although it benefits from better integration with the vehicle stability system.
Subaru's systems are good, no doubt, but there are integration compromises in transverse v. longitudinal layout.
Correct re: Audi; many people don't realize that some variants of Audi's system are a result of heavy outside help.
Many people also don't realize that you're not necessarily getting the exact same AWD system even if it falls under the brand's trademark name. This includes Audi Quattro, Subaru Symmetrical..., BMW xDrive, and Mercedes 4matic among others. Depending on the platform and model it can vary from a transverse/FWD based slip-to-grip system to a proactive system with true torque vectoring (not just brake vectoring) and still wear the brand's moniker.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: gofast182
Depending on the platform and model it can vary from a transverse/FWD based slip-to-grip system to a proactive system with true torque vectoring (not just brake vectoring) and still wear the brand's moniker.

And that's what the automakers have been doing lately is using the ABS/ESP system to brake individual wheels to serve as an "e-locker" or to transfer torque to a wheel that isn't slipping without the need for a LSD/true vectoring setup. Toyota's guilty of this, but from what I've read the Range Rover Evoque also uses ABS/ESP intervention to mimic the Terrain Response system used in the "real" Rovers.

BMW's first iteration of xDrive was pretty close to what the Escalade and Navigator had - automatic, 1-speed transfer case. It might still be the case today(as well with 4Matic and what Lexus uses in the IS/GS/LS).

 

[bluesubie]

Originally Posted By: mclasser
I'm in the market for a new car and am looking at the '18 Outback 2.5i Premium. It seems to be a good value car and the 4WD system is well-suited for my neck of the woods. As a BITOGer, I'm naturally into maintenance and I literally jumped in my chair when I saw the oil filter was located right the at top of the engine bay

. I perused the manual and it takes 5.1 qts of 0w20 full syn, which is nice since that's what my Pilot takes as well. It has a CVT which I believe requires a drain & fill @60k.

I don't have any experience with Subarus. I read the CVTs are better designed than before. How true is this? And do these cars still eat head gaskets? How is Subaru reliability in relation to Honda & Toyota? I buy my cars to drive into the ground so dependability is a must.

The biggest complaint that I hear about on the 18's is the infotainment system. This is actually affecting some "reliability" polls and you can read more at subaruoutback.org. Check out the Gen 5 Model Forum.

When I went to a Subaru dealer a few weeks ago to pick up a part (not even my regular dealer), the parts manager actually told me that they've seen lots of issues with them but when they fix them once the owners no longer have the same problems. I believe that they just do software updates to fix freezing screens, etc.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
You don't need AWD on dry roads. Bottom line.


No, but it's nice to have. It's handy to be able to kick the Forester down a few gears and push power to the rear wheels on sharp corners.

Quote:
If you always run on very wet and icy, snowy roads, then yes, permanent AWD makes sense.


If you don't regularly drive on those kind of roads, a Subaru is probably the wrong vehicle for you.