RE: Subaru Outback | Shed of the Week

RE: Subaru Outback | Shed of the Week

Author
Discussion

Lotobear

6,509 posts

130 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
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
Yes, manuals were available for short time when this model was launched - mine was manual. I think they only last 12-18 months.

I would agree that the 2.5 sounded coarse when stretched. I think this was perhaps made worse by Subaru deciding to equalise the headers on this model which lost the famous offbeat boxer burble

honevo

163 posts

107 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
Lotobear said:
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
Yes, manuals were available for short time when this model was launched - mine was manual. I think they only last 12-18 months.

I would agree that the 2.5 sounded coarse when stretched. I think this was perhaps made worse by Subaru deciding to equalise the headers on this model which lost the famous offbeat boxer burble
That explains the sound - I didn't have the expected offbeat burble I was hoping for ..

If left to its own devices, the autobox would hunt up and down - only remedied by engaing the sport mode

honevo

163 posts

107 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
Nice But Dim said:
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
Your mpg is impressive - our average is about 26mpg and that's after a weekend trip from the Wirral to Cardiff

Ours is an '06 which has been serviced by the same Subaru dealer since new - my other half must drive it like a maniac when I'm not around ....

Lotobear

6,509 posts

130 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
honevo said:
Lotobear said:
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
Yes, manuals were available for short time when this model was launched - mine was manual. I think they only last 12-18 months.

I would agree that the 2.5 sounded coarse when stretched. I think this was perhaps made worse by Subaru deciding to equalise the headers on this model which lost the famous offbeat boxer burble
That explains the sound - I didn't have the expected offbeat burble I was hoping for ..

If left to its own devices, the autobox would hunt up and down - only remedied by engaing the sport mode
Subaru and autos eh? .....I seriously considered a Levorg but could not live with the idea of a CVT trans. If only it had had 250bhp and a manual transmission I would have been all over it.

honevo

163 posts

107 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
honevo said:
Nice But Dim said:
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
Your mpg is impressive - our average is about 26mpg and that's after a weekend trip from the Wirral to Cardiff

Ours is an '06 which has been serviced by the same Subaru dealer since new - my other half must drive it like a maniac when I'm not around ....
I'm confused - ours was registered in April 2006 and the VED rate is £710 ...

NGK210

3,044 posts

147 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
Splendid. Yes, please.

But why are the Japs so crap at rustproofing?

Is it because all the budget gets spent on sturdy mechanical and electrical components – or is there another reason?

Meanwhile, PH homophobes look away now:
https://priceonomics.com/how-an-ad-campaign-made-l...

NGK210

3,044 posts

147 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
Nice But Dim said:
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
Your motorway MPG, is that achieved when cruising at 60 or 70mph, or ‘on the continent at 128.75km/h’?
Ta smile

biggbn

23,711 posts

222 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
I had a 96 p plate legacy estate, just a 2 litre n/a from memory and it was an utterly lovely old car. I'd bought it for peanuts to sell on and was captivated by its feeling of utilitarian toughness, its brilliant ride, spot on gear change and driving position and total useabikity. Sure footed, characterful, fun. Still don't understand why I've not had more subarus, my only other being an original Impreza RA and that turned into a nightmare!!....actually, maybe THATS why I've not had any more!

tr3a

510 posts

229 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
NGK210 said:
But why are the Japs so crap at rustproofing?
They're not. In general, Toyotas and Lexuses are perfectly fine. It's only the smaller manufacturers like Subaru, Suzuki and Mazda that turn out less rustproofed cars. And then only Japanese-built cars. European-built Suzukis are fine. My theory is that it's because Japanese roads are only gritted in winter. No salt is used. In addition to that, the Japanese MOT is extremely strict, making it uneconomical to run most cars long enough for them to rust.

Nice But Dim

462 posts

209 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
NGK210 said:
Your motorway MPG, is that achieved when cruising at 60 or 70mph, or ‘on the continent at 128.75km/h’?
Ta smile
Cruise control at 70mph per GPS not speedo
which reads nearly 80mph



Edited by Nice But Dim on Friday 17th May 16:10

TheMilkyBarKid

557 posts

31 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
Great shed and school boy snigger innuendo this week. I don’t need it, but I almost wish I did.

Lester H

2,773 posts

107 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
Very interesting shed and in just such an appropriate colour. What a shame that these have a reputation for rust which seems ironic, given Subaru’s agricultural associations. Otherwise I’m sure many on here would pay the ‘PH fine’ for fuel and tax.

Nice But Dim

462 posts

209 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
honevo said:
I'm confused - ours was registered in April 2006 and the VED rate is £710 ...
So my ‘55 plate was registered on 8 Dec 2005

TBH I was surprised mine was the lower VED but Google says the cutoff is 23 March 2006 - so looks like you missed it by a week ?

NGK210

3,044 posts

147 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
tr3a said:
NGK210 said:
But why are the Japs so crap at rustproofing?
They're not. In general, Toyotas and Lexuses are perfectly fine. It's only the smaller manufacturers like Subaru, Suzuki and Mazda that turn out less rustproofed cars. And then only Japanese-built cars. European-built Suzukis are fine. My theory is that it's because Japanese roads are only gritted in winter. No salt is used. In addition to that, the Japanese MOT is extremely strict, making it uneconomical to run most cars long enough for them to rust.
Toyota UK:
”Toyota vehicles (excluding Hilux) are covered by a 12-year unlimited mileage warranty on the metal body panels, protecting against rust perforation caused by a manufacturing fault.”

Love the caveats, “body panels” and “caused by a manufacturing fault”.

Translation: Land Cruiser ladder frame chassis not included.

And if a Toyota is riddled with rust after only five years but the owner can’t prove it’s due to a “manufacturing fault”, then they’re fooked?

Cheeky wee shytes bandit

Roger Irrelevant

2,971 posts

115 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
Nice But Dim said:
NGK210 said:
Your motorway MPG, is that achieved when cruising at 60 or 70mph, or ‘on the continent at 128.75km/h’?
Ta smile
Cruise control at 70mph per GPS not speedo
which reads nearly 80mph



Edited by Nice But Dim on Friday 17th May 16:10
Mine must have been a dud then because at a cruise with the speedo reading nearly 80 it would have been easily sub 30mpg. If memory serves the pie-in-the-sky NEDC figure was only high 20s. You've obviously got a good 'un.

BeastieBoy73

655 posts

114 months

Friday 17th May
quotequote all
NGK210 said:
tr3a said:
NGK210 said:
But why are the Japs so crap at rustproofing?
They're not. In general, Toyotas and Lexuses are perfectly fine. It's only the smaller manufacturers like Subaru, Suzuki and Mazda that turn out less rustproofed cars. And then only Japanese-built cars. European-built Suzukis are fine. My theory is that it's because Japanese roads are only gritted in winter. No salt is used. In addition to that, the Japanese MOT is extremely strict, making it uneconomical to run most cars long enough for them to rust.
Toyota UK:
”Toyota vehicles (excluding Hilux) are covered by a 12-year unlimited mileage warranty on the metal body panels, protecting against rust perforation caused by a manufacturing fault.”

Love the caveats, “body panels” and “caused by a manufacturing fault”.

Translation: Land Cruiser ladder frame chassis not included.

And if a Toyota is riddled with rust after only five years but the owner can’t prove it’s due to a “manufacturing fault”, then they’re fooked?

Cheeky wee shytes bandit
I was a SMART repairer in my previous career and worked exclusively on Toyotas.

Hilux’s barely have any paint on them. You can almost rub the paint off the door shuts with your thumb. That’s why, when you go and look at one to buy, it has those eBay sill protectors on.

Sorry for the thread derail… Good shed, btw!

honevo

163 posts

107 months

Saturday 18th May
quotequote all
Nice But Dim said:
So my ‘55 plate was registered on 8 Dec 2005

TBH I was surprised mine was the lower VED but Google says the cutoff is 23 March 2006 - so looks like you missed it by a week ?

Story of my life…..

Water Fairy

5,531 posts

157 months

Saturday 18th May
quotequote all
Shed of the year contender right there

People talking about better engines etc, remember, the clue is in the title.

Hugo Stiglitz

37,292 posts

213 months

Saturday 18th May
quotequote all
Why the importer never sorted out the underbody sealing? Arghhhh

Richard-vcdkn

2 posts

60 months

Saturday 18th May
quotequote all
I had a 2.5 turbo version when I lived in the US, great car, sounded awesome with a fruity exhaust.

https://youtu.be/yX4jA1u23DA