Subaru Crosstrek

[buster]

Link

This crossover is really well priced IMO. A bit underpowered, but you can't find a better AWD vehicle for this price IMO. I've been searching Subs for the last month and there a chance I may just wait a year and pick one of these up.




I posted this before. Interestingly enough, most buyers of the Crosstrek prefer the CVT transmission over the manual. Pro manual people too. Said it works better.

 

[SLCraig]

I think it's a Shame Subaru still makes logical well performing vehicles, with 1 major flaw... (subjective) They are hideous.

I technically like that vehicle but could never own one, it is just terrible looking.

 

[buster]

I hear you. Their designs are really weird. I give them credit for not following the trends, but from a design perspective they do seem to be lacking.

 

[Bottom_Feeder]

It would be at the top of my list if it had more power. 148 hp from 2.0 litres for a vehicle that size just isn't nearly enough.

 

[Nick R]

I dunno what you are talking about. I think that car is very nice looking in person. I see one regularly in Albany around where I work, and I hink it is a very sharp looking car.

JMO, though.

 

[Hokiefyd]

I like it a lot. I'd be interested in owning one.

How much does a Crosstrek weigh? In my opinion 150 hp from a smooth 4-cylinder in a small crossover like this isn't unreasonable. I own what is often claimed to be one of the most underpowered SUVs available, yet 166 hp seems to move our CR-V just fine. I used to own large low-revving V-8 engines, but they just didn't excite me. I now prefer lower power engines that rev more in daily driving; I like to hear the engine rev; I like to know that it's working. A V-8 (or any engine) that never crosses 2,000 rpm on a daily commute doesn't interest me.

 

[gathermewool]

Originally Posted By: buster
Link

This crossover is really well priced IMO. A bit underpowered, but you can't find a better AWD vehicle for this price IMO.


It's essentially a lifted Impreza with a body kit. If you don't need the light-off-roading capability or increased ride height (and associated sacrifice in ride quality,) would like a few more MPG, AND would like to save a few grand, then an Impreza is your best bet.

I admit that the Crosstrek does look much cooler, though!

Edit: there are other differences (re: off-roading ability) such as the purported stiffer chassis, different wheels, etc., but if you're looking for more real-world, NOT-off-roading practicality, then the Forester or Outback would be a better move than the Crosstrek, IMO.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
I now prefer lower power engines that rev more in daily driving; I like to hear the engine rev; I like to know that it's working. A V-8 (or any engine) that never crosses 2,000 rpm on a daily commute doesn't interest me.


I have to wonder if it's not better for the engine too. I mean, it's more likely to get wrung out on occasion; and it seems few engines mind having Italian tuneups.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

I think this is the only recent subaru that doesn't look butt-ugly. Their early 00s stuff looked nice, but then they seemed to make their cars look like bugs.

$21K for a manual trans hatchback is a bit, but it is AWD.

 

[Quattro Pete]

I'm not feeling the exterior, personally. Reminds me of the Aztek.

 

[kkreit01]

I like them. For me, it looks better than any new Honda.

 

[whip]

I don't understand the sudden "need" for AWD. How did we manage before that option was so widely available?

 

[zloveraz]

Originally Posted By: whip
I don't understand the sudden "need" for AWD. How did we manage before that option was so widely available?


Didn't you watch the video? We drove Land Rovers!

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: whip
I don't understand the sudden "need" for AWD. How did we manage before that option was so widely available?


We don't "need" a lot of things. Subaru at least makes an AWD worth having, unlike the gimmicky others.

I wouldn't mind having AWD for snow/sand.

 

[gathermewool]

Originally Posted By: whip
I don't understand the sudden "need" for AWD. How did we manage before that option was so widely available?


How did we manage before motor-driven vehicles? A horse provides adequate around-town mobility AND a bit of companionship on the long hauls! AWP is where it was and still should be, I'm telling you!

 

[artificialist]

Originally Posted By: whip
I don't understand the sudden "need" for AWD. How did we manage before that option was so widely available?

I never needed to have AWD in my car, I just wanted something that was not FWD.

I have AWD only for the purpose of making my car more fun to drive.