Page 5 of 28 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 500 of 2781
  1. #401
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fat Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Sti2relaxxin
    Subies are great daily drivers. Reliability is standard in all models. If I remember correctly each model gets a check mark as a recommended vehicle by consumer reports. Also, just about every model line offers an XT model which is turbo charged and very powerful. Subies offer a very unique driving experience as you've noticed and have a very devout following; similar to Volvo. Not to mention Subaru is at the forefront of all wheel drive technology (right there with Audi). The only negative is that you will never find the super quality interiors in any Subaru that you can find in Audi, BMW, Mercedes, VW, etc. Hope this helps!
    That does help, thank you. On day two of loanerville took my daughter to the park, again it's the little things. The turning radius on the Forester is super tight, I was able to fit in a super tight parking space, couldn't believe how easy it is to drive for a tall mediumish sized vehicle. The Forester is about the same size as my wife's Jeep, but doesn't feel like it's going to tip over in a turn and doesn't skate all over the road. It has good ground clearance but handles well. I should get rid of the wife's Jeep and replace it with a Forester so far I really like the car.

    I'm not a big fan of turbo cars. Just more to break IMO. As I age, I don't need to go that fast, as long as I can get out of the way and get on and off of highway's I'm fine.

    The one downshot I noticed today is while there is ample cabin room for driver and passengers, the cargo area is a little small for such a big vehicle... still beats the wife's Jeep. I was a little disapointed. Do many Forester owners carry their bikes inside the vehicle? Can you fit your bikes inside w/out laying them down flat? I'd love to see some bikes inside using a fork mount or the like.

  2. #402
    MTB Newbie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    574
    ^^ The point of a turbo is efficiency and not all-out power. While cruising you're not using the turbo, but if you need to speed up to merge or pass the turbo spools up only when you need it, so it only sucks gas with a heavy foot, otherwise it's a sipping miser I have a 2 liter turbo Subaru that gets better mileage than 3 liter v6 cars and it's also more powerful. Just look at how many European economy cars have turbos; it's for efficiency mainly.

  3. #403
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,158
    I've had turbos on lots of cars. Never had a maintenance problem with a single one. The main thing is to change oil at proper intervals.

    Right now, my wife's SUV has twin turbos (volvo xc90). Zero problems, great performance. The car has other issues not related to the turbos at all but that's another whole story.

    I'd not think twice about a car with a turbo. It's not exactly a new technology either - well understood and well rendered.

    j.

  4. #404
    550
    550 is offline
    newble
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    243
    Only cars I have ever changed turbos on are the ones that were running 21+ psi. And that is because that specific turbo wasn't designed for that. Right now I have a turbo car with 146k miles on it. It sees 15 psi regularly. When it was only intended for 7- 8 psi. Runs stellar! (not subie, but turbo in general.)

  5. #405
    MTB Newbie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    574
    Turbos have been used in airplanes, boats, trains, etc. since the 1920's. They're normally used in EU on small displacement motors to sip gas when not needed but still be efficient even under boost. Turbos are very fascinating, and I hope more automakers return to the days of yore with more turbo'd cars.

  6. #406
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    69
    I believe vw have a compound charged car, 1.4 turbo/supercharged very good on the mpg yet bonkers on performance when need be.

    Aah here we go, 167hp from a 1.4

    http://www.channel4.com/4car/di/volkswagen/golf/2694/1

  7. #407
    550
    550 is offline
    newble
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    243
    The mini's were supposed to be compound charged at one time. I guess it never came to fruition. :-/

  8. #408
    MTB Newbie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    574
    Why the hell don't all these car companies with the small-motor diesel and gas cars bring some of their offerings to the USA? The cars we have here all get crap gas mileage.

    The common American needs to get over the assumption that all diesels are clunky soot machines that puff black smoke and are only for semi trucks.

  9. #409
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,671
    Quote Originally Posted by Superorb
    Why the hell don't all these car companies with the small-motor diesel and gas cars bring some of their offerings to the USA? The cars we have here all get crap gas mileage.

    The common American needs to get over the assumption that all diesels are clunky soot machines that puff black smoke and are only for semi trucks.
    For the last time: Because they didn't meet emissions requirements. The US isn't the last in everything, we've had some stringent requirements, and while we could have done better in terms of trucks and other vehicles, at least it's a starting point. Only in the last 1-2 years have they made anything that is capable of passing our current requirements. Just because you don't see any "soot" doesn't mean they are clean.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  10. #410
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,671
    Quote Originally Posted by Superorb
    Turbos have been used in airplanes, boats, trains, etc. since the 1920's. They're normally used in EU on small displacement motors to sip gas when not needed but still be efficient even under boost. Turbos are very fascinating, and I hope more automakers return to the days of yore with more turbo'd cars.
    I have plenty of direct experience with turbos in aviation.

    For the most part, they are not worth it due to the fuel consumption and rebuild cost. Where they come into their own is at high altitude cruise, but you have to climb all the way to get there, burning a lot more fuel than a normally aspirated engine of the same size, so unless you're going long distances above 14,000', it's not worth it at all. As an example, a new Cessna 182 turbo has 235hp around 14000, cruises around 150kt at around 20,000', but at lower altitudes due to the fact that it has fixed gear there's a lot of drag and getting around 130-140 is about the max, as you go lower in altitude it's even lower. I fly a normally aspirated cessna 182 retractable-gear model and it's a far better aircraft. Cruises 155-159kt most of the time, and while it can't reach 20,000 feet, it can do that speed at 8000-12000' or so, which is much more practical and economical. We are burning somewhere around 10-11gph with the same engine that is burning 20gph (turbo) or more under similer circumstances. You burn a lot more fuel in many phases of flight, such as takeoff where turbo airplanes have to be full "rich" and dump in tons of fuel to cool the engine and turbo, which is just money flying out your exhaust.

    Nothing is free, and with an aircraft it takes quite a bit of fuel to cool everything adequately, not very efficient.

    Unless you are really going to do only long trips, you're going to lose money with a turbo airplane, but yeah, it will be faster at high altitude where it can make constant power (compared to sea-level). Then add to this the cost of overhaul/rebuild on a turbo-engine, super expensive.

    Otherwise, turbos have been used in a lot of WWII aircraft obviously, but fuel usage didn't mean a damn thing. Getting to 30,000 feet quickly did though. Those fighter aircraft make insane amounts of boost pressure and will blow the cylinders right out if you are not carefull.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  11. #411
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,158
    Putting a turbo in an aircraft is not the problem at hand.

    J.

  12. #412
    550
    550 is offline
    newble
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    243
    True, there are some reliability differences between a turbocharged car engine and a turbocharged airplane engine ;-)

  13. #413
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,671
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnJ80
    Putting a turbo in an aircraft is not the problem at hand.

    J.
    Well, the comparission was made to cars, saying that since they put turbos in airplanes, they should put them in cars. There isn't any connection between the two. I have a turbo car and I like it.

    One of the problems with the statement was also "they sip gas when the turbo is not needed and are still efficient under boost". That isn't really true though, under boost even turbo cars pump WAY more fuel in there than needed for the correct mixture to provide cooling, otherwise it gets way too hot. What they do is allow you to have the power of a much larger engine when needed, and the fuel consumption of a smaller engine when that power is not needed, but under boost you're putting lots of gas in there.

    Turbo-diesels on the other hand are not so cut and dry, as the compression is needed for the engine. You can run into the same issues as above, but it's generally not the same as a turbo gas engine.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  14. #414
    550
    550 is offline
    newble
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    243
    In general, turbo cars when chipped do get 2-4MPG sometimes more because they run pretty rich from the MFR. When tuned to run a little on the lean side (more towards 14.7afr not really lean, just more "stoic") they will get better gas mileage and not really risk over heating the turbo, as most turbo charged cars (post 95) are water cooled as opposed to oil cooled.

    For instance, my 1998 turbo car has a water cooled turbo, and my 1984 car has an oil cooled turbo.

  15. #415
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,671
    Quote Originally Posted by 550
    In general, turbo cars when chipped do get 2-4MPG sometimes more because they run pretty rich from the MFR. When tuned to run a little on the lean side (more towards 14.7afr not really lean, just more "stoic") they will get better gas mileage and not really risk over heating the turbo, as most turbo charged cars (post 95) are water cooled as opposed to oil cooled.

    For instance, my 1998 turbo car has a water cooled turbo, and my 1984 car has an oil cooled turbo.
    Yeah, they run that rich for a reason, like I said, they require more fuel under boost (more than is just necessary for stoich). The reason you get better gas milege is that compared to a bigger engine of the same power, you aren't turning all those extra cylinders when you don't need the extra power. That's one of the biggest benefits of a turbo, although there are a few others.

    There's a lot more that you have to worry about than just overheating the turbo, there's the exhaust manifolds, EGT, any cats in there that might melt and throw peices into the exhaust turbine, there's heat-soak, and so on...I'm not saying a tuner can't change the manufacturer's setting and get a little more efficiency out of it, but again, they are rich for a reason. Race cars have bigger injectors to POUR tons of fuel in there, and when modifying a turbo-car for more boost pressure (higher performance) that's one of the most important things to consider. Otherwise you fry your engine and parts.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  16. #416
    550
    550 is offline
    newble
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    243
    Well in cars you don't run into the over heating turbo as much because of the advancements in water cooling in the CHRA of the turbo. I mean theoretically the CHRA will never get hotter than the engine cooling jacket itself. IF the cooling system is working properly.

    The leaner you run, yes the hotter things get but it isn't anything the cooling system can't handle unless you are running over 14.7AFR.

    Besides, don't planes run water injection for this reason?(Hot turbos)

  17. #417
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,671
    Quote Originally Posted by 550
    Well in cars you don't run into the over heating turbo as much because of the advancements in water cooling in the CHRA of the turbo. I mean theoretically the CHRA will never get hotter than the engine cooling jacket itself. IF the cooling system is working properly.

    The leaner you run, yes the hotter things get but it isn't anything the cooling system can't handle unless you are running over 14.7AFR.

    Besides, don't planes run water injection for this reason?(Hot turbos)
    Supercharged planes have run water injection (the only ones flying now are old post-WWII ones converted into firebombers for the most part)

    Anyways, I like turbos and what they do, turbo-diesel engines do work pretty good, we probably need a lot MORE turbo cars and SUVs. I don't think that just because they work in one area (planes) that they'll work great in cars. A turbo engine is only more efficient than some NA engines that are of the same power, but bigger displacement. That's where the turbo comes into it's own, on the other hand if your honda civic uses a 2.0L engine and 140hp, the only way a turbo would make sense would be if you somehow made a 140hp 1.0L turbo-engine, but then the parts, materials and cost of that setup would be higher and it wouldn't net you much better fuel efficiency. During the time when you don't need 140hp or much boost, it might save some gas, but at that point I don't think it's going to add up to much (to offset the design/materials cost). On the other hand, if you wanted 300hp, taking a 2.0L engine and making it a turbo engine would probably be a lot better than a 300hp V8, be much more fuel efficient, but again, the car doesn't need 300hp. For gas engines it seems that it only makes sense when looking at applications that require a lot of power.

    You keep mentioning the cooling system, and that is great for the engine block and turbo, but it ain't going to do anything to keep the EGT down when you lean the mixture out a bunch. I get lots of direct experience with this in aircraft. Mixture mostly controls EGT, while airflow mainly controls the cylinder head temperature. For a automotive engine it would be the radiator obviously keeping the cylinders/engine block cool, but leaning out the mixture a lot can have a pretty huge effect on EGT.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  18. #418
    MTB Newbie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    574
    While your experience in aircraft is great, I was only using airplanes, boats, trains, etc to state that turbos have been around a long time. The pros/cons of a turbo in an aircraft has almost no bearing on the pros/cons in an automobile unless one sprouts wings and flies away.

  19. #419
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fat Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,661
    Got the call from the dealer today, looks like I'll get to play with the Subie until next week. Took my bike (inside) to the trail today, not impressed with interior space. My Avant has more room front to rear, but not as much head room. The sunroof on this thing is as big as Texas, a plus for sure in my book. Also, now that I've had to put my foot in it a little in "spirited" driving, I think a manual trans is needed, the auto just makes me want an extra little umph in the revs. Mileage is pretty good for a vehicle it's size. The wife's jeep gets ~15-16 this is sits ~25 in mixed driving.

    Fun little car. Would be even more fun with a standard gear box for sure.

  20. #420
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    86

    Two Subarus

    I own two outback wagons, a 2000 and a 2005 XT. I love the turbo outback cuz it's a sleeper. Both have Yakama roof racks and trailer hitches for other bike racks. Great cars if you don't have to haul 4000 lbs of hay up to the high pasture, which I don't.

  21. #421
    MTB Newbie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Bob
    Got the call from the dealer today, looks like I'll get to play with the Subie until next week. Took my bike (inside) to the trail today, not impressed with interior space. My Avant has more room front to rear, but not as much head room. The sunroof on this thing is as big as Texas, a plus for sure in my book. Also, now that I've had to put my foot in it a little in "spirited" driving, I think a manual trans is needed, the auto just makes me want an extra little umph in the revs. Mileage is pretty good for a vehicle it's size. The wife's jeep gets ~15-16 this is sits ~25 in mixed driving.

    Fun little car. Would be even more fun with a standard gear box for sure.
    The last body style Foresters you could get in a manual with or without the turbo which is basically a slightly detuned STi motor; the same is true for the Legacy GT and Outback XT. I don't like the look of the new Foresters, but the 2010 Outback is growing on me.

  22. #422
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fat Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Superorb
    The last body style Foresters you could get in a manual with or without the turbo which is basically a slightly detuned STi motor; the same is true for the Legacy GT and Outback XT. I don't like the look of the new Foresters, but the 2010 Outback is growing on me.

    So, the 09 and 10 Foresters do not give you the option of a manual gear box? WTF!!!! Thank you stupid American drivers. You're too lazy and dumb to learn how to drive a manual, plus you couldn't email, and eat McDonalds w/out that Auto trans.... So I'd have to buy a used Subaru or Stick with the German cars.

  23. #423
    skobiken
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    133
    You can't get a manual AND the turbo. You can get a manual with the NA engine though.

  24. #424
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,671
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Bob
    So, the 09 and 10 Foresters do not give you the option of a manual gear box? WTF!!!! Thank you stupid American drivers. You're too lazy and dumb to learn how to drive a manual, plus you couldn't email, and eat McDonalds w/out that Auto trans.... So I'd have to buy a used Subaru or Stick with the German cars.
    This is of course correct. The new forester is a different car than the previous generation, it's more of a small SUV than a car. It would be nice to have the turbo, but the old XT was much more of a car. The new one has great rear legroom, but it's simply a different vehicle. I have mixed feelings about cars like the Legacy XT/Outback XT/Forester XT. Unless they come with at least 6 speeds, they are fuel-hogs. I would buy a WRX/STI because they are much more specialized, lighter cars, better aerodynamics, so even though you are running a turbo and AWD, it's not that bad. With those other cars you're moving more mass, you have AWD, you have the turbo, and so on. Unless one lives at high altitude in nasty (snow) conditions, I'd steer away from those. Worst of all is the 4spd forester with the turbo, but I don't think a 5 speed legacy is far behind. I like the legacy 3.0R and we had an outback with the 3.0 engine, but I'm just not a fan of the 2.5 turbo in the bigger cars, it just sucks gas like crazy and I'd have to think with a heavier car you'd be using that turbo-range more.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  25. #425
    mtbr member
    Reputation: paintballeerXC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,974
    getting a new engine in my 97 outback right now. head casgette cracked and getting it fixed

    other than the fact that the old engines are not that great love the car. Any bad news on the newer subi's?

  26. #426
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8
    '83 GL (my 2nd) lots of bondo, 4 speed and compound low for hill climbs

    '94 Loyale replaced the '93 that I rolled in KS smokes and keeps on going (175K miles) 0-60 in about 18 seconds

    our "new" '97 Outback

    coming from late 70's/early '80's VW bus/411/Scirocco and '72 Bimmer 2002 (miss that car), Suby's are just fine

  27. #427
    SLO Mtn biker!
    Reputation: Zuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by paintballeerXC
    getting a new engine in my 97 outback right now. head casgette cracked and getting it fixed

    other than the fact that the old engines are not that great love the car. Any bad news on the newer subi's?
    That does not sound like a minor deal!
    My sister had it happen twice on her 97 Legacy GT wagon and I hear others on the forums talking about the same problem...

    I sat in the new 2010 Outback and really like it, but hearing these type of things gives me pause...

  28. #428
    mtbr member
    Reputation: paintballeerXC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,974
    Quote Originally Posted by Zuke
    That does not sound like a minor deal!
    My sister had it happen twice on her 97 Legacy GT wagon and I hear others on the forums talking about the same problem...

    I sat in the new 2010 Outback and really like it, but hearing these type of things gives me pause...

    has anyone heard about newer models having engine problems like the 90's did ?

  29. #429
    MTB Newbie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    574
    The older engines had head gasket problems, but SOA released a coolant additive that greatly reduced the HG problems in older motors.

    The only problems were in 08 and a few early 09 WRX's that would spin a rod bearing in under 3k miles. If you made it that far you were fine. All their other cars are great.

  30. #430
    TR
    TR is offline
    Angry bunny
    Reputation: TR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,886
    Just picked this one up this week.
    Replaced my Ford XR5 turbo which was completely useless for carting bikes.
    JUst need to get some better bike racks as the Rhino's I have dont clamp to the cross bars securely as I would like. Any suggestions as to what brand does work with the Subaru cross bars??


  31. #431
    MTB Newbie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    574
    ^^ Thule and Yakima both have brackets that will work with factory aero bars.

  32. #432
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fat Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,661
    I finally got my Avant back... kinda sad to give up the Forester. For a tall SUV like vehicle with a small engine it did everything I asked of it without hesitation. In the 3 weeks I had the car I put 3k miles on it Took my daughter camping with my bike, her bike, and a weekends worth of camping gear all inside. If I owned the Forester I would have to have a manual gear box for sure. I'd also have to put a hitch rack on it. Outside of that I really enjoyed driving the car. I'm guessing I'd like the Outback a touch more as it's a lot closer to my Audi size wise, and bet it handles pretty well. While I'd love a 300bhp WRX STI, I need more inside room with a wife, a daughter and 140#'s worth of dogs... Anyone have the new body Outback? Do they make the outback with a 4cyl & manual gear box?

  33. #433
    TR
    TR is offline
    Angry bunny
    Reputation: TR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Superorb
    ^^ Thule and Yakima both have brackets that will work with factory aero bars.
    Many thanks.
    So the newer Thule racks will work or do I need to look for an older model??

  34. #434
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Bob
    I finally got my Avant back... kinda sad to give up the Forester. For a tall SUV like vehicle with a small engine it did everything I asked of it without hesitation. In the 3 weeks I had the car I put 3k miles on it Took my daughter camping with my bike, her bike, and a weekends worth of camping gear all inside. If I owned the Forester I would have to have a manual gear box for sure. I'd also have to put a hitch rack on it. Outside of that I really enjoyed driving the car. I'm guessing I'd like the Outback a touch more as it's a lot closer to my Audi size wise, and bet it handles pretty well. While I'd love a 300bhp WRX STI, I need more inside room with a wife, a daughter and 140#'s worth of dogs... Anyone have the new body Outback? Do they make the outback with a 4cyl & manual gear box?
    I have decent seat time in them, as I sell them. If you have an Audi wagon and enjoyed the Forester, you would likely love the '10 Outback. They did a fantastic job with that redesign (although the looks took some time before growing on me).

    They do make the 170hp 4 cylinder with a 6 speed manual box. However, the new chain-driven CVT (don't knock this CVT until you tried it CVT-haters) is fantastic, and it's about a second quicker to 60 mph compared to the manual box, while getting a bit better fuel mileage.

    The upgraded engine would be a 3.6L 6 cylinder with about 250hp, with 5 speed automatic.

    I am a die-hard stick shift driver, but the new CVT took away two of my supporting arguments for stick shifts (better fuel economy and acceleration). And I think a 5 speed like last generation is a better mate to the 4 cylinder than the 6 speed, but it's ok. We're very impressed with both the CVT's it's construction and performance though, it's truly changing peoples minds about automatic boxes and CVTs.

  35. #435
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fat Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,661
    Quote Originally Posted by XJaredX
    I have decent seat time in them, as I sell them. If you have an Audi wagon and enjoyed the Forester, you would likely love the '10 Outback. They did a fantastic job with that redesign (although the looks took some time before growing on me).

    They do make the 170hp 4 cylinder with a 6 speed manual box. However, the new chain-driven CVT (don't knock this CVT until you tried it CVT-haters) is fantastic, and it's about a second quicker to 60 mph compared to the manual box, while getting a bit better fuel mileage.

    The upgraded engine would be a 3.6L 6 cylinder with about 250hp, with 5 speed automatic.

    I am a die-hard stick shift driver, but the new CVT took away two of my supporting arguments for stick shifts (better fuel economy and acceleration). And I think a 5 speed like last generation is a better mate to the 4 cylinder than the 6 speed, but it's ok. We're very impressed with both the CVT's it's construction and performance though, it's truly changing peoples minds about automatic boxes and CVTs.
    Good to know, thanks. I have 3 or 4 dealerships close to me, so I'll begin the process of checking out the new Outbacks. One of the dealerships is running some crazy lease deals on their '09 Foresters... something like $259 with no security and they are eating the down payment cost... bummer that they only allow 10k miles a year, I'd need at least 5k more.

  36. #436
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    137
    Per my name here I drive a 2005 STi. Cobb stage 2 on Bilstein PSS9 with many whiteline suspension bits on Gram light forged 5 spoke 18x8.5 rims. Scary fast and handles just as well. Of course aerodynamics are a problem when you cruise with a Thule rack and mountain or road bike on top all the time.

  37. #437
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1
    Did drive a Subaru, but am no longer a fan. Our 02 impreza screwed us. Complete engine failure at 118000 miles. Meticulous maintenance, mostly highway miles, and we drive like senior citizens.....

  38. #438
    Blue Pig
    Reputation: Blksocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,553
    I'm a Chevy driver.

    I'm in your Subaru thread.

    Poking your pictures!

    Bahahahahaha!!

  39. #439
    to pedal or not to pedal
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    70
    97 Legacy GT Wagon. 235,000 and still running fine but i'm about ready to replace it. I'll just drive it till it quits and walk away-unless some needs a parts car??

  40. #440
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,737

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Blksocks
    I'm a Chevy driver.

    I'm in your Subaru thread.

    Poking your pictures!

    Bahahahahaha!!
    My Subaru was built in Indiana

  41. #441
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GTscoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctorsti
    Per my name here I drive a 2005 STi. Cobb stage 2 on Bilstein PSS9 with many whiteline suspension bits on Gram light forged 5 spoke 18x8.5 rims. Scary fast and handles just as well. Of course aerodynamics are a problem when you cruise with a Thule rack and mountain or road bike on top all the time.
    Sounds baller, got pics?

    Quote Originally Posted by space.travel.is.boring
    Did drive a Subaru, but am no longer a fan. Our 02 impreza screwed us. Complete engine failure at 118000 miles. Meticulous maintenance, mostly highway miles, and we drive like senior citizens.....
    What defines complete engine failure? I spun a crank bearing on the motor in my 02 WRX a few years ago but that was after running a big turbo and 100whp over a stock motor for 55K miles, and I'll never use Mobil 1 oil again.

    Quote Originally Posted by paintballeerXC
    has anyone heard about newer models having engine problems like the 90's did ?
    The older DOHC 2.5RSs head head gasket problems, not really a problem if you're proactive and replace it before it goes out.

  42. #442
    bicycle dreamer
    Reputation: That Geo Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    133
    I'm looking to replace my Jeep Cherokee and I'm looking at Impreza Wagons vs. Foresters (pre-'08/'09 body styles)

    Any advice? I'm seeing both around here for you cyclists, and I'm wondering if I'll need the room of the Forester -- and the smaller Impreza (or WRX) is better on fuel, handling, etc. Roof rack will most likely be used. Won't be carrying more than 2 MTBs at a time. I bike, camp, hike ... that's about it. DD when I'm not biking around town.

    Just lookin' for opinions
    Last edited by That Geo Guy; 01-15-2010 at 12:55 AM.
    Moving the soul with two wheels.
    I have a slight cycling addiction.

    Now living in Nagoya City, Japan!

  43. #443
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    7
    hey everyone. I'm fairly new to the forum, but I stumbled across this thread and thought I would share. This is my Forester at the Illinois/Iowa boarder right before the Mississippi during my move from Chicago to Seattle. My other bikes (including my MTB) had to be shipped.

  44. #444
    Muskoka
    Reputation: BlackCanoeDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,347
    Quote Originally Posted by That Geo Guy
    I'm looking to replace my Jeep Cherokee and I'm looking at Impreza Wagons vs. Foresters (pre-'08/'09 body styles)

    Any advice? I'm seeing both around here for you cyclists, and I'm wondering if I'll need the room of the Forester -- and the smaller Impreza (or WRX) is better on fuel, handling, etc. Roof rack will most likely be used. Won't be carrying more than 2 MTBs at a time. I bike, camp, hike ... that's about it. DD when I'm not biking around town.

    Just lookin' for opinions
    I have an '02 WRX wagon MT (actually purchased in Oct '01) and I love this car..very sporty to drive and hope to have it for a long time yet. I live in central Ontario, lots of snow, salt, slush for at least 4 months each year. There are A LOT of Subarus in this area...very popular because of our winters! The AWD is amazing, love the heated seats . The body is zinc galvanized both sides and no rust on this 8 yr old. I just had the brakes including handbrake completely redone by Subaru using OEM parts, drives like a new car again! Also replaced the rear Mcpherson struts because one was starting to stick and making a noise. Also had the AC recharged last summer and it blows freakin'cold!! So I put some money into it this year but I should be good to go for a long time now. Last year I replaced the front oxygen sensor and the fuel filter and that was about it. Exhaust system is still all original! Don't think I spent anything in the previous few years except tires.
    We ( wife & I & border collie) mtbike, ski, and canoe trip and have never required more space than what we have in this car. Often we carry 2 canoes on it..(2 solos or 1 solo & a tandem.) I have Yakima racks mounted to the factory rails and I also have Saris rack that we put on and off if we have to carry more than 2 bikes.
    WRX does recommends premium fuel, but I think you could get away with regular. The car is very easy to do basic maintenance on..I do my own oil changes, fuel filter ...everything is very accessible, unlike many other vehicles.
    <table style="width:auto;"><tr><td><a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/dVZPxKP_8gVmfOToKHcdgg?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_WYKnoMRX3tc/SaNVOHwoD7I/AAAAAAAAAvs/ym-NRYh3LOo/s800/BuckDay2%20151.jpg" /></a></td></tr><tr><td style="font-family:arial,sans-serif; font-size:11px; text-align:right">From <a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/BlackCanoeDog/BuckwallowAutumn?feat=embedwebsite">Buckwallow Autumn</a></td></tr></table>
    https://get.google.com/albumarchive/...127?source=pwa

    RSD Bikes "The Mayor"
    Rocky Mountain Sherpa Overland

  45. #445
    Stray Bullet
    Reputation: Nagaredama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,275
    My WRX loaded on the way to Mammoth.

    One of these days I'll start doing some mods.


  46. #446
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,671
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCanoeDog
    WRX does recommends premium fuel, but I think you could get away with regular.
    Actually, my manual recommends 93 octane, but it says you can get away on 91, the lowest I'd recommend is 89 (lots of owners report no major problems). I wouldn't use low-octane though, this car is prone to detonation and you'll be damaging the engine and shortening the life most likely. Higher octane prevents this.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  47. #447
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,737

    My FXT hated 89 octane

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    Actually, my manual recommends 93 octane, but it says you can get away on 91, the lowest I'd recommend is 89 (lots of owners report no major problems). I wouldn't use low-octane though, this car is prone to detonation and you'll be damaging the engine and shortening the life most likely. Higher octane prevents this.
    But then again this was in OE form. My 08 tribeca runs great on 89

  48. #448
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    342
    '05 LGT
    Not much changed since this pic except for rims. Put on some newer WRX rims.

  49. #449
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,671
    Quote Originally Posted by jrm
    But then again this was in OE form. My 08 tribeca runs great on 89
    That definitely makes sense, turbo-forester and NA tribeca. I always use the 91 in my WRX. The access port shows me how the engine already has to pull the timing to prevent detonation, I doubt it would work well with 89, and it sure as hell wouldn't work with 87.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  50. #450
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5
    My 08 STI and 09 WRX




  51. #451
    mtbr member
    Reputation: billy goat1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    79
    06' Forester
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Who else here drives a Subaru?-100_0816.jpg  

    "My legs are my pistons"

  52. #452
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    142
    That is a very strange picture of the WRX. I guess the dark color blends into the background. WRX's have the same hood as the STI, but does not look the same in the pic.

    I just bought a '10 WRX SWP 5-Door and am loving it!

  53. #453
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan-S
    That is a very strange picture of the WRX. I guess the dark color blends into the background. WRX's have the same hood as the STI, but does not look the same in the pic.

    I just bought a '10 WRX SWP 5-Door and am loving it!

    Don't know what looks strange to you. Here is another pic.


  54. #454
    Muskoka
    Reputation: BlackCanoeDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,347
    Quote Originally Posted by EVIL-STI
    My 08 STI and 09 WRX



    Nice, love the STI> Did you do a drop or is that stock. It's a lot lower than the WRX
    https://get.google.com/albumarchive/...127?source=pwa

    RSD Bikes "The Mayor"
    Rocky Mountain Sherpa Overland

  55. #455
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    142
    Do you own both?

  56. #456
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCanoeDog
    Nice, love the STI> Did you do a drop or is that stock. It's a lot lower than the WRX
    Still stock springs. I'm on the preorder list for RCE YELLOWS.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alan-S
    Do you own both?
    Yeah

  57. #457
    SLO Mtn biker!
    Reputation: Zuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by EVIL-STI
    My 08 STI and 09 WRX
    Is one your wife's?? Otherwise it seems redundant...?

  58. #458
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,148
    Just replaced my Acura TL (totaled) with our 2006 Subaru Outback 2.5i Limited.

    Absolutely LOVE this car!!!







    Now we are looking to replace our 2004 Nissan Frontier Crew Cab Long Bed with a Forester. Looking at 2004-2005 Forester XS.

    I have always liked Subarus. Now that I have one, I want another! HAHA

    As to the redundancy of the WRX and the STI...
    Two totally different animals. One is a passenger car, the other is a race car.

    Like a 911 Carrera vs. a 911 GT3. Same car in appearance. Not at all the same otherwise though.

  59. #459
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    13
    i do!!

    just got an 06 impreza two days ago- still dont even have pictures of it because its buried in snow!

  60. #460
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    62
    I have an 05 Legacy GT. I want to get a bike rack of some sort but I want to easily take it on and off. It cant in anyway mess with the paint. What do you guys suggest

  61. #461
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rossp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by kramonut
    '05 LGT
    Not much changed since this pic except for rims. Put on some newer WRX rims.
    I'm not usually a sedan fan (06 wrx wagon for me) but I've always thought that Legacy shape is a fantastic looking car. And that photo is sweet too.

  62. #462
    You know my steez...
    Reputation: BunnV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    905

    Legacy wagon

    2000 Model bought new in November of 99.
    135K miles, NO problems....
    Lowered, OZ Wheels, braided steel brake lines, slotted rotors, Alpine sounds.
    Love it, it's a keeper!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Who else here drives a Subaru?-legacy.jpg  

    I'm unique, just like everyone else....

  63. #463
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,246
    My wife's uncle is on the lookout at auction for an 09 Impreza OBS for us to replace the aging Sunfire we have. Simply cannot wait.
    Oh noes. I'm going to drink the Kool-Aid.

  64. #464
    mtbr member
    Reputation: d-town-3-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    278
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve71
    Wife has a new (to us) 04 Forester XT with a 5 speed. A real giant killer for the $, but If I lived somewhere closer to sea level and outside the snow belt, I'd rather have a RWD car.

    By far the fastest car we've ever owned, yet it looks like a little grocery getter. Second only to the STI in Subaru's line up for 0-60 & 1/4 mile times.

    thats hilarious iam actually in the market for a late model forester, they look like great cars. I am driving a honda civic at the moment and cant fit any of my **** in that thing although a good car just not big enough for me.

  65. #465
    pain intolerant
    Reputation: jradin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    745
    I'm in the market for a 2010 Outback 2.5i and have been surprised to discover that the Costco Auto Buyers program is offering a better deal then IMBA VIP. The dealer working through the Costco program is offering $1,100 below invoice (equivalent to ~4% in my case), while the IMBA VIP dealer is offering 2% below invoice.

    Of course the Costco dealer is charging a higher (by $200) handling fee and offering about $1,000 less for my trade-in, but thought this information might be useful to anyone else in the market.

  66. #466
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,148
    Just added another Subaru to our stable...

    Now we have the 2006 Outback 2.5i Limited, and a 2003 Toaster (Forester).



    Love these freaking cars.

  67. #467
    Cereal Killer
    Reputation: chadmeeh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    342
    Just got myself a 2010 Impreza Outback Sport. Love it so far! Here's a picture, still need to get some sort of bike rack. Not sure if I should go with roof rack rails, or install a trailer hitch and go that route. No garage to worry about, so the roof rack won't be a problem, just don't know if it would be less convinent or not. Suggestions? Price is a bit of a factor, don't want it to get ridiculus.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Who else here drives a Subaru?-outback1.jpg  

    Who else here drives a Subaru?-outback2.jpg  


  68. #468
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    13
    finally got some pictures of mine.




    b

  69. #469
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    I am a HUGE Subaru fan and can't believe I missed such a thread. Coincidentally, also an MTB rider (well, I'm sure all of us are).

    Here's a pic of my 1999 Subaru Legacy Outback Limited wagon with the 5-speed manual transmission!

    Mmmmm, nice and muddy!


    And here are some recent pics of it with my just-purchased Yakima Forklift

    gallery:
    http://img31.imageshack.us/g/dsc00338dv.jpg/



  70. #470
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by d-town-3-
    thats hilarious iam actually in the market for a late model forester, they look like great cars. I am driving a honda civic at the moment and cant fit any of my **** in that thing although a good car just not big enough for me.
    I was in the exact same place as you; moving back and forth across the country in a 2006 2-door civic just wasn't cutting it. After loading up the car with barely enough room to fit myself in, the rear wheels were scrapping the wheel wells. On the drive, I ended up blowing on of the struts...obviously.

    So, sold that little champ of a car (and it really was), and picked up an low miles 04 Forrester XT. What a temptress....no speeding tickets as of yet

  71. #471
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    197
    Here's my '05 Legacy GT Wagon Limited with 5spd manual riding on Prodrive PFF7 wheels shoed with BF Goodrich KDW2 tires:


  72. #472
    You know my steez...
    Reputation: BunnV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    905
    Quote Originally Posted by Silvestri
    Here's my '05 Legacy GT Wagon Limited with 5spd manual riding on Prodrive PFF7 wheels shoed with BF Goodrich KDW2 tires:

    It's almost perfect.....
    Where is your bike rack?
    Seriously, that's an awesome wagon.
    I'm unique, just like everyone else....

  73. #473
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    197
    Thanks!

    Our bikes have been going in the back so far. I did buy an OEM hitch last Fall, goes on in the spring. After that comes the Kuat Sherpa to haul my Knolly Endorphin and my wife's SC Superlight around. Should help to keep the inside cleaner!

  74. #474
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,148
    What a sweet Legacy wagon. Hard to find that body style stateside. Great find!

  75. #475
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    11
    04 Forester 2.0XT in sunny Singapore
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Who else here drives a Subaru?-picture-058.jpg  


  76. #476
    Muskoka
    Reputation: BlackCanoeDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,347
    ^^^ sweet!!
    https://get.google.com/albumarchive/...127?source=pwa

    RSD Bikes "The Mayor"
    Rocky Mountain Sherpa Overland

  77. #477
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    10
    08 STi, now has mud flaps, tint, and thule roof racks...


  78. #478
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    33
    Guess I share...

    I have 3:
    2000 2.5RS
    1998 Fully built RSTI (2.5RS)
    2005 STI (bought to replace the 00 2.5RS)

    I just ordered a curt hitch and a swagmax xc rack for it

  79. #479
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    178
    Hey guys i have an 07 Impreza wagon, I just put a Kuat NV on the back but now I want to carry more bikes what do you guys suggest for a roof rack, preferably that uses the factory sidebars. I was looking at Yakima but i'm not sure what kind of towers I would have to use.
    Thanks Mike
    "Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride"
    -John F. Kennedy-

  80. #480
    Ska
    Ska is offline
    Steel is real.
    Reputation: Ska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,269
    My Outback..........

    Here's my crummy, slow-going blog The Slow Spoke if you're interested.

  81. #481
    FBS
    FBS is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FBS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5
    Took some pics with my newly-dirtied F5 and my lazily unwashed 02 Forester S, might as well post one of em.

    I love both <3


  82. #482
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    47

    Wrx

    My WRX (bike) locked and loaded


  83. #483
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by b3rnard
    My WRX (bike) locked and loaded
    I see you have the 2009+ WRX... 265HP and a proper 5-speed manual

    Nice. And of course, all Subarus are nice in my eyes


    Anyone else actually take their Subarus off-road? short gravel driveways don't count, unless it really would be difficult for the average FWD econobox.

  84. #484
    JEA
    JEA is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    56
    Nice topic, good to see so many Subaru fans.

    My first Subaru was a 1991 2.2 legacy GX, nice car, but too common
    The next was a 1994 suabru legacy turbo, much more fun and here very rare.


    The next was a impreza gt turbo 1998 (tuned), max fun.
    But it could burn some ruber from your bike when hanging it in front of the exhaust


    And now the 2005 2.5xt forester (tuned), max fun and can carry a lot of stuff.


    watch my shirt I know, wrong bike


    and it can also carry my killer dog

  85. #485
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by JEA
    Nice topic, good to see so many Subaru fans.

    My first Subaru was a 1991 2.2 legacy GX, nice car, but too common
    The next was a 1994 suabru legacy turbo, much more fun and here very rare.
    The first-generation Legacy turbo is EXTREMELY RARE anywhere. Australia, Japan, USA, you name it, it is extremely rare. Even more rare is the turbocharged Legacy Touring wagon! Sadly, most of the wagons came in the 4EAT automatic. The most rare turbo Legacy variant is the Touring wagon with a 5-speed manual. I think they are more rare than the almighty 22B-STi

  86. #486
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,148
    Quote Originally Posted by AWDfreak

    Anyone else actually take their Subarus off-road? short gravel driveways don't count, unless it really would be difficult for the average FWD econobox.


    Maybe.













    I have more, but most of the stuff I have done in not on camera. They are incredibly capable so long as you don't hit big rocks and such. I love these cars.

  87. #487
    MTB Newbie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by AWDfreak
    I see you have the 2009+ WRX... 265HP and a proper 5-speed manual

    Nice. And of course, all Subarus are nice in my eyes


    Anyone else actually take their Subarus off-road? short gravel driveways don't count, unless it really would be difficult for the average FWD econobox.
    The 09 WRX's with build dates in July/August/September could potentially have a motor that is prone to faulure.

    http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=1648372

  88. #488
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Superorb
    The 09 WRX's with build dates in July/August/September could potentially have a motor that is prone to faulure.

    http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=1648372
    Ouch!

    Seems like someone got lazy on the engine production line

  89. #489
    MTB Newbie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by AWDfreak
    Ouch!

    Seems like someone got lazy on the engine production line
    It was actually due to an improper cleaning process when the crank was milled, so metal bits would float around in the oil and chew up the crank bearings and eventually spin a bearing.

  90. #490
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by pointerDixie214


    Maybe.













    I have more, but most of the stuff I have done in not on camera. They are incredibly capable so long as you don't hit big rocks and such. I love these cars.
    Mmmmm, por-er, I mean, nice!

    Now that's what I like to see!

  91. #491
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,148
    Quote Originally Posted by AWDfreak
    Mmmmm, por-er, I mean, nice!

    Now that's what I like to see!
    Thanks... Will try to remember to post some more as I get them.

    I just absolutely love these cars. So easy to work on (although they never seem to need it knock on wood), great mpg, comfortable, fun to drive, can go mild off road, carry tons of stuff.

    There is simply not another vehicle like them.

  92. #492
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,182


    Proud to be a new member of the Subaru clan!

    My wife and I are expecting our first in June, and decided to replace my Dodge Neon with something more suitable for a family. And outdoor stuff. It's a 2008 Outback 2.5i in bronze. I was just trying out the factory racks using the trays I already had on the Trailblazer; they're pretty ugly, but I already knew that. I plan on getting the Yakima Railgrab system. And the racks only fit backwards if I want the tailgate to open, which I do.

  93. #493
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Superorb
    It was actually due to an improper cleaning process when the crank was milled, so metal bits would float around in the oil and chew up the crank bearings and eventually spin a bearing.
    Wow, so maybe it's someone in the engineering division that's being lazy?!


    Anyways, welcome to the Subaru family twouareks!
    Last edited by AWDfreak; 04-08-2010 at 09:21 PM.

  94. #494
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Here's an image of my dirty floor


  95. #495
    cougarbait
    Reputation: Lambdamaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,783

    +2 on back
    +2 in backseat
    09AS-Rsl/09Six

  96. #496
    You know my steez...
    Reputation: BunnV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    905
    Quote Originally Posted by Lambdamaster

    +2 on back
    +2 in backseat
    So, that's NINE bikes, 1 passenger, 1 driver, and 300 HP!
    I'm unique, just like everyone else....

  97. #497
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,737

    Just couldnt handle

    The 5 sp auto any more. It just sucked the life out of the car so bad. other tippers were the lack of any aftermarket support and the huge blind spots.

  98. #498
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AWDfreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by jrm
    The 5 sp auto any more. It just sucked the life out of the car so bad. other tippers were the lack of any aftermarket support and the huge blind spots.
    If you're worried how lively the car drives, then buy a Subaru with a manual transmission.

    As for blind spots, are you talking about the Tribeca?

  99. #499
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,148
    Quote Originally Posted by jrm
    The 5 sp auto any more. It just sucked the life out of the car so bad. other tippers were the lack of any aftermarket support and the huge blind spots.
    Not talking about a Forester are you? Forester has better range of visibility than any car I have ever owned or driven unless you count a convertible with the top down.

  100. #500
    narCOTIC
    Reputation: Hadouken*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    307

    2004 Impreza WRX

    Just took these pics...








Page 5 of 28 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 9

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •