RE: Subaru Outback | Shed of the Week

[ferret50]

Always fun to learn what happens when the postmistress's buttons are pressed....



Decent shed for the money, shame about the VED rate, though. This really should reflect the age of the vehicle, perhaps a flat rate of, say, £250 for stuff over ten years old?

[andy43]

ferret50 said:

Decent shed for the money, shame about the VED rate, though. This really should reflect the age of the vehicle, perhaps a flat rate of, say, £250 for stuff over ten years old?

That’s a very good idea. 2007ish 3 litre Scoobies are 1500 quid now - the value of two years tax!

[Bladedancer]

sinisterpenguin said:

Never understood peoples fascination with these thing but 5 stars for this week’s innuendo

You should drive one. It's an estate that is nice to drive, though with a bit of 90s interior that has offroad capability that puts most SUVs and pretty much all crossovers to shame. Plus these just tend to work. My dad has a 20 year old Legacy 3.0 (outback is essentially lifted Legacy) and all it needs is a service every year. And staying on top of rust, though that's not as much of a problem as Japanese heritage would suggest.

[nismo48]

Good practical shed and tin worm aside a decent run around.

[el romeral]

Excellent shed which will become a cheap and practical workhorse for someone - all with a tuneful exhaust warble too. Nice bit of Friday humour with the Mrs Shed asides. I do wonder if these would look better with all the grey bits painted in body colour?

[MDMA .]

86wasagoodyear said:

Had 2 of these in lower-riding Legacy flavour, both brilliant. Would prefer the hardier 2.0 or 3.0 engines to this 2.5, but even so, top shedding.

I had the 2.5 Legacy version for 10 years and 150k miles. Made a good daily, though a little heavy on fuel. All it needed in that time was a battery, alternator, replacement front calipers and usual service items. All suspension components should be classed as consumables, I swapped a few drop links/bushes over the 10 years.
Loads of room in them, rear was huge with the seats down, plenty space between the rear arches.

[martin12345]

Thought really hard about one of these for our "Horse Trailer towing duties"
Low annual mileage so fuel economy not a concern.
Solid, good 4WD, giant boot - all good

In the end we went for a Hilux with a Truckman and a bed liner in order to have a "wet" area in the back for the horses dirty stuff after riding (sweaty, wet, muddy)
The Hilux has been brilliant but I do wonder if we missed out - horses for courses I guess !!

[halo34]

POIDH said:

Get that advertised up here in Scotland and someone will snap it up quick - perfect for some of the Highlands and Islands.

Mmm - apart from terminal rot likelyhood, I wouldnt be using it in winter unless it was cleaned under and undercoated heavily.

[DaveEvs]

yme402 said:

For £2000, shouts old money in a way a new BMW/Audi/Mercedes or Range Rover Evoque could only dream of doing.

Sport some tweed. Double park outside and butchers and people will think you own half the local countryside.

[TerryFarquit]

Does the postmistress mind if Shed changes lanes without indicating?

[aarondbs]

MDMA . said:

I had the 2.5 Legacy version for 10 years and 150k miles. Made a good daily, though a little heavy on fuel. All it needed in that time was a battery, alternator, replacement front calipers and usual service items. All suspension components should be classed as consumables, I swapped a few drop links/bushes over the 10 years.
Loads of room in them, rear was huge with the seats down, plenty space between the rear arches.

Nice set there. Maybe only a convertible away from a perfect set even.

[-Lummox-]

CKY said:

Great pictures, Foresters/Imprezas are exactly the same in my experience; Subaru are one of the instances where i'd hesitate to buy anything that's been used over here since new and would search something out from kinder climes instead.

I've had an original Impreza Turbo 2000 and 3x Foresters over the years (an original SF Turbo and 2x SG XTs) and none of them have ever had any rot problems. No rot at all in fact. BUT all of them were specced by the original owners to have the Winter Pack (which included heated seats and, crucially, additional rustproofing / cavity protection etc). If I were to buy another I'd walk away if it didn't have heated seats, for exactly this reason - not because my butt needs toasting, but because I know it wouldn't have the same rust protection.

As to this car, it looks like a capable tip car / wafting machine, but it's a shame they never sold these in the UK with a turbo engine - there was a JDM version with the 2.5 WRX motor (see ebay item 155942977099) which would make a great Q-car.

[-Lummox-]

Cryssys said:

Plus 1 for the longevity of diesel Peugeot 205. My auntie had one that went on forever and ever, it was impossible to kill and absolutely refused to rust.

I hope I wear as well.

A neighbour has one of those old diesel 205s that is slowly becoming more decrepit on their driveway but still in use. Sadly it looks like they've come to the conclusion that it's not worth spending any money on maintaining at this point (or even giving a wash) so they're just going to use it until it dies. It's an L-reg so must be one of the last ones, but even so, must be 30 years old now and still going. I bet you could make a strong case that running one of those for that length of time is still a whole lot more eco-sound than buying a new budget snot box that will be in the bin in less than 10...

[MDMA .]

aarondbs said:

MDMA . said:

I had the 2.5 Legacy version for 10 years and 150k miles. Made a good daily, though a little heavy on fuel. All it needed in that time was a battery, alternator, replacement front calipers and usual service items. All suspension components should be classed as consumables, I swapped a few drop links/bushes over the 10 years.
Loads of room in them, rear was huge with the seats down, plenty space between the rear arches.

Nice set there. Maybe only a convertible away from a perfect set even.

Front, rear, AWD. The silver phase Maybe a silver MX5 could have been the icing on top!

[Numeric]

Augustus Windsock said:

“He uses the same technique when the postmistress comes over. The trick is to resist the natural temptation to let go of the button when it squeaks at you three times. Keep pressing and you should get a proper result. That’s what Shed finds anyway. ”

Dear Shed,
You know owe me the cost of having my armchair professionally cleaned after I spat out a mouthful of hot tea laughing!

As we have shed of the year should we also have innuendo of the year. I really don't know why but today's really made me laugh, in the office, why are you laughing they asked...

[honevo]

Given the service history (cam belt and other issues addressed) this looks good value for the mileage.
We had a 2004 2.5 Legacy for family duties which was a great car , so much so that I replaced it with a 3.0 Outback similar to this.

I thought the 2.5 engine was lethargic and had a tendency to sound like an angry sewing machine when pushed (people say it sounds good but maybe I've been spoilt by the sound of the 2.0TS Alfa engine...)

The 3.0 is a revelation by comparison - very smooth and lots of torque - which better suits the character of the car.

Fuel consumption is horrendous though - less than 20mpg around town and less economical than our 4.0 Jaguar on a long run. VED is similarly frightening.

I don't know why I love it but I do but in an ideal world, I would go for the 2007 onwards facelift as it is a little less agricultural inside.

No one so far has remarked that the featured car is a manual - I didn't know that you could get a 2.5 manual in the UK - I've never seen one before

[Nice But Dim]

Here is my recent purchase from EBay - but it’s the 3.0 H6 variant with many toys

It’s great !

It gets about 24mpg around town but on the motorway can get 35mpg

VED £415

Edited by Nice But Dim on Friday 17th May 13:22

Edited by Nice But Dim on Friday 17th May 13:26

[MDMA .]

honevo said:

Given the service history (cam belt and other issues addressed) this looks good value for the mileage.
We had a 2004 2.5 Legacy for family duties which was a great car , so much so that I replaced it with a 3.0 Outback similar to this.

I thought the 2.5 engine was lethargic and had a tendency to sound like an angry sewing machine when pushed (people say it sounds good but maybe I've been spoilt by the sound of the 2.0TS Alfa engine...)

The 3.0 is a revelation by comparison - very smooth and lots of torque - which better suits the character of the car.

Fuel consumption is horrendous though - less than 20mpg around town and less economical than our 4.0 Jaguar on a long run. VED is similarly frightening.

I don't know why I love it but I do but in an ideal world, I would go for the 2007 onwards facelift as it is a little less agricultural inside.

No one so far has remarked that the featured car is a manual - I didn't know that you could get a 2.5 manual in the UK - I've never seen one before

Manual for just the 2.5 (Legacy and Outback) or the Outback in particular? Mine was a UK model and manual. They also came with the hi/low, dual range box too.

[Arsecati]

Ya may stop 'Shed of the Week' from now on, as this is 'Shed of the Year' right here! Proper 'IDGAF, Git off me laaand....... yes....... that includes the village too!' motoring right there! Love it!

[matchmaker]

No mention in the advert (that I can see), but isn't that a high range/low range lever beside the handbrake? I had an L series Subaru estate many years ago. 1.8GL which had switchable high/low range. It was also switchable between FWD and AWD. Brilliant car. Fitted with all-season tyres nothing stopped it - I even passed a stuck snowplough once...