outback 3.0R - running costs

[sawman]

my old merc shed threw a serpentine belt on the way to work. So having been recovered to the garage it was going to later in the week, for potential mending, I had a 2 mile walk home during which time I was contemplating moving the old bus on and moving out of shed life and into the world of more recent preloved machines.

A brief snoop on the internet has brought up a couple of possibles, one being a 2008 legacy 2.0 and a 2007 outback 3.0r. I am assuming the legacy will be similar costwise to my old forester 2.0x, but how would the 3.0 stack up (I think it would be in the highest road tax bracket)

Is there any particular issues with the 3.0 on this generation outback? the one I have seen has 37k are there any big service items looming?

[sawman]

I can live with that - the 3.0 outback is 3k cheaper than the 2.0 legacy - which should buy a fair bit of the extra fuel!

[sawman]

Thanks for the responses chaps, I can live with late 20's mpg - I currently run a merc c280 which returns a similar amount.

Off for a poke around and test drive tomorrow with any luck, are there any particular things I should be looking/listening out for?

[sawman]

Thanks chaps - job jobbed.

typical subaru solid feel, comfy seats and si box

Edited by sawman on Tuesday 7th January 18:57

[sawman]

Just to update this thread,

I took delivery of the outback last week, So far (according to the onboard computer) its returning 27mpg, I have spent a couple of days twiddling with the seat adjustments and I think I am there now (last few cars have either had no or very little adjustment)

No issues with the powertrain - its great but I have noticed an odd clunk over sharp bumps (grids, potholes) is this normal or should I be getting suspension checked out?

[sawman]

whilst the thread has popped up again, I have been running the outback since the new year, covered about 8k miles getting about 28mpg. No mechanical issues apart from a noisy droplink replaced by the dealer

[sawman]

Ducalio said:

Mr Taxpayer said:

The biggest killer with the 3.0 has to be the £500 pa VED; OUCH! It's what's putting me off and pointing me towards a 2.5 when I change in about 18 months.

Well, that extra £200 you save each year can be saved up and cover the cost of the cambelt changes that the 3.0 doesn't require ;-)

I havent looked at the prices recently, but when I bought my 3.0R last year the prices of the lesser engined but otherwise pretty similar cars were generally higher - the difference paying for several years VED difference and so far as I can tell the mpg difference is not that great. 15k miles so far at average 27.2mpg for me